Icehouse Game Design Competition

From Looney Pyramid Games Wiki
(Redirected from Ice Game Design Competition)

The Icehouse Game Design Competition (IGDC) started on the Icehouse mailing list in 2004 to encourage game design with the Icehouse pieces. It ran periodically until 2009, when it was replaced with the Ice Awards.

The IGDC was open to any previously unpublished game played with Icehouse pyramids.

This page covers the process for game submission, judging, and final ranking. It also provides a location for ballots to be confirmed and for presenting the winners with their kudos.

Spring 2009[edit | edit source]

Submissions for the Spring 2009 IGDC are CLOSED. Start thinking about the next competition, which will have no design restrictions!

Winners[edit | edit source]

First Place: Apophis
Second Place: Landing Zone
Third Place: 3-High

Results[edit | edit source]

Judge 3-High Apophis Diamond Mine Landing Zone Who Made The Team

Adam Kopczenski 10 8 7 4 2
Andrew Clark 8.5
Andy Looney 4 9 5 6 3
Avri Klemer 6 7
Benjamin Holmes 10 8 7 5
Carlton Noles 3 7 2
David Artman 4 7 8.5 2.5
Dennis Duquette 7 10 6.5 9
Doug Orleans 4 4 3 5 5
Kevin Jackson-Mead 7 9 6 8 2
Kristin Looney 9 4 5
Tom Eigelsbach 10

Number of Scores* 9 11 7 8 7
Average Score 6.111111111 8 5.5 6.3125 3.571428571

* All games qualify for their scores, because they all have a total number of scores equal to or greater than 50% of any other game's total number of scores.

Previous Winners[edit | edit source]

Ninth Competition, Spring, 2009 Apophis by Erik Dresner
Eighth Competition, Summer, 2008 Ambush by Jason Spears
Seventh Competition, Winter, 2008 Martian 12s by Avri Klemer
Sixth Competition, Summer 2007 Pylon by Doug Orleans
Fifth Competition, Autumn 2005 Abandoned (games may be resubmitted)
Fourth Competition, Spring 2005 Torpedo by Jacob Davenport
Third Competition, Winter 2005 Hextris by David J. Bush
Second Competition, Autumn 2004 Undercut by Joseph Kisenwether
First Competition, Summer 2004 Sprawl by Jonathan A. Leistiko

Competition Procedures[edit | edit source]

The rules and procedures in this section govern each Icehouse Game Design Competition and are amended by popular vote on the Talk page.

Submitting a Game[edit | edit source]

  1. Each designer may submit one previously unpublished game which is played with Icehouse pyramids and any other equipment. Note that, the more hard-to-find equipment your game requires, the harder it will be for judges to try it out and, as a result, your ratings will likely suffer.
  2. You may only submit your own game designs, collaboration notwithstanding (i.e. a submission does not preclude the collaborator from submitting a different game; be sure to get agreement on who is the "principal" designer of a collaboration, to avoid double-submissions!).
  3. You may submit a game that was in a previous IGDC only if it did not win First Place.
  4. Submit a game for judging by informing the Coordinator via e-mail ( before the submissions deadline (see Schedule above). Please only send a link to the game rules here on the wiki; submissions of PDFs, DOCs, or other file attachments will be immediately deleted (i.e. the Coordinator is not your designated wiki editor).

Judging Games[edit | edit source]

  1. At the start of judging, the Coordinator will post the list of games above and on the Icehouse mailing list (and anywhere else the competition might gain attention, like BoardGameGeek or SuperDuperGames).
  2. This list of submissions will be locked as will the games' rules: the Coordinator will watch this page and the game pages, to roll back any revisions during the competition.
    (Note: If you discover something you want to change and do not want to forget about the revision, make a copy of the game on its Talk Page and make the revision there, temporarily.
  3. Anyone who wants to do so may judge games by submitting an e-mail to the Coordinator which rates the games that he or she played on a scale of 1 to 10 based on the judge's desire to play the game again, promote it to others, and (if applicable) its aesthetic elements or conformity to a design restriction.
  4. A game with no rating will be treated as a No Opinion rating, which does not impact a game's final average rating.
  5. You may not include your own game (or a game on which you are a collaborator) in your ratings (i.e. give it a No Opinion rating).
  6. You may rate games as tied with a particular rating, and you may use half-points to distinguish almost-tied games.
  7. If you do not want your name or user ID associated with your ballot, provide the Coordinator with a "code word" so that he or she can designate your ballot publicly.
  8. Judges are encouraged, but not required to include feedback on the games along with their ballots. Public "table talk" about the submissions while judging is open is discouraged; on the other hand, a month is a long time to hold on to all your thoughts. Including your feedback with your ballot ensures it won't be lost or forgotten. The Coordinator will publish all submitted feedback after judging has concluded.
  9. A judge may resubmit ratings before the judging deadline, if he or she wants to change them; just be sure to inform the Coordinator in the newer e-mail that the newer ratings should replace the older ones (the Coordinator will delete the older ratings e-mail, to avoid confusion).
  10. During the final week of judging, the Coordinator will send an email reply, to confirm receipt of each judge's ballot. If you do not receive a confirmation within a week of the judging deadline, contact the IGDC Coordinator again.
  11. Ballot submissions will be accepted until noon Eastern Time of the Deadline for Rankings on the Schedule.

Determining the Winner[edit | edit source]

  1. For a given game, the total sum of ratings will be divided by the total number of judges who provided a rating for that game, to get an average. Highest average is the winner. A potential winner, however, must have a total sum of ratings equal to or greater than 50% of any other game's total sum of ratings (this reduces a fanatic minority's influence on the ratings).
  2. In the even of a tie, each tied game receives one point for each voter who rates the game above that voter's arithmetic mean score for all of the tied games. Ratings at or below the arithmetic mean receive zero points. The game with the most points wins. (This tie-braking method--Votes Exceeding Arithmetic Mean or VEAM--is basically an instant run-off using a form of approval voting.)
  3. The Coordinator will post the results above, including the full ballots with the submitter's real name, user ID, or code word, so that judges can confirm that their ballots were considered.
  4. The winning game will be moved from the Community Games section up to the Competition Winners section of the Existing Games page; and it may proudly claim "First Place, IGDC" on the wiki or elsewhere.
  5. Other final rankings (2nd, 3rd, etc) may also be noted on their wiki pages, if their designers so desire. Anyone who wishes to provide some other kudos is free to chime in on the Talk page (special logo graphic for use on the game page, publication somewhere other than the wiki, oatmeal cookies in the mail).
  6. All submitted games may add the competition results Template to their pages (refer to Template:IGDCsum2007 for a model).

Finalizing a Competition[edit | edit source]

  1. The Coordinator posts updates to this page to show ratings, total sums, final rankings, and winners.
  2. The Coordinator creates a new Competition Box template and places it on each game page while removing all Lock Boxes.
  3. The Coordinator Lists the winner on the Existing Games page; designers may move their games to Existing Games and What Can I Play? once the game has been finalized through feedback.
  4. When the subsequent IGDC is announced, the contents of the previous competition's section is moved to its own archive page, named "IGDC season yyyy" (refer to IGDC Summer 2007 for an example).
    Note: Reverse the order of sub-sections on the final archive page: Winners, then Ratings, then Submissions, then Schedule.
  5. Instructions to participants and judges are then posted to a new section at the top of this page, named for the season and year of the new competition (refer to IGDC/Templates for templates for that section).
  6. Any mooted planning discussions for the new competition are moved to the Talk page for that year's eventual archive page (see #2 above for naming conventions; refer to Talk:IGDC Winter 2008 for an example).