NAF Logo
leftstar Mar 29, 2024 - 03:44 AM
capleft
spacer
NAF World Headquarters
home forum rankings tourneys nyleague faq
Why do 2+ dodges fail so often? rightstar
capright

Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
DaggersOffline
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: NAF World Cup 2015 Q&A threa  PostPosted: Nov 26, 2013 - 09:14 AM



Joined: Dec 07, 2006
Canada
Posts: 1618
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
      Oventa wrote:
Hi pako,
I understand your wish for more transparency and openness.
I personallzy also don't think it would be needed to hide identities, as I think noone should have a problem with that.
I think it would be sufficient if just the vote would be secret.
But tackling your request with a list of objective criteria will not work to solve this from my perspective.
The sites will be so unique and so different that it will never fit into such a scheme.
And to check if a site has taken care of the obvious ( place, food, accommodation) does not require a complex catalog.
It would be a waste of energy from my perspective.
Hence I also don't see much value in your specific proposal.
Cheers
Oventa

      rmilsom wrote:
      beaso wrote:
I think the panel should be named but not their votes.
However they should not be named until after the decision has been made to prevent any FIFA style corruption so to speak!!!!!
This organisation has had enough problems recently so some degree of transparency to show that this has been done properly is needed.


I don't see why the panels votes shouldn't be included, the more transparency the better, I cant see the logic in that.
I agree with everything else you said though.

Listing the voting members would be fine I think. But I do think it should be done after the votes have been tallied and the winner announced. I am not accusing anyone, but I do see people trying to “convince” all the voters to bid for them (either politely or not), and this would save the voters some unwanted harassment. But as for the votes themselves, I don’t think the votes of each person should be listed, but the totals for each bid should be, so people can see how the votes were broken down. Also, I am not sure, but will the general public get to see the bids after the winner is announced.

_________________
Stunty Champion: Golden Sweetbun I-V , Canadian Open 2014-2015, Brewhouse Bowl 2015 (all with the EPIC IRON CHEFS)
Check out NAFCANADA.ca for the latest tournaments in Canada.
 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
Reply with quote Back to top
MrNuffleOffline
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: NAF World Cup 2015 Q&A thread  PostPosted: Dec 01, 2013 - 05:59 AM



Joined: Mar 27, 2005
Denmark
Posts: 58
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
      Lycos wrote:
I did push the date back to the 30th - But - I have most of the votes in so I will ping off a few emails and see if I can get them all in a bit quicker.

Just about all the voting team said it was a fair bit to get through and in my personal opinion, it is respectful to all the bid teams for their efforts to be fully considered.


Twiddles thumbs ....

_________________
Play to Nuffle.

NAF Member # 2100.
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
torielOffline
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: NAF World Cup 2015 Q&A threa  PostPosted: Dec 01, 2013 - 07:48 AM



Joined: May 21, 2012

Posts: 4

Status: Offline
And the winner is........
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
LycosOffline
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: NAF World Cup 2015 Q&A threa  PostPosted: Dec 01, 2013 - 07:51 AM
Former President


Joined: Aug 22, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 1532
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
Later today. I'm just chasing up 2 votes - although I admit they will not affect the result, we have a clear winner.
Out of respect, I want to email the other bidders to let them know, four teams will be disappointed and I think its polite to let them know.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GlowwormOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 07:02 AM



Joined: Feb 29, 2008
Undisclosed
Posts: 77
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
Im surprised to read that at least a "suggested" rule set is not involved in the bidding process, can I ask why something as basic as this is not considered in the process before votes are cast?

please don't think this is a criticism, just find it strange that we (as a community) can agree to the location of our largest event without knowing if we have a solid rule set...( More doubles for stunties!!)
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
sann0638Offline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 07:05 AM
President


Joined: Jul 03, 2006
England
Posts: 1113
Location: England
Status: Offline
From p1:
Q; How much control over the rule set will the hosts have?
A; Effectively, none. The rules will be the same as previous WC's with the 9 games, 3 x 3 days. The hosts will be exactly that but they will "run the event", the NAF will work with you and provide help and guidance but the hosts will provide refs and admin teams.

_________________
NAF President 2016-17
Founder of SAWBBL, Wiltshire's BB League @ sawbbl.co.uk
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GrumbledookOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 09:13 AM



Joined: Feb 10, 2003

Posts: 922

Status: Offline
      glowworm wrote:
Im surprised to read that at least a "suggested" rule set is not involved in the bidding process, can I ask why something as basic as this is not considered in the process before votes are cast?

please don't think this is a criticism, just find it strange that we (as a community) can agree to the location of our largest event without knowing if we have a solid rule set...( More doubles for stunties!!)


I also would prefer the flagship events to have a more rounded tournament ruleset. Over 10 years of the same familiar few races always being dominant got really stale for me.

The first half of the Nurgle vs Vampire game I had vs Geggster at Thrudball this year was one of the best and most interesting games I've ever played. Throwing up tactical situations that you don't normally get to deal with when using more conventional teams.

I'd love to see the NAF do a gauge of public opinion on this.

_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'

Jon
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
JoemanjiOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 09:40 AM



Joined: Dec 13, 2003
England
Posts: 298
Location: England
Status: Offline
I agree with that in principle Jon, but I'm not sure the WC is the place for anything but vanilla rules. Rules like Monkeybowl or Ironmanj are probably better / more interesting that the WC rules, but I'm not sure they are friendly to coaches who play once every four years.

_________________
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GrumbledookOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 11:17 AM



Joined: Feb 10, 2003

Posts: 922

Status: Offline
That was always the reason for not changing the Blood Bowl rules when it was at warhammer world which made more sense as WW attracted different users.

I don't think that is the case any more and I'd argue that those coaches willing to travel to another country to attend a 3 day world cup event are more than capable of adapting to some different roster rules. Also with it being a team event, even if there are some infrequent players, I'm sure their team mates would help them out before the event if they needed it. (not that I think they would)

Ironmanj and Monkeybowl (iirc) are also far more complex than than what's used at Thrudd for example as well. Just placing some restrictions on top of the existing rules, rather than going for something that introduces a point spend system and putting skills into new tiers. There were a few first time attendees at Thrudd this year and no one seemed to struggle with the rules.

TV120 makes pricier teams like Nurgle and High Elves more viable and letting some (or all) teams put 2 skills on players does as well, neither of which I would say any Blood Bowl player would struggle with. If you don't place any restriction on the races like at Thrudd then they are still vanilla rules, not that I see anything complicated with saying this race can put 2 skills on x number of players. They are more straight forward than recording SPP, winnings and rolling for skills as well. Wood Elves and Undead would still be stronger but I'd like to think we would see a bit more variation, especially from the more casual teams who aren't going there looking to challenge at the top end.

Mind you teams at the previous world cups worked out at around TV130 after all the skills were added? Should a rules change get considered then further discussion on what changes could take place, but starting with something like the rules above and just adding 3 more skills on day 3 seems straight forward enough to me.

It would also change the dynamic a bit at the top end too as you have different challenges to deal with when faced with players like 2 skill wardancers and a block sure hands ghoul etc. May also see more variation in skills taken between coaches who do take a more popular race as well, so even if you do face the same opposition a few times, there is a bit more variation.

So yeah, I don't think that argument holds water ;]

If a survey of potential world cup attendees wanted to stick with the previous format then fine, but I'd rather that than we stick with what's gone before without asking.

So that's my case laid out, if anyone in charge of the rules wishes to use parts of that or wants my input then go right ahead! If a poll is taken I'd like there to be cases put forward for each side as well to make sure everyone is considering both sides. As I'm pro change there may be a case for sticking that I've not considered for example.

_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'

Jon
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GaixoOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 11:43 AM
Former President


Joined: May 08, 2009
United States of America
Posts: 811
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
I think it would be dramatically more interesting if you were to enforce tier restrictions on the teams. As it stands, the world's best halfling coach (for instance) might very well be discouraged from bringing his preferred race because it would negatively impact his team.

I would like to see a system in which every team had to have a coach representing a lower-tier (by which I basically mean "stunty") team. Maybe make it so another slot had to be a mid-tier team and leave the rest for anything goes.

It's difficult to believe that having 5 races account for almost 50% of the teams is really the most entertaining or satisfying format possible.


Last edited by Gaixo on Dec 03, 2013 - 12:59 PM; edited 1 time in total
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
txapoOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 12:08 PM



Joined: Mar 05, 2010
Undisclosed
Posts: 24
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
I had an idea on that prob in order to avoid 66 WE again as in Amsterdam: 4 tiers

Each team of 6 players has 18-19 points to buy their teams.

Tier 1 teams: WE SK DW UN 4 points
Tier 2 teams 3 ponts
Tier 3 teams (nurgle, chaos, vamps, underworld,...) 2 poins
Tier 4 teams (stunties) 1 point

Doing so you obly to somehow buy tier 1 teams for example a team could take sk UN DW and WE but only if goes with a tier 3 team and a stuntie

What do you think on my idea?
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GaixoOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 01:01 PM
Former President


Joined: May 08, 2009
United States of America
Posts: 811
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
I think that's great!

I'm not sure that those tiers are exactly right, but maybe there's an objective way to determine them? LRB6 winning percentage or the like?

_________________
National Tournament Organizer, USA
(NAF Tournament Director, 2014-2018; NAF President, 2018-2024)
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
GrumbledookOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 01:56 PM



Joined: Feb 10, 2003

Posts: 922

Status: Offline
Some people are going to find it hard to make a team up, if you start then restricting too much what races they can play beyond no duplicates it's going to upset some people. This would effectively mean someone on a team is going to have to have to use a poorer race. Attending the world cup isn't going to be that cheap for a lot of people, if you make it harder for them to get a race they want to play as well it could result in them not going at all.

I think a softer incentive by making more races competitive will be better received and less restrictive. It also has the opposite effect that as the poorer races become more competitive, their team mates are less likely to be put off by them playing such a race.

_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'

Jon
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
SpecialOneOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 02:12 PM



Joined: Dec 27, 2010

Posts: 2

Status: Offline
I like the fact that it is the "raw" teams that face off. No tiers, no nothing. Just the coaches battling it out, with the best teams of the game. I for one play Lizardmen, and I still find it interesting to play the woodies, even though it is not a good matchup for me in this kind of turney. By introducing tier, one could force some players into playing a race they don't play that much, and for an event of this magnitude AND price, I would like to play a team I feel good about.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
DukeJanOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: Dec 03, 2013 - 02:35 PM



Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Netherlands
Posts: 128
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Why not: All teams TV 130: no stats increases, minimum 100/110 TV spent on basic roster (Players/RR/FF/Staff). Every sixth skill may be a double. This should level the playing field for most races

_________________
Yeah, finally won something to brag about in my sig: Most TDs @ Bubble 2511 with Chaos Dwarves.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by PNphpBB2 © 2003-2009 The Zafenio Team
Credits