Spiky Club Open Tournament

[Trambi]

Painting, Coaching, Sportmanship are different thing !

[Deathwing]

Couple of thoughts on this, be interested to hear what others think.

Sportsmanship.
There's too much emphasis on sportsmanship, it's going to have too big an impact on final standings. A MSO vote carries the same points as a win, which is even worse than Res, and everybody who was there knows what a joke the final standings were.
I don't like having to nominate 1 opponent for MSO. Didn't like it at Res and didn't like it in A'dam. It reduces things to a lottery IMO.

Hypothetical scenario (ignoring TDs/Cas for now):
I'm undecided on whether to award my MSO vote to Player A or Player B.
There's really nothing in it, but I have to choose one of them, so I go for Player B.
Player A posts a record of W4 (40) D2 (10) L0 and picks up 1 MSO vote (10) for a total of 60 points.
Player B posts a record of W2 (20) D2 (10) L0 and picks up 3 MSO votes (including mine) also for a total of 60.

Had I chosen Player A, the points would be 70 and 50 respectively. That's far too big an impact because of my choice between 2 equally sporting and fun opponents. Why should 1 recieve 10 points and 1 recieve none, possibly based on me tossing a coin? There's also the natural factor that coaches are more likely to award MSO to players that they've beaten than players they've lost to, further slanting the results. In the above example, if I'd lost to Player A and narrowly (or luckily) beaten Player B, then that may well be the deciding factor in awarding my MSO to Player B, assuming as above that I have no other criteria to separate them.

Proposal: Each coach rates each opponent on a scale of say 1 to 10 ( or 1 to 20 if you want a bigger impact) and each coach is awarded the (rounded) average. It may be a little more paperwork, but adding 6 numbers together and dividing the total by 6 shouldn't be too taxing, in fact it'd be a piece of p*ss to incorporate it into a spreadsheet. (I'd be happy to knock one together if it helps.)
That way everybody gets rated for sportmanship, it'll still be a factor and encourage a good atmosphere (which is, after all, the whole point of having sportmanship affect standings).

Deaths/SI's.
I'd rather see teams restored to full strength between games (including skills gained). I've outlined the reasons why in a post earlier in this thread.
Once you get that 10, severity of cas. is largely a matter of chance, it's all about that unmodified Sigurd's roll and the D66 SI roll.
If I come across Wardancers/Gutter Runners etc. with a skill increase, you can bet your bottom dollar that I'm going to go after them, in a way that I won't be able to an equivalent BOB/Ogre/Mummy. If I get lucky on Sigurd's, why should their next opponent get an easier game? A cas. is a cas. to me, it's makes no difference whether they're BH or Dead! Carrying injuries over will tilt the field slightly in favour of the bashing/higher AV teams.
One more point worth mentioning is that every player can see at a glance the legality of their opponent's roster if skills are restored. What's to stop people replacing/ignoring 'dead' players? After all, their opponent has no idea what happened in previous games. It'd mean fairly heavy tracking of all SI/Deaths to eliminate any possibilty of underhandedness. Something to consider in a tourney of this size.

Oh, and some clarifications needed.
a) Ignore Niggles?
b) What happens if I pick up a MNG on a player with a skill increase in game 2? Will I get him back with the skill for game 4?

So restoring 'dead' players with skills intact makes things a lot simpler in terms of paperwork/supervision, and keeps the playing field level for all coaches and teams.
Just my personal take. Again, I'd be interested in other's thoughts.

-Woody

[ace2k00]

i agree, and it was may intention to restore rosters to full at the start of each game skills included(assume that evey team has a infinate supply of magic sponges).

I like the sporstmanship stuff and will look into including them in a few days When everyone has had a chance to post.

I must admit I am a little worried about the fact your opponent nominates the player to get the skill.

Firstly it's prone to some extremely broken behaviour on the part of the opponent. Spite or favouritism could play a large factor - real or percieved.

i hope that we are trying to promote a freindly atmosphere and fair play so nominating opposing players for MVP should not be a problem. anyway i will add in to the pack that the player must be justified in winning the mvp. he scored a td or passed for 1000 paces or somthing else outstanding.

[Marcus]

This highlights my second point: The best player in a match is likely to be the one that got the skills in previous games. In the most objective and sporting environments the same player is likely to keep getting the skills.

I'm personally of the opinion that allowing a coach to pick which player gets the skills allows them to tune their team to match their own style of play. It also removes any possiblity that skills gained during the game were "unfair" or "random".

Marcus

[Piepgrass]

I will sugest that the mvp is dertemind by the coach of the owning team.
That way people will be able to bouild the team in a better manner.

Poul

[Longshot]

rules pack:
_A MAXIMUM of 1,100,000 Gold Coins are available to Field your team.

is it real?


_We will then be allocating a painting score out of a possible 10 points
And 10 points will be allocated to your most sporting opponent of the weekend.

I dont see why is it coming up in the tournament. Tulips was good about it, and all coaches agreed if i remnber well, this are different things.
In 6 games, it will be a winner in games, a best painter and a sportman Guy(Longfang...) But i dont want that a good player can finish in second place if the winner have less point than him on game but he is a better painter...

_if a player dies or is seriously injured in a game he will be replaced with a new player for the next game

Let him his skill...

[Zy-Nox]

1,100,000 to spend.
Thats what it says, I now have to re think my whole team
But thats not really to hard

[Deathwing]

I like the extra sponderoonies..makes the elf teams that little bit more viable. Might take Helfs.

[Marcus]

WPS generally goes for 1100k, makes it easier to run woodies etc as DW mentioned.

Marcus

[BigD]

Now this just makes a few teams like Spyke's Dark Elves really nasty. He'll be packing every nasty witchelf he can get his grubby little hands on. DOH!

But for me that means an extra Black Orc. Sweet! Make them hard with maybe a bit of speed as well.

Why the variation? Why not the standard 1M? Not that I'm complaining but it seems a bit unusual

BigD

[ace2k00]

right,

Just posted (for what i hope to be the last time)the set of rules for the event.

i have taken into consideration everbodys veiws and hope that this rules set is to everyones liking..

cheers for all your comments

dave...

[Deathwing]

I'm quite happy with them, cheers Dave!

[Marcus]

I have no further bitch...er suggestions to make. Looks as bulletproof as a set of rules is likely to get. Looking forward to it.

Marcus

[Thadrin]

Can't come
Wanna come
No fair.

Just as a matter of interest, I saw the 1.1 mill thing for buying your team, and decided to see what I would take. Question from someone who doesn't have the rules: would FF play any roll beyond kick off table?

[Longshot]

Ok, i ve seen the news rules and my planning, i will come, this is quite sure.
How do i Pay?
DW, do you still offer me your house to sleep?

c ya soon mates