should not think what Comik did is okay

Let's see...

He went the way of PTA, right?

Basically what I said in the previous thread.

I think there's a few things.

1. Smart play and good diplomacy is rewarded.

2. Diplomacy means you can make truces but if you do, and they're going to be the type where Truce > Flag for example, you have to make it known to the table so they can respond by collectively fighting back or flagging.

3. Willingness to truce players that are new to the top players and to cheer those players on if they make smart plays. However understanding that sometimes they don't make good allies to still play intelligently.

4. Generally avoiding favoring friends in end game situations where you knock out players and reward a weak "friend" with a spot that they didn't deserve.

Ryan, CoMik has quickly found some of the best strategies to tourneys, probably because he has play-tested them for so long. Two of the strategies that he is a loud proponent of:

1) target the high-ranked players early. in one tourney i sat with him, he started to achieve authority on the table, then decided to run across the map to make sure that i got 6th, because he didnt want me to get any positive points that round. in a competitive perspective, this strategy makes sense, as much as i hated it. he feels he can manipulate newer players, whereas theres no way in hell he can manipulate me. in a final table, he would have a much greater chance at winning everything if my name (or anyone else like me) were there.

2) later on in the tourney, focus on killing players with the most points. this strategy makes sense, because if you want a better shot at winning the whole thing, its good to cripple others who might challenge you. however, this also implicitly means that he is pgaing the players with low points.

i would like to hear your thoughts on these strategies, because they are becoming fairly popular (in my experience there have always been about 1/3 of the players and gallery watchers who say 'its best for you to kill the person with the most points.') if these strategies are considered unfair, we need to let everyone know this now, before they are accepted as the correct strategy.

sorry, edit: cody would have a much greater chance at winning everything if my name were NOT there.

perhaps an improvement would be to hide the number of points that everyone has throughout the tourney. that way decisions couldnt be made as to whom should be targetted. plus it would cut down a ton on all the whining of "dont give me 4th, because then ill lose all my points and be out of the tourney, give me third!!!", which inevitably leads to a stalled-out endgame.

and while im proposing ideas, it would be awesome if you could draw a red line on the tourney sidebar that shows what finishes will be in the money and what finishes wont. so you know how long you have to survive.

Monte, by bringing up tournament strategy in this thread you're implying that comik was banned for using them. Of the bad plays I've seen in the tournaments this is the usually argument. It's even used in the cases where the opposite of these strategies were used. In the case comik was banned he took out the lower player (who he didn't know) and rewarded the player with more points (who he also knew from previous games). This was in a situation where they were fighting to decide 3rd and comik stepped in to reward a friend even if it wasn't the wisest tourney move.

So, my point here is that using these strategies as a cover up for favoring friends is already tired.

makes sense. didnt realize that cody gave 3rd to jpc, who had more points than 4th. i wasnt paying that close of attention.

Ryan: its elementary, my dear watson.

montecarlo my dear friend... you have been manipulated like it or not :D

comik = PTA

He even talked about it during this one tournament