Let's Talk Rapid Thought!

floppyzedolfin wrote:

I never tried that format. Is it 3 rounds, no finals? Can you get GWs? Your TP matrix is missing a result (1-0.5-0)

IIRC we played it as a 3R+F tournament last time. Even that is completely over and done with in 3 hours. It's totally awesome, let me tell you. Maybe we should run one at Origins!

I cannot recall if we did Game Wins or not, although I suspect we did because we were playing all the other rules consistent with the standard rules. So, >=2VP = game win. One could argue for 1.5vp being the GW cutoff in Rapid Thought, I suppose, but I'm not sure there's enough data to support 1.5vp over 2vp, and it seems counter to the beat-the-crap-out-of-everyone mentality that has come to be associated with the RT format.

How could three players in RT obtain 1vp-0vp-0.5vp? As you have 0.5vp there, you are obviously suggesting a timeout, but you cannot have a timeout without two players left at the table, since if you had only the one, you'd have another VP by definition. 1vp-0vp-0.5vp appears to be an impossible result.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Excluding time-outs (which this format is specifically aiming to avoid) there will always be a GW so long as one player is ousted (0.5 v 0.5 v 0.5, 1.5 v 0.5, 2 v 1, 3 v 0 are the VP splits).

That definitely depends on what your definition of a GW is.
Standard tournament rules define a GW as "At least 2 VPs and strictly more VPs than anyone else". With this format, only 4 results (3-0-0, 2.5-0-0, 2-1-0, 2-0.5-0) lead to a GW.

If you change the rules to make it "at least 1 VP and strictly more than other players", then only 3 results end up without a GW (0.5-0.5-0.5, 1-1-1, 1-1-0).
I think all other possibilities lead to a GW, with that definition of a GW.
Now, perhaps "1.5 VPs and strictly more than others" should be the definition. I'm not here to argue what it should be, I'm just asking if there is one (and the only point for having one being the finals, without finals there is no point in having GW definition, hence the initial question).

KevinM wrote:

How could three players in RT obtain 1vp-0vp-0.5vp? As you have 0.5vp there, you are obviously suggesting a timeout, but you cannot have a timeout without two players left at the table, since if you had only the one, you'd have another VP by definition. 1vp-0vp-0.5vp appears to be an impossible result.

You gotta consider Life Boon and withdraw

Player C is ousted. Player A plays Life Boon on Player C.
Player C then withdraws. A has 0.5, C has 0.
Then, have the game time out. 1-0.5-0.

floppyzedolfin wrote:

With this format, only 4 results (3-0-0, 2.5-0-0, 2-1-0, 2-0.5-0) lead to a GW.

Well, some of those results aren't possible within a 3-player format.

The only results which are possible are 3/0/0, 2/1/0, 1.5/.5/0, 1/1/1, and .5/.5/.5 , which is why I have them listed at the bottom. Am I wrong that those are not the only possible results?

To all involved:

The Rapid Thought Format is a specific game variant created and tweaked for a 3 player environment. The goal of the Rapid Thought Format is to make a 3 player variant which captures the fun and enjoyment of a 5 player game.


To those interested in making a 4 or 5 player variant which is faster, I and many others here would be very interested, however, let's please leave the name "RAPID THOUGHT" to the 3 player variant.

Best
Dervish
Ann Arbor

KevinM wrote:

floppyzedolfin wrote:

With this format, only 4 results (3-0-0, 2.5-0-0, 2-1-0, 2-0.5-0) lead to a GW.

Well, some of those results aren't possible within a 3-player format.

The only results which are possible are 3/0/0, 2/1/0, 1.5/.5/0, 1/1/1, and .5/.5/.5 , which is why I have them listed at the bottom. Am I wrong that those are not the only possible results?

3-0-0
A ousts B. A ousts C.

2-1-0
B ousts C. A ousts B.

1-1-1
A, B, C die simultaneously {Anarchist Uprising).

2-0.5-0.5
Probably not doable.

2.5-0-0
C is ousted. A plays Life Boon on C. C withdraws. A ousts B.

2-0.5-0
B withdraws. A ousts C.

1.5-0-1
A ousts B. A withdraws.

2-0-0
B is ousted. C plays Life Boon on B. C is ousted. A plays Life Boon on C. B withdraws. C withdraws.
Easier: C is ousted. A plays Life Boon on C. A ousts B. Game times out.

1.5-0-0.5
A ousts B. Game times out.

1-0.5-1
B withdraws. A and C die simultaneously (Anarchist Uprising).

1-1-0
C is ousted. A plays Life Boon on C. C withdraws. A withdraws.

1.5-0-0
B is ousted. C plays Life Boon on B. C is ousted. A plays Life Boon on C. Then, game times out. (Life Boons don't burn until they awarded a full VP)

1-0.5-0.5
B withdraws. C withdraws.

0.5-0.5-0.5
Game times out.

1-0-0
Probably not doable.

0.5-0.5-0
Probably not doable.



I might've missed some, but here are some doable ones.