SWTC feedback thread

[lunchmoney]

As we are nearing the end of another SWTC season, does anyone have any feedback they wish to give?

[Darkson]

I might have mentioned this in an email, but I'd add a point to the 1-10 spots (1st=11pts, 2nd=10pts etc), as as it stands, there's no "reward" for finishing 10th over 11th or last (bonus points not withstanding)

Maybe a bonus point for Most TDs/Cas/Best Painted (yes, shamelessly stolen from the Golden Gauntlet, but it is a good point).

To encourage participation, say a minimum of 3 to place, but can score from 4? On one hand I like that it encourages players to try to attend more, on the other does it penalise to much...?

[lunchmoney]

I might have mentioned this in an email, but I'd add a point to the 1-10 spots (1st=11pts, 2nd=10pts etc), as as it stands, there's no "reward" for finishing 10th over 11th or last (bonus points not withstanding)

Maybe a bonus point for Most TDs/Cas/Best Painted (yes, shamelessly stolen from the Golden Gauntlet, but it is a good point).

To encourage participation, say a minimum of 3 to place, but can score from 4? On one hand I like that it encourages players to try to attend more, on the other does it penalise to much...?

All good points.

[Darkson]

Another idea that I know a couple of us kicked around was scrapping the half points for one day events, but adding a bonus to players scores based on the number of games they played, so for example the ACT would score slightly more than Crumb, but less than Speedbowl, and less than Gert.

Might need to expand the bonus points though?



Also note I'm happy to spit-ball these ideas as I'm not involved next year - if I end up doing the scoring again by hand it will be as simple as I can get it.

[Itchen Masack]

I have the shield in my car, shall i just get my own name engraved and get my wife to present it to me? Will put next years too to save another trip to the engravers

No plans to make two 1-dayers count as a full event? Personally think it might add to the competition for top spot(s). Although i understand it may add a little more work for our generous organisers.

[Dionysian]

I didn't even realise there was supposed to be a shield until the drive back when Andy asked where it was - where da shiny at?!

No plans to make two 1-dayers count as a full event? Personally think it might add to the competition for top spot(s). Although i understand it may add a little more work for our generous organisers.

As a quick note, allowing any two 1 dayers to count as a full score makes them significantly more powerful than 2 dayers. While at the moment attendance at the majority of 2 dayers is mandatory for anyone actively pursuing this (although I'm not sure if anyone does as it's more a side benefit for tourneys you're attending anyway), this change would make attendance at 1 dayers mandatory and 2 dayers much less important. For equal weighting between 1 dayers and 2 dayers the 1 dayers would have to be paired in advance and only the scores from those two specific events get combined to create a full score.

While I realise one dayers are a huge boon to people on shift work or limited family time, personally, I'd prefer to see most of them replaced with, or expanded into, two day events, as they're very much like getting half a handjob.

[Loki]

I agree (mostly) with Spence (I'm ignoring the last line) with regard to allowing any two one-dayers to equal a two-dayer would definitely change the value of the events for the SWTC.

I think the table generally allows people who want to to put some sort of gauge on their years gaming and have a bit of a benchmark. At the very least for this year I don't think there is any need to play with the format.

As the organiser of one of the one-dayer I have no desire and do not think there is any need for BUBBA to become a two-day event, as has already been pointed out the one-dayer fills a different niche to a two-dayer.

[lunchmoney]

We did ask for feedback a few weeks ago.... Just saying

I've got it all up and mostly automated now (massive thanks to tojurub, organiser of the German series, for his help), but we can certainly look at alternative points for the one dayers. The idea of combining 2 one dayers into 1 score is a good one. I'll copy the idea across to the SWTC organisers forum.

[Glowworm]

As the organiser of one of the one-dayer I have no desire and do not think there is any need for BUBBA to become a two-day event, as has already been pointed out the one-dayer fills a different niche to a two-dayer.

Remove : BUBBA

Insert : Crumb-Bowl

This

Many of the coaches who come to Crumb couldn't do 2 days, its sometimes not practical.

While I realise one dayers are a huge boon to people on shift work or limited family time, personally, I'd prefer to see most of them replaced with, or expanded into, two day events, as they're very much like getting half a handjob

Or a "Newport Shuffle" as I believe they are more commonly known.....( as half way through someone blindsides you with a bat and they both disappear with your wallet)

[Darkson]

As one of the organisers (albeit an out-ging one) I'm against making two one-days = a one-dayers for a couple of reasons:

1. We'd have to go back and ask tojurub to change the spreadsheet again (and as he's put so much work already into a series he hasn't participated in I'm loathe to do so)
2. How do you decide which races count as being played? Do you insist a coach plays the same race at both events?

Just not keen.


On a side note, once I can find the other thread I'll be moving these posts to the discussion thread.

[lunchmoney]

On a side note, once I can find the other thread I'll be moving these posts to the discussion thread.

The feedback request I mentioned? It was in the 2015 thread, page 10. Only you commented. But I think it would be a good idea to make a feedback thread and put those 2 posts from the 2015 thread and relevant posts from the 2016 thread.