A better scoring system?

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:42 pm

Asked JJ/Andy/Jake about the tournament and the system ... mainly my questions where twofold:

1) 40% non-gaming points seems way way too high. 20% is the maximum I thought sounded reasonable.

2) Having 10% based on a quiz written in English when the Blood Bowl attracts a world community and other points based on having a written team background (again in English) seemed wrong.

Jervis response clarifies these points and the proper who to write if you want to discuss the issue. He also gave me permission to post his response.

From: "Jervis Johnson"
To: BBRC
Subject: RE: Blood Bowl Rules
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:11:59 -0000

I'd like to draw a line under this discussion if we can. Fascinating as it is, it's the UK events team that came up with the rules pack rather than Fanatic, and I'd be loath for us to go and stick our oar in about a matter like this. To put things in context, the UK have always felt that the 'hobby' side of the hobby was something that should be emphasised strongly in their tournaments, which is why the marking system is set up the way that it is, and their remit is to provide a tournament for the *UK* market rather than a global one, which is why they are not too worried about including tests and points for team histories. If any of you have really strong issues about these things, I recommend getting in touch with the UK events team about them (their email address is on the UK website). They are really good people, and will be happy to listen to any constructive criticism, though I really doubt they are in a position to change anything at this late stage.

Best regards,

Jervis Johnson
Head Fanatic

Now I had to dig ... but I think the email address Jervis is referring to for discussion of the rules to the right folks is:
specgt@games-workshop.co.uk

Hope this helps ... I'm trying to keep my promise of getting information back to you guys.

Galak

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 6:57 pm

right thats the organ grinders email

if i could be bothered i would make use of it ;]

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 7:29 pm

Grumbledook wrote:right thats the organ grinders email

if i could be bothered i would make use of it ;]

Who are you and how did you get Grumble's account?

Galak

Post by **Thadrin** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 8:24 pm

l_dauguet wrote:What's Alice ?

Surely you've seen the video Louis...
the question really should be (ALTOGETHER NOW)...

Slinky78 · Post by **Slinky78** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 10:50 pm

Think after a day of reflection I'm less concerned by these rules. Still don't really like them, and not very pleased at the total opt out of just using a 40k system, but I can probably live with them (just as well really...).
The large number of painting marks etc seem silly, but then I was worried last year, and my averagey efforts got 3, as they were acceptable, I reckon we can all throw a theme fluff together if need be, and most people who care have all their players numbered/marked. So while it could be a bit of a pain in the ar5e, realistically we can all expect to be there or thereabouts on the actual marks, and therefore unless you're exceptional or turd, those points become largely meaningless. Thus the games become the major variable again.
Still not a fan of the quiz idea - but then we can all cheat and share answers if needs be. The fact I will be somewhere around table 70+ means the scoring rules aren't really going to affect my weekend.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Wed Feb 11, 2004 11:20 pm

I think we should put our efforts into free beer at the bar instead

Odium Khan · Post by **Odium Khan** » Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:38 pm

Grumbledook Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 12:20 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think we should put our efforts into free beer at the bar instead

Amen to THAT!

Five Minute Lasters · Post by **Five Minute Lasters** » Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:20 am

Slinky78 wrote: Lining up 10 pints and getting a point for each one you can drink inside 2 hours would be a far more sensible option.

wouldn't be fair for non-drinkers would it

olaf · Post by **olaf** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 2:24 am

i think there is no problem for my dwarves, i make "allways four touchdowns minimum in a game" the only thing thats not so good, is my terrible spoken english

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Mon May 03, 2004 3:48 pm

Hi all,
I don't care much about the hobby points. Write a story, hit the books and do a decent paint job.

My problem is with the points for the size of your win.
Not all races can win by 4 TDs.
However, all races can win - meaning that everybody can avoid losing by 4 TDs.

IMO, the sensible thing would have been to penalize big loses rather than rewarding big wins. That should put everyone on equal footing.

(Also, in our tournament we have a single end-all tiebreaker. 1 step only: Quality of paint job. Then again, we don't give out actual points for painting).

Cheers
Martin