Talk Fantasy Football

sann0638 wrote:Slann will not be affected....

I would very much like if Slann became Kislev. GW does not have them anyway and Cynide and the NAF would be aligned. And most of all I think frogs playing Bloodbowl is strange and I like the Kislev team for some reason.
I know I am pretty alone with this, but just for the record.

You know, I still don't understand why aligning the NAF and Cyanide is considered to be important. The NAF has been around much longer, and will (hopefully!) be around long after Cyanide stop making Blood Bowl games. Slann have been in Blood Bowl pretty much since the game started.

Third party teams that are re-themes of existing teams (e.g., "Goblins" that are Star Wars Jawa's, or any of the "Vampire" teams that are half a dozen of one thing, and a dozen of another) are really common, and there's no reason why "Kislev Circus" teams can't or won't be made, using the Slann roster.

So... there's nothing stopping anyone making or selling a "Kislev" team. There's also nothing wrong with Cyanide's re-theme, but neither of those imply that official changes should be made.

Domfluff wrote:You know, I still don't understand why aligning the NAF and Cyanide is considered to be important.

It is not important. It is just a nice to have that can be considered all other things being equal.
And for Slann, "all other things being equal" does not apply, so I understand that this will never happen. Which is fine for me, I just happen to like Kislev way more than frogs. So my next team in my local league will probably be Slann using a human minis...

frogboy wrote:Also, would be interested to see how many new members we have now compared to before when the vote was announced, i seen at least one post somewhere saying "i'm just signing up to vote in this poll" meaning they don't even play in NAF sanctioned events!!?

Can we have a rule and something in place next time to only allow excisting members to vote on important issues please?

Sorry to drag this back up but as I'm one of those who signed up to vote and the post Frogboy's quoting is plausibly mine I thought I'd explain myself.

I play BB online mostly (pretty much exclusively tbh) because I have small children so opting out for a weekend is not a route to marital happiness for me That said the NAF bills itself as "an international association of players dedicated to Blood Bowl – the Games Workshop game of fantasy football" no reference to TT exclusivity and certainly no reference to TT Tournament exclusivity.

That the NAF has predominantly been about tournaments does not mean that it should stay that way. Over the last couple of years they've done a great job of starting to help TT leagues as well with the OBBLM hosting and that's great. Online BB (where arguably the majority of BB games are played) is still neglected by the NAF, hence I never joined. But this vote I saw as being an olive branch toward the Cyanide BB community (probably the biggest source of potential new players) and an opportunity to start bringing the NAF and Cyanide community closer together. Also I've never seen an argument against these two teams that convinced me that there's anything wrong with them. Too many humans? Lose Norse and Amazons then? Doesn't fit with fluff? Write new fluff, it's a daft old world so you can make just about anything fit. Teams not balanced? They've had loads of testing that strongly implies they are. Just don't like them? That's fine, people don't always like all teams.

Should my vote and votes of new people be discounted? No, because the NAF should be for all BB players not just tournament regulars. Plus I hope to be able to make a tournament or two over the next year if I can get a team painted (4 minis left on the Humans I started at Christmas!) so it made sense to join up

Which leads to what I suspect is the fundamental question - "What is the NAF for?"

One of the things the NAF is clearly for is establishing a centralised system and set of rules for tournament play, alongside tracking of stats.

Is that it? It might be.

At the moment, that means the NAF is limited to FUMBBL and tabletop. With Legendary Edition, I believe that BB2 now has some, most or all of the tools to run NAF-sanctioned tournaments, so this may well become important, but it certainly isn't right now.

Even with this, that in itself does not mean that Khorne and/or Brets need to be allowed for the tournament to run - Khorne can't be played on any format at the moment, and Brets can also not be played on Fumbbl without some jiggling (even the Secret League Bret roster has been changed away from Plasmoid's roster now, for better or worse).

It may have been you I quoted Raveen, it was in this thread.

I was a member of the NAF long before I started playing Tournaments too as I love Blood Bowl and wanted to support them in some way, nothing wrong with that.

Hopefully this doesn't offend you but I just think its daft to vote on something that's not going to effect you in anyway (unless you do come to a tournament in the future and if you paint a khorne or Bret team up). The NAF is for everyone, but this vote was about whether to include the teams at tournaments?

You might not be the only one, the NAF is all about giving benefits to its members, like a "free" set of dice, discount to "their" tournaments and keeping you locked out of the forums lol, unless its something that will really effect the majority of members then anyone can vote. Welcome to the club


Seriously though, thinking about this today and it doesn't really matter, I could include Khorne and Brets in my Tournament and stick them in their own Tier giving them 100k less to spend on there team and no skills. If i wanted to i guess. Biggest thing I have realized from this thread though is we can include any roster we want, fan made or whatever...
Never thought about that before. Unofficial Squig Team inbound at Foul Bowl 3 possibly

Vanguard wrote:

spubbbba wrote:Well I guess the next question is should the variant human, orc, etc teams that GW have published also be allowed?

Better question, are they not allowed currently? As far as I can tell, NAF sanctioning requires the inclusion of the 24 standard races. There's nothing specifically prohibiting a TO from adding more that I'm aware of. In fact, the sanctioning guidelines state:

NAF_Tournament_Approval_Document_2017 wrote:Although you may want to include unofficial races in your tournament rules, coaches who pick one of these races will not gain any NAF points as the NAF rankings only include the 24 races listed above.

Which seems to confirm that Tournaments with unofficial races can still be NAF sanctioned, although at the discretion of the Tournament Director as always. Not sure if there's tournaments that have used (or asked to use) rosters outside of the 24+2 that would give an indication of current attitudes.

The two (or three) real questions that have to be answered are:

1. Should Khorne and Brettonians be mandatory for NAF Sanctioning?
2. Should Khorne and Brettonian matches be recorded for NAF ranking?
3. Should Khorne and Brettonian matches be included in NAF Ranking calculations?

Those questions can then be applied to any other unofficial roster you care to name. I'd argue that any NAF event should guarantee the recording of your match result, regardless of races involved or your opponents membership (which is a different argument for a different time). Whether they should be included in the ranking calculations is less cut and dried for me, but I can't see these two races skewing the standings in any way.
As for other races, I'd say its a simple cost to benefit argument. Are there enough TOs and coaches wanting to include a specific roster for it to justify the use of NAF funds to support?

Without knowing the specifics of the NAF database, in theory it should be feasible to record all matches. Rankings can be calculated using some or all of the matches as preferred, or even give the option to the user. I'd have agreed with Gaixo in separating CRP and BB2016 rosters where they differ for recording purposes. They can be combined for rankings use if desired but also tracked separately when required.

We need a "Spare Player" in the Data base as previously argued about on different thread somewhere lost in the warp...

Domfluff wrote: Khorne can't be played on any format at the moment

Not true, CE is still being played.

Ah, fair enough then One out of four (BB1/BB2/Tabletop/Fumbbl)

frogboy wrote: We need a "Spare Player" in the Data base as previously argued about on different thread somewhere lost in the warp...

Not lost in the warp, just not in the plan.

frogboy wrote:The NAF is for everyone, but this vote was about whether to include the teams at tournaments?

As per the thread title, the vote was about whether or not to add them to the database. Their status at tournaments should be independent of that and I feel it may have been helpful to more clearly separate the two.

sann0638 wrote:Not lost in the warp, just not in the plan.

I believe it was discussed at a recent Committee meeting (or I may be confusing it with the July discussion on mandatory membership) but is there a reason why it's not being considered?

sann0638 wrote:Not lost in the warp, just not in the plan.

Domfluff wrote:Ah, fair enough then One out of four (BB1/BB2/Tabletop/Fumbbl)

I can play them in local leagues so....two of five (BB1/BB2/NAF Tabletop/Non-NAF Tabletop/Fumbbl)?

Domfluff wrote:Ah, fair enough then One out of four (BB1/BB2/Tabletop/Fumbbl)

Khorne can be played at tabletop!

Baxx wrote:

Domfluff wrote:Ah, fair enough then One out of four (BB1/BB2/Tabletop/Fumbbl)

Khorne can be played at tabletop!

Can be, and is.

I made & painted a Khorne team (using all GW mini's too) a couple of years ago (it's one of the few of my teams that I've actually managed to finish). I've used it in non-NAF tournaments, and in leagues too. Currently I'm using the team in the Waterbowl Premiership - indeed there are three of us (out of ~50 coaches) using Khorne teams this season.

I'm very happy about the result of the vote. I look forward to being able to bring a Khorne team to NAF tournaments in the near future, and to having my very mediocre performance with them recorded for posterity...

I played them in a UKBBL tournament a while back. Good fun! So they are definitely a thing.