Rest of the World - Leviathan 2005 Tourney Report (very long) Chunky - Apr 25, 2005 - 11:57 PM Post subject: Leviathan 2005 Tourney Report (very long)
Inspired by a post on TalkBloodBowl.com suggesting that Humans were an understrength team, I decided to take them to Leviathan, as I???ve always thought of them as one of the strongest teams available for my style of play.
The tournament was played using standard LRB4 ruleset at 1.25 million gp, including normal team progression. A team was allowed to reset back to its starting roster if it got trashed however, a feature that proved rather handy.
This starting roster was designed to give me enough speed for scoring quickly at need, while also giving me enough strength to survive against the bashy teams. I was confident I???d be able to do quite well.
Game 1 ??? Brendan - Khemri (Argh!) 1- 1 Draw
At this point I thought any chance of doing well in the tourney was already down the tubes. Khemri are a team I absolutely despise, as they have no other choice than to destroy the opposing team in order to win. But here I was drawn against them in the first round. At this stage I was not aware the reset rule was in play, and there was going to be little way of escaping a beating. I thought winning the game shouldn???t prove too difficult, but the cost would be big.
I resolved to try and do everything I could to try and reduce the damage to my players by trying to do everything I could to ensure the game was played as far away from the 4 mummies as possible.
Things started out OK, with me receiving the kick and starting a drive up the right flank, getting the ball to the catcher in the pocket, and holding up the mummies with the Ogre and some excellent work by the mook linemen. The Khemri had planned their defense well though, and were able to swamp the pocket sufficiently to prevent me getting a very quick score without making some very risky moves.
Encouraged by my success in keeping the mummies occupied, I decided to be a bit patient, and worked my way into a strong position despite some lackadaisical blocking. I???d need only to make a single basic dodge with my catcher to get him into an unassailable position to score ??? oops fails the dodge with the reroll. After some scrambling, I managed to again achieve this position once again. Oops, again I fail the dodge with reroll, and now the mummies are breathing down my neck ??? exactly the result I???d been hoping to avoid. I had the ball in the Khemri half, and there weren???t enough turns left to actually score, but I now had to go through the mummies to get a touchdown before halftime, or I would certainly be facing a Khemri team in the second half determined to use up all the available time to bash me to a pulp and score in the final turn ??? earning me a sure-fire loss.
The Khemri had a couple of mummies with tackle zones on the ball, and with little other option, I decided to blitz the mummy with a blitzer in the hopes of getting at least a pushback result and moving the ball to a more accessible location. On two dice where the Khemri picked the result, my odds of achieving this weren???t too bad with a reroll. I finally managed to get a bit of luck however, and not only succeeded in pushing the mummy back, but knocked it over as well! The ball scattered clear, and my by now much-maligned catcher finally managed to successfully scamper off with the ball. We???d been hurt a bit, but were still fielding a full lineup for the second half, and were ahead 1-0.
I knew the most important thing on defence against a Khemri team was to try and get at the Thro-ras in the backfield, before they can reach the protection of the mummy cage of doom. I managed to do this, and dispossessed them of the ball twice briefly, but just couldn???t manage to get the ball clear, with a few scatters not treating me kindly. The Khemri eventually formed their cage, but had left me a gap that I exploited to again knock over the Tho-ra carrying the ball. Then disaster struck. After scattering onto about five other Khemri players, the ball scattered onto a mummy ??? who caught the ball! As Brendan let all the players in the tourney know about this chain of events, I looked at my dwindling pool of rerolls, most of which I???d expended to get the ball loose previously for no result. I???d probably have very few chances to get the ball off the mummy.
I again gave this task to a lone Blitzer, and after the use of a reroll he again came through, knocking the mummy over next to one of his comrades ??? who the ball promptly scatters onto, and who again catches the ball on a 6!
At this point I am near ready to tear my hair out, as a cage is building up around the mummy. I take increasingly drastic and risky measures to try and prevent the mummy from scoring, but they inevitably fail and the score is tied at the end of the game ??? 1-1.
I???ve taken 8 CAS in the game, 3 of which have me missing players next game and fielding only a 10 man squad. At this point I asked if the reset option existed, and was relieved to find out it was. In a 6 game tourney, there was no way I???d be able to stay in touch with the leaders if my second game I was forced to start down men on the pitch, so I took the reset, hoping the fact I???d do a lot better in the next game with those players back would make up for the lack of winnings and spps ??? not that there was a great deal of either. I was reasonably happy to get a draw from such a rough game ??? particularly when I found out most of the field had also had draws. I wasn???t very far behind, though I was cursing a little that I hadn???t been able to pilfer the ball in that second half, or scored a little earlier in the first to get a crack at a quick turnover TD while the Khemri probably wouldn???t have enough time to score themselves.
Game 2 ??? Michael Horton ??? High Elves 4 ??? 2 Win
This game was obviously going to be much softer than the previous one, much to my liking, and it looked like a lot of TD???s would be in the offing, giving me a good chance of recovering fully if I managed a win in this game.
To my dismay, both sides began the game breaking armour on pretty much every successful block. I scored quickly, and then managed to turn Michael over and score. In the process, though I???d taken a couple of badly hurts, I did a lot of KO???s and a casualty of my own. This left me with a numbers advantage after Michael had some poor luck on his KO rolls, and with the numbers advantage I started piling on the KOs and casualties. Michael managed to score at the end of the first, but in the second I again turned him over and scored. He then managed another TD, but I finished off the game running in my fourth to get the full points for winning the game by 2 or more and winning the casualty count.
With a lot of casualties and TDs, I managed to get 3 skills from this game, and was in a strong position to get a lot more from the next game as well.
Game 3 ??? Anthony Lai ??? Dark Elves 3 - 2 Win
This seemed to be a pretty cruisy round for me, in fact I wasn???t sure exactly how Anthony had gotten this many points given a friend had played him and said he didn???t seem to know the game very well. This proved very much to be true, as Anthony often knew little of the rules, and generally attempted actions involving long strings of dice rolls despite me trying to help him out with some advice.
He was however very lucky, and despite his lack of planning, pulled off some outrageous actions that I simply could not stop to score two TDs. I was always going to win this game, but the luck had meant I didn???t get the full 6 points, as I was thinking I would going into the game ??? still, this left me in a very strong place going into day two. As expected, I got a lot of skills out of this game. I had a very nice looking squad by now, with both catchers having Block, a Blitzer with Guard and one with Tackle, my Thrower had Accurate, and last but not least, I had a Dirty Player with which to try and pick off the oppositions best players early in the following days games. I also had 100K in the bank, and decided I???d try and freeboot the Mighty Zug during all three games the following day, to take some hits against the bashy teams, and to cause some carnage against the weaker teams.
Game 4 ??? Brian Horton ??? Wood Elves 2 ??? 0 Win
This game was probably going to be the difference between being a contender or pretender for the title. At the time Brian was first on points, I was second, so if I got a win, I???d be on top, and simply have to maintain it.
Brian???s team was going to pose some problems though. First of all, Brian by all accounts is a very good player, normally with his trusted Skaven. The Wood Elves had enough similarities to the Rats that I was expecting a very competent opponent. I was also worried about the Wardancers, whose Leap skill makes them very good at attacking the loose cages and pockets I normally prefer. I decided to target them early with my Tackle Blitzer and DP early on. This approach yielded quick results, and I caused a miss next game injury to a Wardancer very early on, which Brian chose not to use the Apothecary on, a fair trade for the DP, who was sent form the field for the first time today As expected, Brian???s defense posed a lot of problems for me, and I wasn???t actually able to score in this half, but I had forced him to take a lot of risks, and with no rerolls for most of the half and Zug doing some sterling work, we???d reduced the Elves to only 8 players to start the second half. This meant we were able to easily win the match in the second half, scoring two TD???s fairly comfortably and inflicting further casualties on the elves, for another full 6 point win for the Humans. I knew next up I???d be taking on either a Dwarf or Chaos Dwarf team, and grabbed another Guard in anticipation. I also once again freebooted the Mighty Zug, and would need only 20K from the next match to hire him again.
Game 5 ??? Dan Collins ??? Dwarfs 2 - 2 Win
Dwarfs have always been a bit of a hoodoo team for me when using Humans. I tend to have a curse that means I cannot knock over their ball carriers no matter how many Block Dice I throw in their general direction. So it proved in this game.
The game was actually quite even in terms of strength of blocking, as I actually had more Guard than the Dwarfs, and in addition had the Mighty Zug and the Ogre. As a result neither side suffered any significant casualties, and my Dirty Player was sent off on his first foul for no result.
The Dwarfs opened the game with the ball, and managed to get it into the cage on the first turn, meaning I couldn???t intercept the Runners further back on the pitch. I managed to blitz the Runner carrying the ball on a couple of occasions, but wasn???t able to knock it over. The pressure I put on did at least ensure that Dan wasn???t able to stall however, and I was able to equalise before the end of the half.
In the second half, I got a fairly standard TD via a sideline drive. I would have liked to stall to give the Dwarfs little time to score an equaliser, but wasn???t able to manage enough separation to pull it off, and ended up scoring in Turn 5, giving the Dwarfs 4 turns to score.
I made a crucial error in my first turn on defence. The Dwarfs had actually left the ball in the hands of a non-Block Runner just within reach of a one dice Block on two go for its by one of my Blitzers. Before doing this I ran another Blitzer around as cover, putting him in between the Runners and a Blitzer. Instead of being happy with this, I decided to put a tackle zone on the blitzer, and was forced to use my reroll on the go for it. This meant I didn???t manage to blitz the Runner.
Dan managed to get the ball to the Blitzer, and began to scamper off. I managed to setup a two dice Block on the Blitzer though, but much to my dismay failed to knock him over with a reroll ??? which probably would have been enough to win the game, as their was only a single Runner left to reach the line in time, and he would have had a hell of a time getting there with no rerolls. Alas, it failed, the Dwarfs equalised, and I ended up with a hard fought draw.
This meant going in to the final game I would carry a 1 point advantage, so if I managed to win with the casualty count in my favour I would be assured of at least a tie for first place. Due to the draw system being used though, I wouldn???t be guaranteed of playing the person in second, meaning I had no direct control over the situation. If I happened to play a stronger player, it could all go pear shaped.
Game 6 ??? David Horton ??? Skaven 3-2 Win
Looks like my last game was to be Skaven, while the player running second had the Dwarfs I???d just played. This made it pretty safe for me if I could get a win, as he was unlikely to beat the Dwarfs in casualties, and I was fairly likely to vs the Skaven.
The rats had hired Headsplitter, while I grabbed Zug and a spare thrower for the final game. I used a quick drive in the first half, hopingmy defense would either hold the Skaven off, or they???d score quickly, allowing me to equalise while not giving them a chance to score in return ??? I was fortunate that they hadn???t been able to develop a one turner.
I managed to cause a fair amount of damage to the Skaven in the first half, but not enough to force them to field less than a full team. My defense was very good, and I held them out till turn 8, and it then looked extremely unlikely that they would score, after Zug brutally dispossessed the Thrower with accurate, hurting him in the process.
However the other thrower was able to move up to Zug, dodge into the tackle zone containing the ball, pick it up, throw a long pass to a Storm Vermin who caught it, then headed up field to handoff to a Gutter Runner who scored ??? all without a reroll.
In the second half, David was able to score without much problems this time, getting the ball to a Gutter Runner in a tackle zone who easily dodged out and made his way to the line.
I soon found myself in a strong position to score in turn 5 of the second half, but this left me with a dilemma. I hadn???t been able to do any further damage to the Skaven, and with a full turn, he would be short odds to score again, giving me a loss and almost certainly losing me the tourney. On the other hand, the draw would almost guarantee the tourney for me, but I could only be about 80% certain. A win would definitely seal the tourney. In the end I decided to go all for the win, figuring second place ain???t bad, and I???d much rather win it having gone all out to try for the win than by settling for a draw.
I setup defensively to allow me to pressure his drive right from the start, but with two Blitzers back to cut off any Gutter Runner breakouts. My setup seemed to intimidate David a bit, and he setup in a very compact offense, looking to use Headsplitter and the Rat Ogre to drive through the middle. He left me a chance to blitz his thrower however, and with the flanks clear, we were able to put a strong cordon around the ball. With his rerolls used, the risks David had to take to scramble back for the ball ended up giving me an easy and clear path to the winning touchdown.
So in the end I managed to win the tourney by a clear two point margin. I think I was a little bit lucky in this tournament, as fully half the field was made up of Elf teams, and I have a strong history of doing well against those teams with Humans. I did however play what I thought were the strongest and well-coached bashy teams in the tournament, and I thought I was unlucky in each game to come away with only a draw.
One thing this tourney definitely changed for me is my view on progression vs non-progression tourneys. I???ve now played two progression tourneys, and in both I???ve been unlucky enough to cop 3 miss next games in the first round. While the reset option helps, I think I???d much prefer a non-progression tourney with some set skill upgrades. Another thing I found was that I thought by the end, my team had a lot more depth of skills than most of the others I???d faced, while I hadn???t beefed up my team rating much due to hiring Zug and also not having the winnings from the first game. I thought this made my team a bit too tough, and would prefer to see a closer skill set amongst the various teams.
The last thing was I thought the prizes were given out a bit too densely ??? I got a hell of a lot of stuff for first place, and I think it would help grow the Blood Bowl tourney scene in Australia (which we need) better to spread them out a bit. I believe this was mainly down to the organisers of the con as a whole rather than the actual Blood Bowl organisers though, but it is something to consider trying to get changed for next year, when I???ll certainly be back for more.Babs - Apr 27, 2005 - 03:09 PM Post subject:
I'd like to see a variety of progression and non-progression tournaments offered in Australia/NZ. Will Eucalyptus Bowl be non-progression?
Also I agree about the density of prizes. It would have been good to have a small pack for third place, who walked away empty handed.
Not that the tournament was poorly run - Emma does a good job and she doesn't put up with any nonsense. She's tough and sticks to her guns.
The other thing I'd like to add was: I was robbed! Not having a chance to play Chunky at all during the tournament we'll never know who should have won. Chunky - all I can say is that you were fortunate I didn't play you Chunky - Apr 27, 2005 - 03:34 PM Post subject:
Bah! We had prepared to play you Babs - enough tackle to knock those Blodgers over, DP to finish em off, and Zug to smack anyone who wasn't a blodger. But yeah, would really have liked to have gotten it done.
Eucalyptus Bowl will be Immortality, with two skill rolls per game I believe, so there will be some progression, but it will be standardised. That way cheesy buggers like me can't end up with a much stronger team than most.Doubleskulls - Apr 27, 2005 - 05:30 PM Post subject:
EB will have resurrection style rules - and we are linking of 2 skills per game on random players. You not playing chunky is a weakness of not using Swiss all the way through - that would have forced you to play one another. adam_29 - Apr 28, 2005 - 06:30 AM Post subject:
Im new to this site (and all the online BB forums for that matter).
Oh Im in Canberra by the way.
Unfortunately I couldnt make it to the Leviathan in Sydney, but where can I get more details about this Eucalyptus Bowl?? Or can someone tell me the dates at least.
Thanks allChunky - Apr 28, 2005 - 03:27 PM Post subject:
Dates are likely to be 3rd and 4th of September - we'll be confirming them (and the venue) this weekend hopefully.-DM- - Apr 28, 2005 - 09:29 PM Post subject:
I will be there for this event. I too have only just come back into the fold and I'm keen to get stuck in. Post details as you get 'em Chunky!
CheersBevan - Apr 30, 2005 - 03:33 PM Post subject:
Doubleskulls wrote:
You not playing chunky is a weakness of not using Swiss all the way through - that would have forced you to play one another.
Since it has been mentioned that the event used my program I should point out that the failure to pair Babs and (C)Hunky was not the program's fault.
Freckles requested that there should not be a single final between the top two teams so that everyone (or as many as possible) had some interest in the final round.
So I told the program that this was a 7 round event, instead of 6. This prevented the program from pairing the top two coaches in the 6th round as it would normally have done. Instead it worked out that 10 coaches could possibly make it to 2nd place after the 6th round, so in the 6th round it took that group of 10 and formed pairs, using its usual rules within that group. The other 6 were paired off separately to avoid interfering with the top 10's chances of getting a prize.
This had the useful effect of giving most coaches a possible chance at a top 2 position. If Babs and (C)Hunky had been paired, then one of them would have to win, but the arrangement used meant that if both lost then several other coaches had a chance of sneaking past them.
This added to the interest in the last round at the cost of "robbing" Babs of the top position. freckles - May 01, 2005 - 04:23 AM Post subject:
Given all the 'bones of contention' that Leviathan seems to have brought up, maybe someone else will put up their hand to run it next year... ? I run this event every year because nobody else volunteers to do it. Being a tourney orgnaiser is a pretty thankless task (as I'm sure Babs can tell you!) and I get essentially nothing out of it.
The reason I didn't want a 'final' between two teams is because I hate playing in tourneys where you know that the last game is a total right-off because you can't make the prize positions. I think that the way it turned out (with 10 possible contenders for the top 2 positions) actually made the day more entertaining. Players certainly put a lot more into the final round than I've seen some players put into the final round at other cons.
Re: prizes... I myself wasn't aware of quite how much was in each prize pack, and could have spread it further if I had realised. We could have had 3rd prize if we didn't have Best Painted and Sportsmanship. I wasn't prepared to sacrifice those awards however as I think they are very important to the game overall, demonstrating both a commitment to the game (painting) and a commitment to playing in a reasonable fashion (sportsmanship). Again I might point out that we've had less than 8 entries in the last 3 years, so I think the con organisers were very generous with prizes - given that they were expecting a similar number of entries again this year.
I'll be interested in seeing how Eucalyptus Bowl turns out. I'm always happy to take on ideas from other cons if I think they are usable in the long run.
Finally let me just say that I'm in the position of feeling that I am having to defend myself for the way I've run the con. I'm happy to turn the reins over to someone else next year if they are volunteering! If I hadn't run this tourney nobody else would have, and there wouldn't have been a BB tourney at all. As it was I think that most people had a fun weekend, playing a game they enjoy against some really great opponents. When all is said and done I think that's the most important thing!
EmmaDoubleskulls - May 01, 2005 - 05:26 AM Post subject:
Emma - I don't think I'm alone in saying I thought you did a great job of running the tournament. The fact 16 people turned up indicates that you must have been doing something right in previous years to get more people to come and for others to come back.
There are always people with niggles or issues and there is always room for improvement too. I think all the comment so far has been at trying to ensure Leviathan is better than ever next year.-DM- - May 01, 2005 - 05:31 PM Post subject:
I certainly hope you step back up to the plate next year Emma.
I was the lad who wandered in on both days from the WARMACHINE tournament running next door (you snagged my email addy for the mailing list). I have been playing under the Rogue Trader system for Warhammer 40k for years before leaving that to play in WARMACHINE - and under the WM system, there are no prizes for sportsmanship and the painting prize is mostly a token gesture. In short, the experience was less than satisfactory and it's one reason why I'm returning back to the GW fold. I will admit that whilst the format for the RT system (under 40k anyway) was somewhat flawed, the principles and ideals make it more than worth keeping I think and I realise this now since I've had the opportunity to experience tournament gaming with and without these rules in play.
I 'ran' the Warhammer 40k tournament at Gamescape last year and most definitely understand how you feel (wargamers can be quite an ungrateful lot at times) - but I found that they truly do appreciate the effort, most of the bitching that goes on after an event tends to be more about community politics rather than giving the TO a hard time.
I noticed you ran a tight ship Emma and if it's any consolation, I'd be very keen to add to the BB player numbers for next year's event as well...
Cheers.Chunky - May 01, 2005 - 06:46 PM Post subject:
Emma, note I think the con was fantastic - that doesn't mean there aren't areas I think could improve, and all I'm trying to do is give good feedback - improvements doesn't happen if no-one tells you there is a problem - and realistically these problems are very minor issues. You never tend to hear about the good things as much as the bad, as people are content with those areas. Leviathan to me seemed to run better than Cancon if that is any indication. I also hope you'll be posting about whatever problems we end up having at Eucalyptus Bowl so we can improve on it.
You have nothing to defend - the tourney was excellent and I plan on being back next year.
I have since talked to one of the Leviathan organisers (random chance - didn't go seeking him out) and he did say that many of the sponsors specify that their prize must go to the winner - so that problem isn't really one that you have any control over.
As for the other one, I understand the logic behind the no final, but does it have to be the final if Babs and I had played? What if we'd had a draw? Wouldn't that have left the gate open for someone else to sneak through and grab the top spot? I'm not exactly sure what the points situation was, so I'm not entirely sure, but it seems to me you can still have the top two players play the final game without guaranteeing one of them the win if things are close.
Also, keep in mind that despite not liking that particular aspect of the program, I am in favour of its use regardless as it speeds everything up and makes everything run much more efficiently - compared to that, the final thing is a small thing.
And remember - there is no way I'd take the time to write a 5 page report on a tourney I didn't like Babs - May 01, 2005 - 08:55 PM Post subject:
I agree completely. And I think my moan was more about not playing Chunky at all, not necessarily playing him in a final. The explanation of more people being in a winning position is a valid reason not to have a 'final'. Emma being tournament organiser has right of say of the rules, we're merely commenting on what it was like to play under them. Hopefully the comments help refine the process.
Emma you are a great tournament organiser and we don't want you to stop organising them freckles - May 03, 2005 - 01:17 AM Post subject:
As I have said before, I am more than happy to take on board peoples comments about the tourney. I have chopped and changed a few things over the years to try and get a better outcome. I'm always keen to play in other cons and then adapt my tourney to use other tactics that I like (or avoid tactics I disliked).
For example, I have adopted the use of a neutral team of painting judges. I think this gives a more realistic result in the painting comp. Players who put in the effort to do a sterling paint job deserve to have their efforts rewarded. (I can say that, being married to one of the best I know exactly how much hard work goes into a decent paint job!) Bringing in neutral judges allows them to judge the painting, without any dramas about 'oh but I played him and he was a w#$nker, so I'm not voting for his paint job'.
I'm not overly keen on results being the sole factor used to consider the winner. A very nice guy by the name of Richard Naco used to run the BB at MOAB and the sportsmanship and painting always contributed to your overall finishing position. I think that's a very fair way to run it, allowing the overall gamer (painter/nice guy/decent player) to do well. However, after several years of people jacking up over winning all their games but not coming first I decided to do away with that system. The problem with it was that not very nice people who won all their games didn't necessarily do well, and then complained endlessly about it. That's why I adopted the painting and sportsmanship as seperate things, with results counting towards final rankings.
I guess at the end of the day it comes down to what I believe makes for a good con, and sorting things accordingly. As I said, that's why I award painting and sportsmanship prizes. I think these are both very important aspects of the game, as anyone who has played an unpainted team or an absolute w#$nker can attest!
I'm glad to have back some positive feedback, and so plan to be there again next year (barring unforseen circumstances, which is always a possibility with my health).
Cheers!freckles - May 03, 2005 - 01:21 AM Post subject:
One more thing I should mention... I was really happy to have the use of Brian Horton's BB computer system. It made life a thousand times easier, with the unexpectedly large turnout we received. I don't believe that anyone was disparaging the system when they were writing comments about the tourney overall. Just wanted to say that, as I don't want Brian to think that his efforts (and those of Michael and Andrew) were wasted. I for one greatly appreciated having it there!
Cheers!Babs - May 03, 2005 - 03:41 PM Post subject:
I also think that having sportsmanship and painting seperate is a smart move.
After Freckles' defence I think that, objectively, having the chance of 10 people vying for the top three spots is better than only 4 having that privilege, so I actually like the system of 'no final' with hindsight and after calming down from being jipped by playing dwarves in the last round and having to win the casualty count to win (argh!).
I had a great time and my only real complaint is not being able to play _everyone_ there. Everyone else has one real complaint - how slow a player I am!
Apologies for holding up the tournament everyone. I rarely finished my game anywhere but last of the lot of us. *Sigh* - maybe that's why I run CanCon and MOAB.Doubleskulls - May 03, 2005 - 05:50 PM Post subject:
Babs wrote:
I also think that having sportsmanship and painting seperate is a smart move.
I think separating them entirely from final scores encourages the "win at all costs" attitude. So I don't really agree with that - hence our rules for the Eucalyptus Bowl. IMO people who are wankers and/or show up with shoddily painted teams should not win.
What we are doing at the EB is effectively penalising those who aren't up to standard. Everyone gets marks out of 7 for each every round. If you get 3 or more you get 6 tournament points - effectively the difference between a draw and a win. If you get a 1 you get no points, if you get a 2 you get 3 TP (so half the difference).
There is no advantage for getting top marks other than being in contention for the sports/painting prize - but there is a big incentive for people to meet what I'd consider a minimum standard for presentation and sportsmanship - both of which are vital for ensuring your opponent has as enjoyable experience as you do.Chunky - May 03, 2005 - 06:40 PM Post subject:
I also prefer sports and painting to be included in the overall winner - its the system I'm used to from WHFB and I've seen the effect its had on peoples behaviour over the years.
If anything, I'd give these things a larger roll than is in Ecalyptus Bowl.
Another aspect to consider though is that the BB crowd is made up from people outside of the GW wargaming fraternity where such things are commonplace, and there is some resistance to it. There are a lot of people out there who think it should be based on gameplay only. I do think they believe such things will have a much larger effect on things than they actually do though - most people are OK, and so the scoring generall reflects this.-DM- - May 03, 2005 - 06:43 PM Post subject:
good point Ian.
Like I said, I've been a Warhammer 40k tournament old hand for some years and their system is a combined effort - it promotes the 'hobby' as much as playing the game and depending on your beliefs, it's a good thing as it DOES encourage nicely painted models and good personal conduct at the tables.
By contrast, I played the WARMACHINE tournament at Leviathan this year which uses the 'wins' & 'painting' as separate awards and the difference was staggering. Only 3 of the 10 attendees had a fully painted army and the conduct at the tables was harsh enough to put me off playing the game at tournament level ever again.
I dunno, it's a tough one to answer really. I have to agree that having the awards separate does in fact promote the 'wins at all costs' attitude - I experienced it first hand - but it depends if winning games is the primary goal of the tournament.
For me, it's more about having a good time and promoting the hobby - and nothing promotes it better than people having a good time with beautifully painted figures on the table...Babs - May 04, 2005 - 05:55 PM Post subject:
Just a quick note that rankings have been updated for Levaithan (see my signature for why I'm so interested).rochallor - May 05, 2005 - 12:19 AM Post subject:
Yessss!! Finally logged myself in to NAF site. There goes another hour of free time each day spent on forums...
Well, Leviathan was my first tournament, and I had great fun... will certainly be back for more, maybe Eucalyptus Bowl, depends on how it fits in with exams... but in my (not exactly experienced) opinion Emma ran it really well - I was (pleasantly) surprised by the sportsmanship prize, but I will wait till I attend a couple more tourneys before I start commenting on whether this and painting should be included in overall results or not... (maybe if I finish in the top 10 I will start to care about this a bit more... )
Good to see there are a few more Oz BB coaches than I thought... I was wondering where you were all hiding!!Babs - May 05, 2005 - 01:12 AM Post subject:
Good to see you on here Rochallor.-DM- - May 05, 2005 - 07:10 PM Post subject:
I think it's more a case of a revival in the game locally actually.
GW's focus on their flagship games have made them very expensive of late and people are just looking for alternatives. BB is an old favourite of many and probably the cheapest GW game to get into...
It doesn't hurt the support for BB is excellent all round and the community strong. It's all good.
