 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Uthrac |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: May 11, 2006 - 12:47 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 09, 2006
Posts: 16
Status: Offline
|
|
Zinak wrote: Zinak wrote:
hmm 3 colors
zinak
Detailed ??? 2 points: All models have had the details painted in a variety of colors or with noticeable effects.
And again, to clarify, I do not object to painting guidelines, restrictions, etc. Nor would I bring an unpainted/unrepresented team to a tournament. I merely question the use of "painting points" in the tournament scoring system.
~Uthrac |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Shane |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 11, 2006 - 03:11 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Boston-ish
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
Note that the identical system for last year's B-town B-haha was on the books, and widely ignored. No points were deducted from any playing team (unless there was an 0/10 somewhere) as you can see from the website, as all scores end with either a 5 or 0. Also, keep in mind this is 10 points out of between 90 and 300+, so the painting points end up being a potential tiebreaker, nothing more. Please don't let the stray hobbyist attitude keep you away.
There is quite often a divide between "BB is a Hobby" players and the "BB is a game" players at times.
I'm fully in favor of a Best Painted prize, and know better than to even inset myself into the voting. (I've never painted a fig in my life, and have no intention to start now.) I prefer this kind of 10 point system to the "you must paint to these specifications or you are out" version in the North American Cup rulebook.
Anybody looking to use the Hawthorne Suites to save some cash for the Brouhaha? That $30 for parking turns into a couple bucks total by using the bus into Harvard Sq. I live across the street from the Hawthorne, and would be happy to escort anyone staying there into the store. |
_________________
Shane Yeager, Licensed Rules Lawyer
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
ryltar |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 11, 2006 - 06:48 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 7
Status: Offline
|
|
Shane wrote: No points were deducted from any playing team (unless there was an 0/10 somewhere) as you can see from the website, as all scores end with either a 5 or 0. Also, keep in mind this is 10 points out of between 90 and 300+, so the painting points end up being a potential tiebreaker, nothing more.
Roman Dwarves Dwarven Kings 204 1 1 3 5 6 17 10 6
That's a line from the Brouhaha site. Roman got 204 points. Assuming it wasn't just for s- and giggles, he must have been docked on painting.
I wish y'all had been around Danger Planet three or four years ago, when a 40k league was starting up. Painting rules were three colors and basing (as they are here). Basing had EVERYONE up in arms. It was quite a scene. In fact for me that is an issue. My orc team doesn't have texture on their bases. They are all color coded so no one can mistake a position. Its really much nicer than playing the almost all identical orcs, who were all very well painted and based, but the black orcs and blitzers and line orcs were virtually indistinguishable from each other. I'd lose two points right there if I came with them. Not that it'll matter since it is only a tiebreaker. 
But, why tiebreak on a hobby aspect? I thought BloodBowl was supposed to be a game, and a tourney was to determine the best coach (on that given day). Even more so, why tiebreak on something that isn't enforced  ? The tourneys I've been to (few in number as they are), standings do seem to end up pretty close. Despite your plea, Shane, you definitely are not going to draw in those people who have unpainted teams and want to play, or at least object on principal to the exclusion of unpainted teams (exclusion by penalty anyway).
If something is in the rules, it should be enforced, otherwise it will be enforced at the judges discretion, which is not fair. If it isn't enforced, don't put it in the rules!
Personally I feel both painting and sportsmanship should be recorded outside of the event scorekeeping. Even others on these forums have stated that the reliablity of the sportsmanship system is arguable. And painting has no bearing on whether you are a good coach or not. It hurts my eyes to see flash metal teams, but if a flash metal team can beat my well painted one, then they should get the full benefit! Both sportsmanship and painting should have their own categories and judging. But it shouldn't be part of determining who gets to be champion.
zinak wrote:
In reality it would take you 1 afternoon to complete a paint job that will get you all of the above points. You are jot judge on how well it is painted(thats what the painting comp is for) just that you have paint on the models. I ,for one, hate setting down a team that I took my time to paint,as per the rules tournament, to find my opponent didn t take the time todo the same. I would not even care to play such a person as painting in a huge part of the hobby... i would say even as much as the game itself. To clarify this i dont expect every paint job to be world class , i just would hope everyone would put some work into it.
I have painted several of my Bloodbowl teams up to as high a standard as I could. 'one afternoon' is a poor description for the 12 hours it took me to get the guys looking most of the way there, and that is the point at which one would score the full 10 points. I didn't time the finishing details after or the conversion work before. And I've been painting for over a decade. A novice, with little interest in painting, could waste a lot of time meeting even the lowest standards for an event like this. Not everyone cares to spend their time painting. It hurts me too, but while they may not be hobbyists (or possessed of a lot of time) they often love the game just as much as you and I. And we should accept that and welcome them to the game. If it hurts you enough, I am sure they'd love to have you spend 'one afternoon' to paint their team for you. They might even give you money (it'd be like a buisness!).
I'd like to point you for a second to the vast wealth of pre-painted collectable miniatures games (Hero-Clix, Mage Knight, Star Wars Minis etc..). Not only are they a huge market (as in people buy the stuff cause they don't even have to paint them) but they are a major resource as a pool of gamers to draw into our hobby. Sooner or later they would probably take to the idea that they could paint their own dudes, and might even like it. But if you set up tourneys that inherently penalize them, it will be a lot harder to draw them in. And I think that is a loss to the hobby. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 11, 2006 - 07:08 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
I really don't get why this is such an issue...it is 10 stinking points. And it is not a penalty for those people who don't want to paint/can't paint/have no interest in painting...it's a reward for those who do.
Generally speaking the game is more enjoyable when painted minis are used. That's my opinion, but I think it is shared by quite a few, if not the majority, or people out there.
If you want to play for, "The love of the game" exclusively...then you should not mind not getting the 10 points that generally don't get applied until after the fourth round at the earliest.
And just to repeat using different words so that everyone gets it...these rules are not meant to be exclusionary...they are not discriminating against the non-painters...they are simply a perk for those people who enjoy this part of the hobby and are willing to put extra time into their team. If it doesn't strike your fancy to spend the time doing this...don't begrudge those who do put in the extra effort. Thanks.
-Rob
P.S. I myself can't pait at all, and get most of my creative itch scratched by modeling and conversions. That said...having a nicely painted team for me to play with...and for my opponent to play against...is very important to me. I will commission someone to paint my teams, or buy them pre-painted. Problem solved...that's the way I handle it and I don't begrudge the winners of "Best Painted" because I am not elidgable because I don't paint my own teams. (And BTW...sometimes the winner of that award at a given tourney doesn't have a better looking team than mine...it's just that I didn't paint it so I am not a candidate for that award. Oh Well.) |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
 
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Shane |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 11, 2006 - 07:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Boston-ish
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
The Dwarven Kings is most likely a typo, but I'll let Melifaxis say one way or the other if he wants. I know if it were strict reading, I'd've ended up with 4 out of 10 (a HE Blitzer subbing for a 3rd DE Blitzer for -4, and substandard basing for -2.) I know Melifaxis knew about the turncoat Elf, at least. Final score for me was 255.
--->I think we're on the same page though, on hobby v gamer, so I won't comment to much on that.
--->I was around DP back then, but I can't stand 40K. I actually tried running a BB league there once. Remember BABBLe?
--->As to the pre-painted stuff, it's likely that I'll be showing up with a BattleBall team to one of these tournies, once I figure out if they're better as Humans, Norse, or Chaos. |
_________________
Shane Yeager, Licensed Rules Lawyer
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
ryltar |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 11, 2006 - 10:33 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 28, 2006
Posts: 7
Status: Offline
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: I really don't get why this is such an issue...it is 10 stinking points. And it is not a penalty for those people who don't want to paint/can't paint/have no interest in painting...it's a reward for those who do.
Rob -
With all due respect, if it is 'ten stinking points' then why do you want them so bad? And your 'bonus' is someone else's penalty. It is all a matter of perspective. And if you want to reward people for their painting or converting skills, why not just give out a best painting/best conversion award?
I guess we look at this differently. I think (correct me if I am wrong) you feel a tournament to be more of a 'hobby' competition. I would prefer one I go to to be a 'game' competition. Both are valid. A 'hobbyists' can to some extent be satisfied at a 'gamer' tourney by inclusion of painting and other awards in addition to a purely game mechanics based determination of a winner. I have yet to see a 'gamist' approach to scoring though outside of theoretical discussions. A 'gamist' could perhaps be satisfied by including a 'best coach' award besides overall winner (Warhammer GTs used to have Best General besides the Overall champ based on win record only) but this option is something I have seen no trace of here or elsewhere on the boards. I may have missed it.
And I know no one is TRYING to exclude anyone. But if I told you that anyone coming to my tourney with only stock GW figures gets +10 authenticity points would you, with all your conversion work, feel that that is just ten stinking points? It would be a turn off wouldn't it? That's how it is exclusionary.
Furthermore, someone who plays with unpainted figures is very likely playing to win, perhaps even more so than the rest of us, and wants every opportunity to do so. As has been implied, he likely cares little about other aspects of the hobby. He wont show up to a tourney where he starts out 10 points down (even if that is out of 300+). That also excludes him.
Now note that I absolutely prefer playing with painted figs. It hurts me to put unpainted guys on the pitch, and disappoints me when my opponent fields flash metal. I have, however, as many of us have, experienced brutal time shortages in my time. I definitely have chosen to play games rather than paint, because I often find it to be more fun. At least I like painting, some completely abhor painting (and might lack funds to have other people paint things for them). But I wouldn't want to deprive him of what he wants out of the game, just in case he might decide to paint his figs one day to not deprive me of mine (or yours).
And I do hope to get to see some of your conversion work some day, I love doing conversion myself.
Shane -
Sadly I missed the BABBLe days. I only really noticed Bloodbowl a year ago, but have fallen in love since  We do have the dpbbl and attendant activities going on, so you can check in on us if you are interested in getting involved.
Greg |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Uthrac |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 06:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 09, 2006
Posts: 16
Status: Offline
|
|
Greg,
Thanks for your clear explanation of the "points for painting" issue. Couldn't agree more.
Ryltar wrote: And I know no one is TRYING to exclude anyone. But if I told you that anyone coming to my tourney with only stock GW figures gets +10 authenticity points would you, with all your conversion work, feel that that is just ten stinking points? It would be a turn off wouldn't it? That's how it is exclusionary.
Most excellent analogy! Good to see someone take note that different coaches value different aspects of a game. This main point to remember here is that anything added to the scoring system may be objectionable to some coaches. (There's a more general discussion on scoring problems, for example, a loss by 1 + a smackdown bonus is equal in points to a tie!)
Be that as it may, the important thing is not to tell people who prioritize aspects of the hobby differently than yourself: "No big loss." 
~Uthrac |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hoshi_Komi |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 06:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 550
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
I don't like painting points involved in determining a winner, in my tourney the painting award goes to the best painted. That's the hobby aspect right there.
But if you put forth the minimal effort to painting you should get 8-10pts anyway--so you'll lose a max of 2 pts. And I've never seen painting affect the overall winner. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 07:59 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 2319
Location: United States of America
|
|
ryltar wrote: But, why tiebreak on a hobby aspect?
Because part of the hobby is painting. Just as part of the hobby is competing in leagues or tournaments.
Just to clarify, last year The Dwarven Kings received 4 points, and all other teams received 10.
Painting is looked at, and it is judged. At the same time, 10 points is a very minimal amount. You can get 10 points for a smackdown bonus based on a few lucky rolls. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Painting scoring is there, and will remain there as a tool to encourage folks to embrace that aspect of the hobby. You can always have someone else paint for you if you so choose. |
_________________
aka Rob (NAF #248)
President of the Lord Borak Fan Club
Founder of the GCLU
Commissioner, TO, Goblin King, NEBBN TSO
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 09:10 AM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
ryltar wrote:
Quote:
Rob -
With all due respect, if it is 'ten stinking points' then why do you want them so bad?
I don't want them "So Bad" I am just defending a tourney organizer's right to include them if so wishes. I understand your getting rubbed the wron way by the "get over it" comments...but I do feel that painting points have value.
Quote: ...why not just give out a best painting/best conversion award?
This is often included in alot of NAF tournies...but this is not the same point. The Painting Points that are being discussed here are not looking at, or appraising, the skill applied to the job...but just that the job was done.
Quote:
I guess we look at this differently. I think (correct me if I am wrong) you feel a tournament to be more of a 'hobby' competition. I would prefer one I go to to be a 'game' competition. Both are valid. A 'hobbyists' can to some extent be satisfied at a 'gamer' tourney by inclusion of painting and other awards in addition to a purely game mechanics based determination of a winner. I have yet to see a 'gamist' approach to scoring though outside of theoretical discussions. A 'gamist' could perhaps be satisfied by including a 'best coach' award besides overall winner (Warhammer GTs used to have Best General besides the Overall champ based on win record only) but this option is something I have seen no trace of here or elsewhere on the boards. I may have missed it.
To be completely honest, I like these events from a Gamer Perspective because I enjoy the game itself first and foremost. However, what folks need to realize is that in the current context of NAF Tournies...strict game-ist perspectives are not really applied. Part of the NAF Tourney Philosophy is to be as inclusive as possible...and as such there is not standard ruleset. As far as I understand, Grand Tournements for other games typically apply the same "standard" rulesets accross the board. This is done so that the same metric can be applied to everyone regardless of the specific tourny that they attend. I personally would like to have this same philospophy applied for Blood Bowl tournies...but that is not currently the reality of the situation. With that context in mind...a strict gamer might not want to attend a NAF tourney. I would hope that they would...acknowledging the slightly different take on tournies...but if these players are looking for a strict(albeit fun) Blood Bowl tourney...another Tourney Circuit/Organization would need to be formed.)
Quote:
And I know no one is TRYING to exclude anyone. But if I told you that anyone coming to my tourney with only stock GW figures gets +10 authenticity points would you, with all your conversion work, feel that that is just ten stinking points? It would be a turn off wouldn't it? That's how it is exclusionary.
This would not dissuade me...most of my teams fit this catagory. I understand your point...but frankly these issues would not bother me one way or the other.
Most of the things that "irk my ire" ( Take that Spazz!!)
are tourney specific rules that I feel break things that provide racial balances within the game...then I decide for myself how this will impact my decision to attend.
This seems to me to be the reason why NAF Sanctioning is dependant upon the rules being posted with alot of lead-time and the commitment that they will not change within a certain time frame. (But this is more of a side note.)
Quote:
Furthermore, someone who plays with unpainted figures is very likely playing to win...
BTW...I have talked to NAF staff..and my impression is that they do not want to foster an environment where people attend a tourney with a "win first" philosophy. I think there may be room for another organization that values a more standardized tourney rule-set and more meaningfull/relevant rankings.
I would be interested in attending either or both types of tournies, and I see the value of both...but see the need for a new/seperate Tourney System.
Greg |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Shane |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 11:11 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Boston-ish
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
--->Just a quick note to say I stand corrected on the non-enforcement issue. It was a fun event last year, and look forward to this year's tourney.
And again, if anybody is looking to reduce costs for the trip, look just a little outside of Harvard Square, and you can find bargains for hotels. Boston public transport makes getting there a cinch. |
_________________
Shane Yeager, Licensed Rules Lawyer
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
bampf |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 12:13 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 01, 2004
Posts: 219
Status: Offline
|
|
It s interesting to note that the Grand Tournaments and all Rogue Trader GW sanctioned tourneys (I have atteneded and run dozens) value Sportsmanship, Painting, and Army Composition (not bringing a win-at-all-cost cheesy army) at the same weight as game results. So wins and losses make up a whooping 25% of your score.
The idea is there is more to a hobby than just winning. If you can t appreciate the other aspects of BB and complain about having to spend slightly more than an afternoon slapping some paint on a dozen minis then, again, I re-iterate, I d just as soon not attend a tourney with that type of person.
Ten points is a ridiculously small number of points to be concerned with and from my experience, any kind of earnest effort will receive basically full points. This is not the Best Painted Competition... this is the does he care enough to put forth some kind of effort (or in Rob s case, is he willing to spend the big bucks for a great looking team cause he knows it enhances the game and the hobby... btw Rob, if yer talking about any of MY Best Painted Awards we re throwin down, sucka!)? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Zinak |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 12:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 06, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 153
Status: Offline
|
|
Damm look what i started
Zinak |
_________________
"It's just 10 points"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 01:17 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 12, 2006 - 01:42 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3953
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: Well...You didn't officially win that award at the Krimpit Cup for some reason so...My Orcs were painted better than the team that won on that occassion. 
EDIT: And I don't know who won at Bashin' By The Bay, but my Gobbos are pretty sweet. (As Goblins go.... )
And jumping in here wihtout having read anything else of this discussion brings me to two points:
1) We should get this thread back on track
2) Why are people allowed to win the best Painted award when they do not paint the models themselves? This to me seems a bit unfair. I think that I will be making efforts to rectify this for the Q'ermitt. |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
