|
Post by stunties on Apr 20, 2011 22:34:32 GMT
You fools - the solution is clear ;D If more people want to play a system than are needed they simply have to play amongst themselves to decide the best player(s) example as it stands at the moment Carl, Warren and myself would have to fight several WAB games against each other to see which two get the honour of representing the club. Failing that we just rely on common sense and people being reasonable to see if we can't all come to a sensible arrangement we had the same problem last year so we competed for every slot, sorry warren if this goes against your opinion i am in favour of the less fuss option(as it always falls to me to organise the rabble). However the competition leading upto the tourney was both fierce and fun, so im sort of torn between reliabilty and other selection processes. A quick update :- this year we have a REAL chef doing the food( probably finger food lunch/ but definately bacon and sausage cobs). sorry about the rulespack will have it by sunday. Just waiting on milton keynes they have until saturday to confirm their place. again apologies warren.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 21, 2011 9:55:48 GMT
I'm quite patient on this as I know what is involved behind the scenes Justin so apology not needed, but I suppose most welcomed by others at the club, so thanks . A REAL chef?? Hmmm it will be hard to beat those bacon and sausage baps/butties/cobs (term changes as you move around the country) from last year . As for the team, I don't see any problems for the minute and everybody seems amicable about what is on offer and who has been given which slot. In our case its about bums on seats ensuring the Systems are covered. With so much going on at the club with most of May booked up for one game or another it would be very difficult to get a tournament in. I'm not in favour of a one Fantasy game decider as a quick power scroll (should be banned!!!) could basically kill off half an army in the first turn and then it resembles a 40K game. Hardly fair on the opponent who got second turn. Three game deciders would be good however we just don't have the time and I for one don't really want to organise that with so many other things to do personally and for the club. We have our guys thus far and its working (I hope). However after this message I do expect (an almost requirement) someone to just troll giving me a hundred and one reasons why we should have a decider competition for all systems and push it to what I don't want. If you are considering this - who ever you are - please don't as everybody is happy as they are! Looking forward to the rulespack on Sunday then. So just waiting on a FoW player is all.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Apr 21, 2011 10:32:22 GMT
To be honest I was joking when I suggested a competion to see who plays what.
I'm in favour of common sense and fair play whenever possible.
Mind you since I'm currently down to play WAB - I could be biased ;D
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 21, 2011 10:36:23 GMT
Its doubles and there are only two of you! Can't see what you wanted to decide in the WAB to be honest??
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Apr 21, 2011 11:08:35 GMT
It was an easy example for the purposes of the joke, and at the time you were technically down as a potential for the WAB games.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 25, 2011 12:23:33 GMT
Ok the rulespack is up so any questions or queries please PM me and I will collate a batch to send to Justin. WAB still has to have tweaks to the sceanrios but I'm sure that won't worry Carl and Simon. We still need a FoW player. Alex, Andy, Anybody beginning with an A? phoenixgamingrushden.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=otherevents&action=display&thread=1451Just to add that for the whole team it is £100 this includes breakfast (bacon / sausage baps (cobs?) tea 'n' coffee) and the buffet lunch. With your 3 games that sounds like a bargain! So for a team of 12 that works out to be £8.33 each (ok recurring). However, Steve is it possible for the club to pay and then we pay the club as Justin would like this payment by the 9th May?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Apr 26, 2011 11:51:27 GMT
I have some queries regarding both the magic and the Bloodbowl sections.
Bloodbowl The rules say an 11 player team? Does this mean 11 players minimum, or that you can only have 11 players? This makes quite a difference to how you select a team, as normally I would have a 12 man team, allowing a sub for injuries and to make my team slightly more flexible between offence and defence.
Also I'm total unfamilar with the living rule book rules, so I'm going to have to download that and read it through to see how the game has been changed from the 1992 Boxed Set copy of the rules I have.
Magic I'm afraid I don't really follow exactly how this is going to work?
When they say that you will play each player 5 times. With each win being worth 1 point. Does that mean you will play 5 single games of magic against each person. Or you will play each person 5 times (best of 3 games as is standard with competition magic) with the winner of each best of 3 games getting 1 point?
I'm assuming it's 5 best of 3 games against each person, purely as a single game of magic 1 on 1 takes about 10 to 15 minutes max (sometimes they can be over very, very quickly, less than 5 minutes). So if you are only playing 15 single games in total on the day that could in theory only take maybe 3 hours tops for everyone to play all of their games.
Also on a general query, what happens if a club can't field players for more than one system? We currently appear to be struggling on FoW, and at present even though Richard has said he'd like to come, he's not 100% certain he'll be able to make it due to when he works weekends.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Apr 26, 2011 12:11:37 GMT
I'm also not entirely sure which version of the Living Bloodbowl Rules is V6. Is it the copyright 2010 competition rules, as other than that all I can find is living rule book v5.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 26, 2011 17:19:35 GMT
I wil relay this info on - but Justin should be able to view it here and answer accordingly. I really didn't want to burden him with this way (although if he is ok about answering each and everyone then fine) and did ask you to pm me with such queries.
As you know I am not that up on either systems so I cannot help you. However seeing the possibility of only having 3 hours tops for playing MTG seems worrying. You must realsie that there may be players that may not play as fast as you or the other guys. This has to be taken to the organisers for clarification as does the Bloodbowl rules.
As for the FoW missing we have until a week or so to find someone or veto it. This I find quite ironic as we are looking to run a FoW tournament in August.
@ Davinder - the 40K was a typo at the beginning it should have been 900 pts each as it is later in the descriptive.
|
|
|
Post by stunties on Apr 26, 2011 22:12:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 30, 2011 10:17:02 GMT
Ok guys the club is sending off a cheque to Norman Cross for this and its going to be £8 each. It has been agreed that the club will absorb the 33p extra for everyone - this just keeps this simple. You will need to pay Stephen on club nights but let me know when you do so that you can get ticked on the list as paid. This includes breakfast bacon/sausage rolls and buffet lunch - a bargain in my view.
We still need a 40K player to double up with Davinder. So come on guys - with so many 40K players spare I'm sure there is someone out there wishing to represent the club. I believe other clubs are holding mini tournaments to decide who will go through to represent them for 40K. All you have to do is say "yeah ok".
|
|
|
Post by Ben 'Panzer' Harris on Apr 30, 2011 20:01:58 GMT
If it comes to it, veto Warmachine and I'll go add to my list of titles in 40K.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Apr 30, 2011 21:11:27 GMT
There is one slight flaw in the veto which may or may not have been overlooked. As I currently see it if two clubs veto the system then its out of the tournament. If just one club vetoes it then that club will pick up 3 battle points or three loses. If the other clubs have a full team then we are seriously handicapped and are starting on a losing foot before we have walked through the doors. If we don't veto and then somebody pulls out at the last minute we get nothing. Let's see what the next week will bring.
|
|
|
Post by stunties on May 1, 2011 8:15:05 GMT
There is one slight flaw in the veto which may or may not have been overlooked. As I currently see it if two clubs veto the system then its out of the tournament. If just one club vetoes it then that club will pick up 3 battle points or three loses. If the other clubs have a full team then we are seriously handicapped and are starting on a losing foot before we have walked through the doors. If we don't veto and then somebody pulls out at the last minute we get nothing. Let's see what the next week will bring. norman cross will not be vetoeing but we will have spare players for any system that is vetoed so as not to spoil it for anyone with only 2 games in the day. The veto was introduced because of the 3 new systems to last year so as not to put anyone off. I know its probably too early but if this year is a big success like last we will be organised at least 6 months in adavnce with 6 clubs of next years event...(no veto's) hope this helps ;D
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on May 1, 2011 10:47:34 GMT
Cheers and I hope you had a good birthday yesterday! Would I be cheeky in requesting a possibility of one your "spare" players tagging one of ours in the 40K doubles at the very very last resort? I don't think we would need it (its a just in case) but perhaps other teams may. Also good to have reserves for very last minute emergencies (illness, transport problems, other mishaps).
|
|