Talk Fantasy Football

The last Dutch Open painting price has once again shown that painting prices are difficult to decide upon, especially in large tournaments such as the Dutch Open. People simply stop looking after voting for painting prices. Discussion is the result and the winner is not treated with the respect he deserves. Accusations of people rigging the painting competition are made and things are barely kept friendly.

I think you all agree this shouldn't be how a painting price works. So, I'm not going to make a poll. But it would be useful to discuss what works best for painting prices.

Personally I think it should be done by a jury, including last year's winner. This means that last year's winner can't win again, which is a downside, but it does mean someone with knowledge of painting quality should be in the jury. Other members of the jury can be one or two players who don't think they're contenders, but enough of an expert, and someone from the organisation. The organiser doesn't get to play anyway and so (s)he can walk around telling the jury which teams are worth a closer look. Judging 90 teams between your matches is a bit too much.

Last but not least: no accusations or smear campaigns in this thread, please!

let Norse do it

gken1 wrote:hmm. sounds like there should have been a "display" period where the organizers pick the top 5 painted teams for display. then everyone votes for one of the 5. Been like that at every tourney I've been to and no one's ever had any hard feelings.

Succinct, to the point and fair. By all means ask the previous years winner to vote personally, but apart from that the above system should sort the men from the boys... (the Halflings from the Ogres?)

I liked the system they had at last years Spiky, the refs picked about 6 different teams and then they said if anyone else would like to have their team considored to put the team up at the front with the ones they picked. This worked very well.

Yes that would work very well, but I also think it is important to schedule the display as an actual event so that coaches have an oppertunity to look at those teams

Yes, but if like they did at the SPiky it is only a matter of looking at about 5-10 teams it makes it alot easier, but not knocking the Dutch open at all, it just made it a little awkward due to the layout of all the diferent floors.

True, the venue at the DO did not help.
Still, if you have only half an hour or so to catch some fresh air, eat some lunch and stop yourself from getting dihydrated, looking at some teams for a painting vote is not going to be high on my list of priorities. It takes some time, so you better make sure coaches have that time.

Valen is right.

The Spiky system is the best I have seen. Makes it easier for everyone to judge and allows anyone to have a crack at winning.

Painting competitions will always suffer from the problem of subjectivity. Bit of a truism i know. But it's a fact that I don't think even the most even handed judging system could remove.

er yeah can be kinda silly. Sure at the may BB last year i did not vote as i forgot in the lunch break - i did not even vote for someone else as i forgot :O and i had my own team there!

Cant really gurantee a fair system but i guess if their is a clear 'best' team then they will win. SO far the 3 tourni's i have been to the best team did win - but i do fear its easy for a rigged vote. - dont know best way but even Golden Demon looks total rubbish method of choice - so a random bunch of people cant really do a better job imho

I'm in favour of picking a few to choose from, no set limit as Traveller suggested elsewhere, you might have 5 worthy, you might have 8. Works well enough at Spiky and the BB too.

Another option is having two prizes as they did at Pearly Kings last year, a 'coaches choice' voted for by the masses and a 'judge's choice'.

It's worth noting that conversions always score highly in a popular vote, coaches will vote for character/humour/theme as opposed to purely 'Best Painted'. Examples include Indigo's Xmas goblins which won Pearly Kings Coaches choice (which I voted for) and Zodiac's Halflings at the inaugral Rendez-Vous. Neither of which (in my opinion) were the 'best painted' in the purest sense, but they were both choc full of character and conversions, and both were worthy winners IMO.

One thing is abundantly clear though, you can't possibly see all the teams in a a large tourney, irrespective of how many floors it's on. The other advantage of having a choice of a few on a single table is that you can directly compare them, it helps immensely in any close decision to actually see the teams alongside each other.

Oh and anybody who votes for their mates/compatriots over and above a team which they genuinely believe is better should be strung up by the b*llocks from the nearest lamppost and stoned.

perhaps 'best team' would be a better description for some tournaments

I've also heard it called 'best team uniform'

another factor that gives bias is...

" ... figs are an awesome paintjob, but they are around for almost a year right now and thus i went for someone else. "

Not too slander but i think people tend to vote for a 'new' team more than a better team that has been around for a while. Thats an issue becuase you should vote for the BEST - not what i have not seen before. - if thats the policy might as well just give it to a random team.

I dont mean to cause offence by that comment and quote but it does appear to be a massive factor - be nice if that was not a factor

for the upcoming BUBBLE we will make a shortlist during the tournament somewhere .. I like that idea from the Spiky ..

I also think, when vieuwing the DO and who's teams did get votes they all would be in my shortlist (apart from my own norse) with a few more added to them ..

I think I'll ask several players (both painters and non painters) to hand in their 5 best team in no particular order .. the top x of those make the shortlist and can be voted upon ...

juck101 wrote:another factor that gives bias is...

" ... figs are an awesome paintjob, but they are around for almost a year right now and thus i went for someone else. "

Not too slander but i think people tend to vote for a 'new' team more than a better team that has been around for a while. Thats an issue becuase you should vote for the BEST - not what i have not seen before. - if thats the policy might as well just give it to a random team.

I dont mean to cause offence by that comment and quote but it does appear to be a massive factor - be nice if that was not a factor

That was me you quote there, so i'll explain a bit. The problem for me is that i go to many tournaments, and some teams like Del's brilliant Hashrats for example have won best painted on 3 or 4 of them. It's not the factor that i've seen the team somewhere on the web so they are not brandnew, but that i've seen that team win several prices, so for me they've gotten all the credit. So i try and go for something new, or at least the best team that has not won several times already. I only vote for the same team about 3 times and then i move on ... unless there's no worthy alternative.

yeah im not quoting to be a pain - no offense intented...

Just a shame that the potential veterans are penalised. I understand why it happens - just does not reflect the best as such. To be honest not that im good enough, but i only would try for the big 4 tourney's best painting for this reason. I for one play pretty much only a few races so if i was to attend 10 events you would basically see the same team. - shame that would discount me from prizes.