I for instance don't think Ottawa, my location, would be the best choice. But Toronto or Montreal (in the East) could certainly make bids that would be competitive as could Vancouver in the West of Canada.

Really? Because I was thinking that Ottawa tend to have a lot of people who will attend tourneys, just so long as they are in Ottawa!

But there does seem to be a hinting that some of the TBBFers may be coming out of retirement. And I would imagine, that for something of this size and calibre, that they could almost certainly be coaxed to come out!

Something we have been working on behind the scenes already.
I'd like to prupose a biyearly event, with every other event bieng hosted in the US.

Every two years. I don't think it would be a good idea to do it any more often then that.

That's what my wife used to tell me.....

I like every two years for tournaments of this potential size and scale.

LOL, a NA team tournament,the winning prize should be a wooden spoon

(don't worry guys, you'll have plenty of opportunities to kick my ass )

Sounds like a great idea for all of NA to have a much larger scale tourney every 2 years. Would be quite the large undertaking but well worth it I would think. Would you want to alternate between the US and Canada hosting the event every 2 years? This way it would really only be every 4 years that each group from the US or Canada would have to organize the event. Timetable would seem realistic at least under this format.

I for instance don't think Ottawa, my location, would be the best choice. But Toronto or Montreal (in the East) could certainly make bids that would be competitive as could Vancouver in the West of Canada.

I suspect there are about 5-10 cities in the US that could be considered as well.

But it is the organisers not just the city that is important.

Any place is fine as long as the TO's and TD agree. TO's sell their location to the lot and everyone hashes it out.

Well I think the first thing to do is look at the number of coaches that are attending in the respective hemispheres.

Ontario boasts more tourneys than our Western bretheren, but I am not sure of their numbers.

Advertising $$$$
Hard work often pays off. Pitch the event as a North American board game tournament and we would love to put them up as sponsors from either goods or cash. There will be a ton of people from all over North America. (we'll sneak some guy across the border, or go to the local Home Depot and teach a day laborer how to play)

If you can let me know what info I need to present to you to make this an offiical bid.

I might add that those not only putting in a bid and or volunteering understands that at any level it is for the love of the sport not for monetary gain.

Clan thank you for the witty humor I needed that after the day I had

If we can now get back to the regular scheduled programming...which is creating a NA Tourney for all to attend that can compete with the other major events worldwide.

I think it' s called the lakeside cup

Hey pete, can we re-make Woodstock in your backyard ?

I think it' s called the lakeside cup

Hey pete, can we re-make Woodstock in your backyard ?

I would like to suggest both the US and Canada vote for a primary NA Cup Coordinator. So someone would nominate them, 2nd them, then people can vote. Once the primary coordinator for each country is chosen, they can then choose a crew of 2 others to join them.

Those 6 people now form the NA Cup Committee...with the primary US and Canada coordinators ultimately calling the shots overall.

Just a thought since there obviously needs to be some direction here before moving any further.

Some good points you made Jonny.

Sorry if it sounded inflammatory. I didn't want it to be, but in looking at the post now, it could probably be taken that way.

I think this is a spectacular idea. I think we totally need something that is specific to NA, to show that we can play BB and support BB just as much as Europe.
And I agree with CS, Niagara Falls is a viable option for Eastern Canada, just as much as Toronto or Montreal. I think that being accessible to everyone is key. Even Buffalo or Seattle could be options, because of their proximity to Canada. Since American internal flights are not terribly expensive.

I will gladly volunteer my skills for whatever is required. And would love to help with the discission committee. I think more realistically, this tournament should be every 4 years, so it can alternate with the WC. Simply for the fact that then maybe we can build this up to be a second massive tournament specifically to NA, until the point when we are considered as good an otion as Europe.

Let's not forget many of us are in our 30's and 40's already, unless we're going to still play when we're all 80 or so I believe every 2 years to be enough of a gap. Just my 2 cents of course, would probably have to be tabled by a committee once there is one in place.

It's a damn good point.. but when you say it like that...... Damn! I feel old!

LOL! We're all gettin' there, your not alone in that feeling.

I think I like the idea of it being every 4 years also for the reasons that the Dingle mentions. I like it to be in the middle of the years between the World Cup.

I don't necessarily think that it needs to be on/near the border. I enjoy the travelling to other locations. I think there are plenty of cities that wouldn't be that expensive to fly to.

I see a lot of people wanting to help but I don't see anyone actually stepping up.

Any volunteers? I would suggest that there be at least 2 people from each country and then those people can ask for help from those willing to offer support.

We could shoot for a tournament sometime in 2013.

Any comments are welcome!!!

as the most canadian-european (british are not european, don't know what they are though ), I strongly aggree with DarkOrk points. And doing so might even motivate more europeans that you would expect (especially if the tournament is held during summer).

for sure need the Babel fish...

At least correct my english so I can improve it !

Well, as for time I would think if we want it to be every other year and not necessarily overlap with the World Cup, have it the year after it (2013), and then alternating years after that (2015, 2017 and so on)..

Do you really think coaches can do a major trip to play bloodbowl 3 years in a row ? If you think so, then it's fine, but if not, then every 4 years alternated with the world cup might be more suitable, no ?

(And as we are in the same league, I foresee much of my role as reigning in daloonieshaman's crazy ideas!!)

2012 is a stretch, but If need be I could sacrifice the Quake in Vegas to host the NATC (we are working with venues to work out the date could be as late as memorial day time frame)

yeah, but you want people to actually stick around for BB and not get "distracted", right?

2012 is a stretch, but If need be I could sacrifice the Quake in Vegas to host the NATC (we are working with venues to work out the date could be as late as memorial day time frame)

You might want to TELL the OTHER people who are working on the WC Quake what you're doing, Mr. Daloonieshaman.

I think this is a great idea.

Out of curiosity, what has been the biggest NA tournament so far?

just butting my english opinion in... ;]

I agree every four years alternate between the world cup seems to be best

as the only coach (afaik) who has been to all four majors, there doesn't seem to be many coaches from american or canada going to tournaments in each others countries

if you have a world cup and 2 north american cups in the space of every 3 years I think you are going to limit attendance

I've been to the chaos cup twice and the spike when it was in toronto, there are also now it seems more tournaments for north americans to attend than before

the choice has been growing well and I'm pleased to see that though (I may be wrong) it appears to me there aren't that many coaches travelling a great deal to tournaments

obviously the distances are greater than we have in europe, though there is nearly a tournament every weekend in the UK now and unfortunately due to that and the fact the £ is worth a lot less now there seems to be a lot less travel around european countries than there was initiall with fewer tournaments to go to

I think the expression of don't run before you can walk could well apply here, I understand the enthusiasm though it isn't like there is a shortage of tournaments in your calender already that you could encourage people to go to

the two that see the most foreign coaches over here now are both the Blood Bowl and the Dungeonbowl (more UK coaches travel for that than any other in europe now)

feel free to ignore me but maybe some outside perspective could help, it is easier to do more if the demand is there than to fizzle out cause you spread yourselves too thin to begin with

The mistake here is trying to compare this event to a European one. If 80 people is large for NA, then shoot for that. I don't think we should cry defeat just because it wouldn't be as big as a European tournament.

For most people over here, 80 people would be awesome, wouldn't it?

That's not what I'm saying - I think 80 coaches at any North American tournament would be awesome so we are totally on the same page there. My issue is that having a Team Challenge in North America every 4 years would only take away potential teams going to World Cup instead.

World Cup 2011 in Amsterdam has no North American teams, and it's not because we don't have individual players from Canada and the U.S. that wouldn't be able to go, but that it is extremely hard to get 6 coaches from a North American club together and able to register a team. Myself, my brother, and 2 other guys could have gone from our club - but I honestly couldn't tell you who the other 2 guys would have been.

As Dwarfrunner pointed out, going to Toronto to Vancouver is the same as going from Toronto to Amsterdam. If North America was able to put together a Team event that could get 6 player-teams from clubs scattered around the New World to attend once every 4 years then why not just attend World Cup then?

I agree with James that overall a Team Challenge wouldn't hurt the Major Tournaments in North America (Gencon, Zlurpee, Chaos Cup, Spike!) that much given it's only every 4 years, but I do believe that it would further diminish any chance that 6-man-teams will travel to Europe to participate in the NAF WC.

Again - North America doesn't have one team attending WC this year and I'd like to see that remedied for WC 2015. Imho a North American Team Challenge as much as it would be fun would only make this worse, and I want to see more NA Teams in the WC in the years to come. No teams attending from either Canada or the U.S. is a little embarrassing imho. I'd like to see more effort to get our teams in Europe instead.

World Cup 2011 in Amsterdam has no North American teams, and it's not because we don't have individual players from Canada and the U.S. that wouldn't be able to go, but that it is extremely hard to get 6 coaches from a North American club together and able to register a team. Myself, my brother, and 2 other guys could have gone from our club - but I honestly couldn't tell you who the other 2 guys would have been.

As Dwarfrunner pointed out, going to Toronto to Vancouver is the same as going from Toronto to Amsterdam. If North America was able to put together a Team event that could get 6 player-teams from clubs scattered around the New World to attend once every 4 years then why not just attend World Cup then?

I agree with James that overall a Team Challenge wouldn't hurt the Major Tournaments in North America (Gencon, Zlurpee, Chaos Cup, Spike!) that much given it's only every 4 years, but I do believe that it would further diminish any chance that 6-man-teams will travel to Europe to participate in the NAF WC.

Again - North America doesn't have one team attending WC this year and I'd like to see that remedied for WC 2015. Imho a North American Team Challenge as much as it would be fun would only make this worse, and I want to see more NA Teams in the WC in the years to come. No teams attending from either Canada or the U.S. is a little embarrassing imho. I'd like to see more effort to get our teams in Europe instead.

+ Fumbbl wbsite

+ bloodbowl L E forum

Hey GJ, just to let you know there is one Canadian team confirmed and possibly a second in the works as we have 2 spots registered on the WC list #38/39 I believe. There are also some players from the US attending as well that I know of (I think there is one team and a few individuals) So there will be a North American presence at the WC this year. That being said, I do agree with much of what you said above. It is hard to estimate whether a NA tourney would impact numbers going to the WC in Europe though as only having one of the events every 2 years is enough of a distance between them that it would be possible to plan on attending both. Anyhow just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents

these are the teams who preregistered but are not, yet in and will go into the draw at the 22nd of February

Denmark -0


Italy -4
Team Name: Six Pistols
Team Name : KILL BBIL
Team Name : Granducato di Toscana
Team Name : Evolution

Australia/New Zealand - 0

USA -0

Canada - 0

Austria – 1
Team Name : Team Österreich


Switzerland - 1
Team Name : Ouroboros

Spain - 7
Team Name : Fumbblers
Team Name : LBN (El Prat)
Team Name : Garrapato Unako Team
Team Name : Fumbble Renegades
Team Name : BASQUE BARBARIANS
Team Name : Freebooters
Team Name : EQUIPO ACTIMEL

Dutch - 0

Germany - 2
Team Name: KAmPF
Team Name : Kurpfalz Crew

France - 9
Team Name : Lutece Noobz
Team Name : CROM LECH BASHLORDS
Team Name : PILOU 1
Team Name : OLD LUTECE CREW
Team Name : LES RUELLEUX
Team Name : EXPERTS LUTECE
Team Name : RHONE ALPES
Team Name : MBBC
Team name : NEW AZES

UK/British Isles - 4
Team Name : Scotland Clan ELG
Team Name : The Blackshirts
Team Name : Hampshire Superhogs
Team Name : Flame On Team B

Belgium - 0

Portugal – 0

Individuals: (will make up 12 players)
NAF Name: clamoroso NAF Number:11858
NAF Name: Cosworth NAF Number: 9963
NAF Name: Danisheraser NAF Number: 16742
NAF Name: Superbeasto NAF Number: 16923
NAF Name: Rolex NAF Number: 16091
NAF Name: DrunkenDwarf NAF Number: 7357
NAF Name: Tiamo69 NAF Number: 13759
NAF Name: Caran NAF Number: 13232
NAF Name: Paloji NAF Number: 15286 (spanish team ACTIMEL)
NAF Name: Solomon Knicely NAF Number: ?
NAF Name: flyingdingle NAF Number: 4244
NAF Name: Chapuzas NAF Number: 12746
NAF Name: SirSebstar NAF Number:5271
NAF Name: Barks NAF number: 11622

That is fantastic that you and 3 of your friends could actually make it to Europe and compete in this WC.. in fact, why not look for 2 more Americans to complete your team?

I think the fact of the matter is, it would be hard for many gaming groups in the this country to find 6 people who can AFFORD to make a 1200$ trip to Europe for WC. It has nothing to do with lack of interest.. Hosting a NA Championship would allow teams from North America to compete in a large scale tournament without having to pay AS MUCH (it wouldn't be cheap to travel all over the country) to play.

I can honestly say that is 100% of the reason why I won't be attending WC2011.. funding and I'm sure there are loads of American and Canadian players out there thinking the same thing..

And worst case.. we attempt to run it and it doesn't work

Well we've just had a state championship in Australia and it was the best tournie I've been to in a long time. Really try and make it work guys.

However, the original goal here was to create a proof of concept event to facilitate an eventual World Cup in NA, right? How about we consider a compromise where one of the major NA competitions add a team meta-game onto their existing tourny structure? You don't need to rebrand the tourny or add another date on the year--our biggest problem is not a lack of major tournys so much as a lack of convenience to travel to all of them in a year.

Basically, I'm just saying let's use a NAC meta-game to make our existing tourny's stronger. We could have the NAC itself rotate through NA tournaments that have NAF major status. For example, the 2012 Zlurpee will also determine the NAC champion club. The 2014 Spike! will determine the next one, 2016 WCQ holds the 3rd NAC championship, etc. Does that make sense? I see it as a compromise that both helps the pocket book (most of us already would like to attend the major NA tournys) and takes advantage of our existing TO infrastructure.

I do not like the backpacking idea of tournaments. Let the NAC have it's own identity. If people choose to go to that instead of something else, well then that is their choice and it happens all the time.

If the NAC does not have it's own identity then it will just be an afterthought and not even take the full attention of the people in attendance. Some will be at that tournament and not even know it's the NAC!

Let's not sell ourselves short here and think the only way to get a large turnout is to piggyback it with something else.

Simple idea....just have it in Vegas in 2012. If it's a success, start work on planning another in 2014. If it's Vegas every year because it's most feasible, then that's fine. Currently Vegas has not had a major tournament so this could be a great "identity" for the NAC ongoing.

Simple idea....just have it in Vegas in 2012. If it's a success, start work on planning another in 2014. If it's Vegas every year because it's most feasible, then that's fine. Currently Vegas has not had a major tournament so this could be a great "identity" for the NAC ongoing.

I really agree on the unique identity for the NAC.
We need to do this if we want to attempt to bid for the NAF WC in 2015 or beyond.

Funny you say
The West Coast Quake is finalizing the space for the 2012 event that will be held Saint Paddy's Day weekend March 17th -18th.
We have been posting our intentions for a bit now.

I am willing to talk to the group and see if we would like to change our plans and allow NAC to take the spot.

I do not like the backpacking idea of tournaments. Let the NAC have it's own identity. If people choose to go to that instead of something else, well then that is their choice and it happens all the time.

If the NAC does not have it's own identity then it will just be an afterthought and not even take the full attention of the people in attendance. Some will be at that tournament and not even know it's the NAC!

Let's not sell ourselves short here and think the only way to get a large turnout is to piggyback it with something else.

I really agree on the unique identity for the NAC.
We need to do this if we want to attempt to bid for the NAF WC in 2015 or beyond.

The goal of the NAC should be to establish a NAC - not to prove that North America can host a NAF WC. I don't believe a North American location - even Vegas, will ever get into the neighbourhood of 400-500 like Europe can and the only reason for that is because the majority of the tournament players are there: even to the point where they had to turn some people away.

not to tread. How about 2013 or 2014 for Vegas an use the experience we are gaining with the Quake, to ease the process a bit.
(push back start to 2013) or (use Vegas as NAC 2 in 2014)

...btw....I do like the 3-4 man team concept.

I think a tourney in Vegas in the winter months would easily hit 100+ in it's first year.

The Rat City Rumble hit 30+ it's first time out, NOT a major tourney, and it was snowing.

Does this mean that we have a plan? It sounds ok to me. I just wouldn't want our northern neighbors to feel slighted if it is always hosted in Vegas.

I'm been advocating for Vegas the whole time because I think it's the best location in North America for this kind of tournament.

Not at all Tom but thanks you for your consideration. I'm been advocating for Vegas the whole time because I think it's the best location in North America for this kind of tournament.

Not sure how you could say it's the best. Vegas certainly has some strong points, but other North America locations have already demonstrated they are very good for large tournaments. (Note: This is not a vote against Vegas.)

I'd feel thrilled to have it in Vegas. It's is probably one of the cheapest destinations for us to fly to in the states. Flight+hotel packages are numerous and competitive.

But most importantly for those of us with a ball and chain that's not a gobbo fanatic, Vegas is as easy a sell to the wife and family as you're going to get.

You get to go geek out for a few days on blood bowl, she gets to spend your money on the strip...

And the added touch is that this consideration applies to the numerous Europeans who might want to participate as well.

As for the year - fall 2013 would be my vote. Then 2017, 2021, ect. ect.

Fall does not work for 3 reasons

1) Vegas is hotter than hot (Hard to enjoy the evening if you are dripping in sweat and then going into a frozen smokey casino)

2) Conflicts with Spike and Chaos Cup

3) Feb, March,April into May are traditionally the cheapest times due to lack of conventions (Vegas is the convention capital of the world)

4) Airfare is "usually" cheaper during that time

We have already decided that if you were to win anything there would be and * by the award

I do not see a major problem in getting 100 (104) players, though 32 teams would make the math FAR FAR easier.

Someone would have to sell me on the 4 player team format

Interesting to hear about your result tracking developments generaljason. Keep us informed!!!

Someone would have to sell me on the 4 player team format......

Skill Selection basic skill 20K, to take a doubles or stat you must first have added a basic skill.
Cost:
Doubles +40K - MA - AV 40K
AG - +50K
STR +70K.

Amsterdam and Vegas in a month? Look at the big baller living the big life.

I think I have found a convention cordinator [sp] Rich (the fuy that wond the Quake) his wife use to do that stuff full time. I asked him to ask her if she is willing to help as she speaks the language

By curiosity, are you opening the registration to everybody or just north americans ?

Rules set independant of event runners. Probably similar rules to the World Cup II.

There will be no "new" kick off table permitted.

If you eliminated things at a whim for simplicity and add things at a whim for flavor (all in the interest of the game of course) What do you really need a kickoff table for?

I guess it's a bloodbowl tournament, therefore they a re planning to use the bloodbowl rules, especially the ones that have been proven to work well in this kind of tournaments

I guess it's a bloodbowl tournament, therefore they a re planning to use the bloodbowl rules, especially the ones that have been proven to work well in this kind of tournaments

For the record we did have to pound on Lucy to give the HMC to the Halflings and the Bribe to the Gobbos for WCII. So yes I would say that every addition and subtraction has its effects

Yes it promotes diversity
But do you want to not play your Dwarves because Dave wants to play his? do we want to go down that road.

Team creation: 1 mil, 1.1, 1.25 they all offer different levels of fun.

as far as inducements why eliminate any? (well maybe cards as some people find it bothersome). The argument for the wiz is petty as my snotling can just as well bop on your head and send you out. (yea and how many times you you rolled a 1 on an important GFI at least you get to reroll that) Other than the HMC/B you can make a circular argument for any inducement if a person wants to spend his $$$ that way.

(s)Kill progression. not my favorite

Team Scoring

Matchups

I am not so sure limitations on the roster selection for the four teams should be there.
Yes it promotes diversity
But do you want to not play your Dwarves because Dave wants to play his? do we want to go down that road.

Team creation: 1 mil, 1.1, 1.25 they all offer different levels of fun. as far as inducements why eliminate any?..... .

My feeling on the rules is this.
#1) first and foremost this is our show and we have no reason to be lazy and do things as others have done them.
#2) Yes some things have proven to work and have become almost universal (ie except for special events no cards) so lets use a lot of those.
#3) Throw it out there regardless of how loonie it seems at first, diversity promotes discussion.
#4) Eventually try to calm down and look at from the other guys point of view
#5) A group whittling is better than a blank ruling. You win some you lose some at least your voice was expressed
#6) Last but not least enjoy a good ole turn 16 foul once in a while (just because)

A Jonny_P: Around here, we pretty much eliminated most of that bonus points for TD/CAS and such. It ensured the coach with the best record wont he tournament more often than not. And I liked the idea of toughness of schedule being the first tie-breaker. Although I am not entirely sure how it is calculated (Average points of your opponents throughout the tournament).

I don't expect there to be a great deal of change in the ruleset and such, but where does it say that 1.15 is less competitive than 1.1. Honestly, no matter how you swing it, certain teams will do better in tournaments than others (hence the tier 1, 2 and 3 references to level of difficulty playing them).

I liked the idea of toughness of schedule being the first tie-breaker.

I'm just being the devil's advocate to prevent bad surprises, I'm almost not a power gamer any more because of you guys

Not trying to butt in, but the WCII did not have any rules that discriminated between races

no idea what you are talking about

Out of interest, what is your break down of the tiers under the World Cup II rules?

I guess he didnt read the entire 16 pages of our bullshits, and got confused

This I guess:

It would probably have made more sense if it hadn't jumped to the top of the next page... or I'd bothered quoting!

Notorious_jtb - ah - I thought you thought the rules differentiated between the races, but they didn't. If you look at http://naf.talkfantasyfootball.org/tournaments/world_cup_ii.html you can see the averages for all the races at the world cup. It doesn't deviate massively from the norms for an LRB6 tournament, although its interesting how badly 'zons and Dwarves did and lizards a bit better. Most of the races in the bottom half and Nurgle have fairly small sample sizes (e.g. only 5 coaches playing Chaos) so aren't particularly reliable.

Something that is never done is to allow skill purchase with team creation money, as it completely screws up the balance that have been achievec by adjusting player/reroll costs since LRB 3.0.

I am with Doubleskulls, I really don't think it alters that much the balance of certain teams. I mean good coaches know how to play certain teams, and play against certain teams. All this talk keeps me thinking that there is a coach playing this team, and HIS skills dictates more the outcome then skills.

But yes, certain teams will always benefit from different Tourament team creations. Really in the end, simpler is probably better.

Maybe. But here is a possible scenario...

Coach 1 - Wood Elf
Coach 2 - Undead
Coach 3 - Skaven
Coach 4 - Halfling

You are allowed a total of 20 normal skills, and 4 doubles skills (no more than one per player)

Divide how you wish.

Coach 1 skills up his two wardancers with sidestep, lineman with leader, and catcher with block (3 norm, 1 dbl)
Coach 2 skills up his two mummies with break tackle, 4 ghouls with block, 2 wights with guard (8 norm, 0 dbl)
Coach 3 skills up his rat ogre with block, thrower with leader, 4 GR with block (5 norm, 1 dbl)
Coach 4 skills up his two treemen with block, 4 halflings with sidestep (4 norm, 2 dbl)

Something like this would really make the team feel like they are building as a team by working with strengths and weaknesses within their team list.

Require all rosters to be submitted together when they pre-register too.

how about 4.0 or 4.4 to make 4 teams at least 11 players per, then add the skill stuff

+1 for 4x1.1, then skill stuff.

Anyway, if a team has 11 skills it means another team has almost none. And Tier 1 teams that don't need double can pass them to Tier 2/3 teams, making them more competitive. I think it's a great way to have fair rules but lot of flexibility. Good idea !

Could you imagine checking rosters where teams come up at 950k, then 1020k, etc?

Consider this get a team pack (say 20+4) limit the skill (say 4) the group may have. Ex: you may only add 4 blocks or 4 dodges. This requires a ton of teamwork.

The more I think about this the more I feel uncomfortable with the "team skills pack" concept.

With or without skill or money packs is fine with me. Just throwing some random ideas out there.

Teams better show up in matching shirts/hats/underwear tho!

so jtb:
4 x 1.1 (or what ever)
no skills
all inducements (but cards for obvious reasons)
4 separate races
Standard Weather
Standard Kickoff Table

Yeah, and they have T-shirts too for the most TD, the most Cas and the most fouls. Every round, the T-shirts are re-attributed. (well, If you plan to take the tshirt home at the end, you'd better start to lead early, so the T-shirt hasnt been use as sweat-sponge before ).

Yeah, and they have T-shirts too for the most TD, the most Cas and the most fouls. Every round, the T-shirts are re-attributed. (well, If you plan to take the tshirt home at the end, you'd better start to lead early, so the T-shirt hasnt been use as sweat-sponge before ).

Wow like the tour de France, awesome!!!

Skills changing round to round is a pain in the ass. It's going to be someone's only job to monitor that between games.

I'd vote for everything up front, and nothing changes.

Something we are trying at Chaos Cup this year is the printing out of ALL rosters for coaches and their opponents for them. We will print out 2 copies of each before the event, and mark one COACH and mark one OPPONENT. That way the opponent always has a copy for review during games.

Even tho I always state in the rules pack to have multiple copies, it still happens that there will be lazy coaches who don't give their opponent a roster to hold onto for the entire game.

Adding new skills to that mix makes enforcing the fairness of "open rosters for all" even tougher.

As far as we are considering to promote a comparable initiative in Europe.
Don't you think will be desirable to share the ruleset in order to have as closer tournaments as possible?
I will like the idea of "brother" continental tournaments with same ruling.
Moreover, maybe all we could discuss with Pippy a fixed ruleset for WC and these tournaments...

What do you think about?

I think if we could set up a number of Continental Team Challenges every 4 years (two years from WC) the NAF WC venue could easier move around the world. Most active players will join one big NAF team challenge every 2 years, and other players that won't travel to other continent will have at least one event every 4 years.

Let's define every ruleset and then put all together and see what we could do to get an homogeneus ruleset. I think is not a major issue for these tournaments attractiveness but will get a better image of NAF team events as a whole.

You're right

That is one of the main positive points IMO.

I think if we could set up a number of Continental Team Challenges every 4 years (two years from WC) the NAF WC venue could easier move around the world. Most active players will join one big NAF team challenge every 2 years, and other players that won't travel to other continent will have at least one event every 4 years.

Let's define every ruleset and then put all together and see what we could do to get an homogeneus ruleset. I think is not a major issue for these tournaments attractiveness but will get a better image of NAF team events as a whole.

I am in fact waiting for this III WC in Las Vegas, mate.

To share dates will be a nightmare. But comparable formats will enhance the whole set of tournaments as a world wide event.

We should in any case discuss the european format (I am not the only one involved), but we certainly could get something related.