Talk Fantasy Football

After many queries about sportsmanship/painting issues, Brian confirmed to me that there were issues with the spreadsheet. He has asked me to pass on his profound apologies and is working on producing a correct final results chart. This will be made available online as soon as possible.

He has also said that anyone that should have won an award (but didn't because of these errors) will be informed and a suitable prize arranged.

IMO though it wouldn't be a Blood Bowl tourney if there wasn't SOME mistake in the results

quite correct

Indigo wrote:IMO though it wouldn't be a Blood Bowl tourney if there wasn't SOME mistake in the results

Well I didn't win, so there must be a problem

That's cos you weren't playing goblins

and I'm going to hunt down the swine who didn't give the xmas gobbos any painting points too...

Preferred last year's system where there was a simple one of judging of painting when they went looking for the best painted teams. Just leaves it open to someone forgetting to tick the box - and if your team's painted game 1 good chance it'll be painted for game 6 unless you've dropped them a lot.
As was covered in an earlier thread re: sportsmanship, not a big fan of the + sportsmanship system, as when you look at the games points the influence of a further 5 or 10 is substantial for what is a largely subjective process.
When are we expecting to see the 'real' standings?

Whats the email address for feedback?

Couple of suggestions - Sportsmanship is only for award and tie-breaks (watch out for geggster, he's not sporting he is )
Painting - if you get three or more ticks in a category during the weekend, you get full points for that category. Doesn't penalise those that miss games as much, or play gamey so and sos, or people that hate goblins/christmas.

It seems ridiculously unfair that a player gets penalised because an opponent forgot to tick a box. Why couldn't the painting judges check the three criteria, since they already had to look at every team in detail?

And what was all that team theming malarky? Did any one have enough time to have a really good read of their opponents blurb? Background fluff is all very nice for the game, but does it have a place in international tournament?

And another thing. (Don't stop me now, I'm on a roll). Were the sportsmanship tick boxes labeled misleadingly? An awesome game might be one where you win 6-0, but does that necessarily make your opponent a good sportsman? (I'm not talking from experience here, just trying to be objective, and taking conversations with other players in the bar into account)

Just my ten pen'orth.

(btw, Geggster gave me the most sporting 4-1 drubbing I've ever had)

Send any comments about the tourney to

events@games-workshop.co.uk

Case in point: it seems that Odium Khan (who got nominated for best painted) got fewer points for painting than I did.

Yeah, let the judges do the judging on painting and stuff. I also agree with madzit on misleading sportmanship boxes. I think it may have messed up my own rating of my opponents a little bit even though I had read it carefully and stated to myself that it would probably cause some confusion. What I regret is that I ticked "great" if I had a great game, just as it said in the rulses, but since it seems many people have handed out lots of awesomes (by the results anyway). In aftermath, I'd like to give my very sporting opponents the same chance as everybody else and give them all awesomes, but hopefully you all take as lightly on the final score as I do (I finished #136)!
Also, for next year, I would like to ask for clear printed rules for calculating #cas after games as this can vary with different people's views. I know I felt insecure about this and had to ask Indigo after my first game, but according to the stats I should have ended with 23 cas, made by players blocking (not from fouls or the crowd and not counting regenerated or healed players), which I think covers up a little for my disability to win games!

Thadrin wrote:Case in point: it seems that Odium Khan (who got nominated for best painted) got fewer points for painting than I did.

I had the honour of playing against Odium Khan's team I didn't want to touch them for fear of scratching them - they were absolutely brilliant and it was a real treat to get to play a great coach with such a fantastic team.

Ooo thanks, I'm flattered Thads and Levinas. Levinas, were you the skaven coach that outplayed me in game 6 while I was trying to squish your gutterrunners all game?

That's me, the Mapelheim Maulers, helped greatly by the sunny weather which just about made up for the fact that I fumbled the ball as my first action (twice) each time you kicked to me...

I should have listened to Tim when he said "that's why you never try to pick up the ball as your first action" when it happened against his chaos dwarfs in my third game... How right he was.

Cheers

Levinas

Slinky78 wrote: As was covered in an earlier thread re: sportsmanship, not a big fan of the + sportsmanship system, as when you look at the games points the influence of a further 5 or 10 is substantial for what is a largely subjective process.

I agree.

I had a decent (and certainly much better than expected) record: W2 D1 L3, but finished 146th (I think...) because I didn't get any points for sportsmanship (but full points for painting/background). Not a problem, there are more sporting players out there than me, but I don't think there were as many who got 5, 10, 15 or even 20 points for sportmanship- it seems to me people either didn't understand the criteria or abused (knowingly or otherwise) the system to give them and their oppoenents extra points.

I think everyone (except someone I really put the boot in on...) enjoyed playing me, and would (I think) have rated it 'good', even 'awesome' in places, but because I and the people I played read the rules stuff, in particular the bit about "we expect the great majority of games to be 'great' games" (or something like that)- no-one got negative points, and loads of people got extra points. Now some undoubtedly deserved them, but given the importance placed on them in the final rankings, I think the criiteria should have been more rigorously applied, of the sportsmanship should be given less weighting in the final results.

I only gave two (I think) awesome games, even though I would have quite happily played against any of my opponents again, and certainly I didn't think any of my games came close to lousy- I thought this was how it was meant to be, but judging by the standards many other coaches used, I played 6 awesome games, and I should have both given and received more points for sportsmanship.

Please understand, I'm not bitter about this, I just don't like unfairness when some people exploit a situation where honesty and fairplay is expected (along with actually reading the rules... )

...after all, I finished much higher this year than last year

Feel free to agree, disagree, hang me from on high etc.

Tomba