What sort of World Cup do we want?

TuernRedvenom · Post by **TuernRedvenom** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:00 am

Kheldar wrote:
TuernRedvenom wrote:I voted 2, keep it open to everyone.
Version 4 is the worst IMO, small nations will always get shafted in this system and it doesn't really add much to a simple individual event like the Blood Bowl.
In my oppinion the big nations will suffer from version 4, not the small ones. Because from at the big ones you allways have coaches travelling arround playing not sooo competiv. But this is no statement that is true for all. I think its very dependent on the country.

Depends on how it's implemented, if you let every coaches' result count then you are right that a small country which only sends good coaches has an advantage. If you only let the top 8 count (as was proposed by some) then the big countries are always at a big advantage compared to the small ones. More coaches will mean more chances on freak results either positive or negative. Since the negative freak results won't count for nations with more then 8 players and the positive will they will have a big advantage on nations with only 8 players where 1 player will inevitably have a bad tourney.

Panico · Post by **Panico** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 11:53 am

Theorically the best should be #4.

But is not easy at all to do.

So I'll go for #1, for not losing the charme of a World Cup. (EB style)

And I'll spectate from the side tournament... or just spectate

clodius · Post by **clodius** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:21 pm

I voted for option 4.

rodders · Post by **rodders** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 2:20 pm

on the criterea given its a toss up between option 1 and 2

Mathias Toss · Post by **Mathias Toss** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:07 pm

Voted for option 3, that is the only one who gives to everyone a chance to compete for the world cup without problems of "elite" national teams...

Evil Git · Post by **Evil Git** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:30 pm

the main problem with option 3 as i see it is that it's supposed to be a world cup where nation takes on nation.

i can see that a situation could arise where i've played 6 games of blood bowl and instead of pitting my wits against the best that holland, belgium, the usa whereever has to offer i'll have played 6 english teams. that to me is fundamentally not a world cup.

that is why option 3 wouldn't work in my eyes.

to combat that though have the national teams split off from the main tournament. every one plays a team event based around the same idea.

Hangus · Post by **Hangus** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:32 pm

Evil Git wrote:the main problem with option 3 as i see it is that it's supposed to be a world cup where nation takes on nation.

i can see that a situation could arise where i've played 6 games of blood bowl and instead of pitting my wits against the best that holland, belgium, the usa whereever has to offer i'll have played 6 english teams. that to me is fundamentally not a world cup.

that is why option 3 wouldn't work in my eyes.

to combat that though have the national teams split off from the main tournament. every one plays a team event based around the same idea.

group stages would help sort this, maybe by putting mongrel, other english whatever teams in seperate groups so "national teams" would only play one

Rab · Post by **Rab** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:34 pm

Voted #4 as I have experienced this working very effectively in archery tournanaments.

Also, I can't imagine you'll get as many coaches attending if they won't be influencing (even if it's a remote possibility) the final result.

Someone mentioned an average score for each nation attending. I like that too - it means you would encourage like crazy everyone from your country - from the newby who is trying to scrape a hard fought draw, to the superstar pushing for a major victory. Has potential...

Indigo · Post by **Indigo** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 4:44 pm

I'm yet to see how having only one or two official national teams will convince those from other countries to come along. They need to feel involved. IF spectating from the side was involving enough, we'd have hoards watching Eurobowl - as it is we don't, so we need another mechanism for getting people involved and playing games.

If people are against option 4 (without enough evidence as to why IMO) then what about multiple tournies.

e.g.
8 player team event (1 race limit, no multi Dwarfs for example)
4 player team event (no race limits?)
Doubles event (i.e. each pair wins points and the pair with the most at the end wins overall)

i.e. multiple tournaments where each is as prestigious as the other.

Evil Git · Post by **Evil Git** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:03 pm

Indigo wrote: e.g.
8 player team event (1 race limit, no multi Dwarfs for example)
4 player team event (no race limits?)
Doubles event (i.e. each pair wins points and the pair with the most at the end wins overall)

i.e. multiple tournaments where each is as prestigious as the other.

indigo i think this is the way to go. you have to make the other competitions prestigious enough whilst also making it easy to organise. it seems like most are wanting some sort of team event, mainly because it's something that little bit different from yet another individual tournament.

the easiest way of sorting that is to have multiple competitions running concurrently. maybe to entice more teams there have some sort of extra prize support for the secondary competitions?

hangus wrote:group stages would help sort this, maybe by putting mongrel, other english whatever teams in seperate groups so "national teams" would only play one

hangus you might be onto something but would this be easy enough to sort out beforehand? i honestly don't know the answer to that but probably wouldn't be that hard.

Hangus · Post by **Hangus** » Mon Nov 20, 2006 6:10 pm

If they pre-register team beforehand then it should not be too much of a problem but if they do it on the day maybe just seed the "other" teams not because they are good but to keep them apart and just pick them out of a hat. Don't know really

Marco Gianni · Post by **Marco Gianni** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:48 am

I've voted 1, but I wonder : is there any individual tournament beside the team competition ?

Indigo · Post by **Indigo** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:10 am

There CAN be an individual tournament alongside the team tournaments but the real question is - will people travel a LONG way to come for an individual tournament? Is the perception that it's "team tourney or nothing"?

I personally think the individual tournament can be at least as prestigious as any team tournament but I get the impression European coaches don't think that...

Xtreme · Post by **Xtreme** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:18 am

I really like Indigos thoughts on having multiple tournaments going on at once, and making them all something to be proud of being a part of.

I don't like option 4 because it doesn't allow you to have the team vs team rounds like the eurobowl setup. That is something that is the selling point for me. Being able to travel over with a group of coaches that I know are on my team and then taking on one country each round.

Emberbreeze · Post by **Emberbreeze** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 10:24 am

I think an individual tournament has to be at least as prestigious as any other events going on.

Also have to be warry of over complicating the event as that might make for lots of chaos on the day and could put some people off coming.

Talk Fantasy Football

What sort of World Cup do we want?

One where: