So our play group did a fun tournament for new years, just me Trevor and Bronson. And this very odd scenario came up that I thought I would inquire to what everyone else thought about the match.

First, we had a Swiss inspired tournament, pick one faction, build 3 200 point armies, all with the Unique restrictions, and you picked one map, you reveal your squads, then your opponent picks one squad of yours that you can not use, then you pick one of the two, and then you battle! ( Great tournament idea BTW, and very very fun)

But now, to the odd match. I'm not going into the details of the squads, but it was a very offensive squad vs possibly the BEST defensive squad minis can make. I played cautious, b/c his squad had some good fire power once I got into the fight, he had no shooters, and I had one, no swap squads.

The match lasted 5-6 rounds, which, oddly, the first 2 rounds were strictly positioning with me taking control of Gambit. At the end of the hour, I had done damage to 2 of his character ( Or 1 twice, I can't remember) and he was able to heal them back to full health. He killed an uggie and R2-D2 Atromech, (so he collected 11 points there, and had 1 round of gambit)But, I left an R7 in the middle next to Gambit for the whole match, so I collected 20 points of gambit for just sitting there... So our match ended, 20-16.... Me.

So, my question, should this be allowed? I definitely don't think I came away from that match with a victory, but with the current rule set I was allowed to win by playing cautiously by the rules. I rarely complain when I win, but if I had lost that way, I would be FURIOUS!

So..... My question with the new year rolling around.... Can we incorporate a rule, that says you can't get a win if you don't kill a piece? I know its tedious, but its the little things that make me mad. Any thoughts on this?

And if no one kills a piece? Points were scored. That is the whole point of Gambit. The tournament rules are as fair as can be, in order to encourage interaction and produce a winner, since ties do not exist in the tournament rules.

What happened is far more fair then what happens when you get into tiebreakers (ie highest cost piece closer to the middle).

the best wins are, in no special order
A- lockout
B-total annihilation
C-sitting in gambit w/large emplaced piece, for many rounds
D-assassinating the enemy's commanders
E-scoring 1 more point that your opponent when time expires
F-avoiding the enemy so they can't attack you

MULTIPLE CHOICE Q?
what is your opinion?

No, that shouldn't change. The real question is did the winner (the guy who killed no pieces) TRY to kill anything? If so, everything was legit, that's just how the game works. If you spent the whole game running around, avoiding conflict, and just barely getting Gambit every round, that should be considered stalling. From what I gather I don't think that is what happened, though.

If both players just roll terribly the entire game and nobody dies, or only 1 character dies, no one should be specifically punished for that. Imagine you get into gambit and spend the whole game there. You have shooters mobile attacking in and out of Gambit, but you keep rolling incredibly roll by cursed luck and/or your opponent keeps rolling high on defensive abilities. Your opponent doesn't even try to get Gambit. Time is called, your opponent runs out and kills one of your Ugnaughts with an accurate shot. Now he has 3 points and has killed a character, you have say 30 points but haven't killed anything, despite trying your best. Giving the win to the player who couldn't even get Gambit all game would be terribly unfair, much worse than giving it to the player who killed nothing

The main thing is that if you're trying to kill something and just failing because of whatever reason (your opponent has a very defensive squad, you are rolling really low, or some combination thereof), you shouldn't be punished. If you spend the whole game specifically avoiding engagement, that's textbook stalling and a judge should be called early in the game to give a warning to the offender, and if it continues it should result in a game loss for him.

if the player out activates the opponent, and gains gambit with the last activation of his squad that round, and then wins init, then retreats said piece,that could cause emotions to come into play

ps- Echo is most always correct (+ he's a pretty cool dude)

THANX OBAMA!