Purplegoo wrote:I think you're doing 'older coaches' a disservice, there. I see plenty of rulespacks from tournaments that have been going for over a decade that are keen to embrace the new, enough to convince me that the newer rules gain traction with the NAF community pretty quickly. Even in areas of the world that are historically loudly anti-GW, they are keen to use new stuff at a surprising rate. The positionals and stars are in a free download that tournament goers should really be aware of, and none of the Spike! inducements are really that game changing that even an ignorant coach wouldn't be able to get on board within moments...
Yes obviously a stereotypical generalisation, but just from my own TOing and tournament going experiences the BB2016 coaches turn up with Almanacs and Spikes and 100% of the more "anti-GW" players who refused to buy anything since CRP are older coaches, but of course that does not imply that 100% of older coaches have that attitude! I'm a CRP era coach myself (just!) and love all the new stuff, especially in tournaments where we don't have to suffer the nonsense of special play cards, expensive mistakes and silly stadiums (controversial!).
Purplegoo wrote:...I suppose with the exception of the Giants. I think how they should be dealt with is pretty clear (see above comment). You could 'argue a case' for lots of things in the BB rules as written, and people have and do at length, but I think this one is relatively clear. That said, this is a ~400 k, optional rule. The instances of these showing up and there being half an hour at the start of the game where a stuck in the mud older coach is horrified as the Giants are explained to them aren't going to be frequent. At least, not after the initial wave dies down.
Agree, I have since spoken to one of the people who developed that and he's confirmed they work as Stars and there will be an FAQ out next week clarifying this. It will be an extreme edge case but I'm expecting someone to turn up with 14 gnoblars and 2 giants!
Purplegoo wrote:The roster chasing discussion is an old chestnut. I'm a public supporter of however TOs wish to do it, but I am sure there are more than a handful of threads on the topic.
It's not a huge problem, but in my limited experience it's way more of a problem when you have nearer 100 coaches than when you have nearer 50 just not enough hours to squeeze checking in without people submitting early and on time. I think the WC approach was perfect and hope we can move over to more online based systems as time passes.
Purplegoo wrote:Anyway! Happy new year, all. Seems a heavy enough traffic thread to say it, doesn't it?
Happy new year, too!
