OverDose
Joined: Apr 07, 2005
|
 Posted:
Sep 14, 2006 - 21:53 |
 
|
| Walks_in_the_Sun wrote: | | It's kinda depressing that every team you named was darkies. |
I beg to differ since the XFL tournament was Dark Elves only. Besides, Dark Elves are inarguably the best High TR team in BB.
edit.| MadTias wrote: | | Frankenstein has a point that could be experimented with: no games between qualifiers and main event. I think it would just mean bigger treasuries going into the qualifiers, but it could be worth a try. If you want to limit the "bought games" factor, no stars/wizards could be an option. Whatever you can work into the fluff. Myself, I don't see this as a problem, big teams are big teams and mostly they should beat small teams. The majors are for BIG teams, SMACKS are for smaller teams. To each his own. |
I agree for the smack part. Actually the first time I qualified for a major I was really surprised by the fact that you could play matches in between. I really think that the teams should NOT be allowed to play friendlies. It would be a lot fluffier too. |
|
|
Walks_in_the_Sun
Joined: Apr 16, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 14, 2006 - 22:02 |
|
| OverDose wrote: | | Walks_in_the_Sun wrote: | | It's kinda depressing that every team you named was darkies. |
I beg to differ since the XFL tournament was Dark Elves only. Besides, Dark Elves are inarguably the best High TR team in BB. |
Sorry - I thought you were talking about the GLT. I hope you can understand my confusion. |
|
|
OverDose
Joined: Apr 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 14, 2006 - 22:07 |
|
I was talking about the GLT but XFL Dark Elves were at the semifinals at the same time thus depriving the chance for those great teams/coaches to take part in the GLT.
And no apology needed : ) |
|
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 14, 2006 - 22:13 |
|
TR caps on all majors would certainly make them more interesting. I don't see the fun/interesting with coaches competing with completly different levels of TR. Majors need to have at least a small amount of actual in game coaching skills instead of being all about who has cherrypicked themselves to the best team before tournament start. I would be interested to know what kind of smacks that are most popular, that would certainly give a hint on what the majority feels is most fun.
To make one of the majors into a Swiss sounds like a great idea. |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
Dominik
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 15, 2006 - 00:17 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | | If you want to limit the "bought games" factor, no stars/wizards could be an option. |
Not good, bec. there has to be a reason for giving Chaos and Orcs the best of all Star Players while Dark Elves only have this waste of money called Horkon Heartripper. |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Jan 26, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 17, 2006 - 12:06 |
|
With regard to Korhil's thread about TV:
Actually seeding and ranking in tournament games (including SMACKS) should be entirely detached from CR and casual games.
Teams should be seeded by a team's tournament ranking rather than coach ranking.
This tournament ranking then would only consider the opposing team's tournament ranking and the k-value of the tournament.
Major tournaments would still have a different k-value than minor tournaments (e.g. SMACKS, qualifiers), perhaps k-value should be directly proportional to the number of participating teams, casual games in [R] would have no effect on tournament ranking at all.
With regard to seeding:
Being seeded 1st in a 8-team-tournament should mean a team will play a team seeded 5th to 8th. Being seeded 1st should also imply that you can encounter the team seeded 2nd in the final only.
I am not certain whether the latter is the case already. |
Last edited by Frankenstein on %b %17, %2006 - %12:%Sep; edited 5 times in total |
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 17, 2006 - 12:07 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | Furthermore, seedings by ranking should not determine the schedule as detailed as they do now. 1st seed in a 8-team-tournament should mean a team will play a team seeded 5th to 8th. 1st seed also should imply that you can encounter the team seeded 2nd in the final only. |
I think this is all it implies.
As far as Christer has told me, seeding is a random pairing of the top half teams vs the bottom half, so it's a very loose seeding indeed. |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
tautology
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 17, 2006 - 12:36 |
|
I personally think that the tourney's run just fine.
For those who are concerned about "engineered" teams, I would note that such teams have not won many majors to this point (one, I believe).
The only TR limit I would support would be a *minimum* TR, of 200+ or more. It peeves me a bit when opponents get a walk-through match while I have to struggle through a monster team. It is a MAJOR tourney, after all.
The majors add a lot to the fumbbl environment and I will take this moment to thank Malthor and Mezir and all the rest of the folks who run them...thanks! |
|
|
mymLaban
Joined: Apr 20, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 17, 2006 - 13:02 |
|
i understand we all hate certain elves teams atm  but if no games were alloved between qualifing and the finals would that not give high av teams an advantage compared to weak av teams? |
|
|
Kamahl
Joined: Oct 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 17, 2006 - 13:50 |
|
There are no uber teams, only great coaches
[dons his azbest suit]
I have no problem with superdeveloped teams competing, as long as the games are intresting to watch/play. Minimum TR/TS sounds like a nice idea, altho some races would probably be much better of actually playing with lower TR to get handicaps [from an undeads coach perspective - my zombies should only have DP or guard, rest of SPPs should be on important players. Works wonders when you encounter developed AG team with a bunch of skills that gives you handicaps ;> ]
It would be intresting idea to see a tourney medical staff that is taking care of nigglers - ie making sure that they will always show up in the major match.[obviously MNG would still miss the game]
That could make for even more balanced games. Case in point - in latest match of certain elven team [  ] Skaven opposition had a bucketload of nigglers. They showed up, it was a great game to watch, and ended 4-3[altho the elves stalled to avoid 1 more round of LOSing the players - it could be 5-4 as well]. Now imagine what that game would look like in case all those players missed it? You would have more fun watching the paint dry... |
|
|
|
|
War Drums?
Search
