Talk Fantasy Football

There has been quite of lot of discussion in the EuroBowl thread and elsewhere recently about "narrowing tiers" and generally making the gap between the best and worst teams narrower, primarily with the objective of increasing diversity. I'm interested in seeing what the views of the wider community are in terms of "narrowing" the tiers for tournaments. This commonly takes the form of additional money/skills for weaker or less common races, or alternatively bonus points for "winning uphill".

I'm not trying to debate the topic, just see where the numbers are for a regular tournament.

I dont give any bonuses or incentives to any of the races at Exiles Open, but I understand why other TO's do.

I like the fact that there is a mixture. It can be fun trying to decide whcih team is getting the most beenfit from a rule set but I wouldn't like every tournament to go with the same idea.

I think it is important there aren't any true lemons. This is not so much for the player but the opposition. Its not much fun simply wiping the floor and worse it upsets somewhat progression through a tournament where teams that play lemons get big boosts compared to those that don't.

How much should you tinker with the balance though? It would be nicer if the tiers were a little tighter as this would allow the points approach, but that is aimed at the player of a weak team not the opponent. Unless you have tougher winning conditions against poor teams? So we expected you to win, but you didn't win by a big enough margin to satisfy the fans.

Of course its a matter of specific tourny conditions. Allowing Stars and inducements can alter things. Halflings with chef and star are better than vanila, likewise goblins have a lot more fun with their bribes.

Ultimately though can you address the issue that 9 times out of 10 the Undead will wipe the floor with humans and so on for the imbalanced within tiers?

I don't see the need to boost the weaker races at tournies. Part of the appeal of playing them is trying to get one up over the top teams. It's nice sometimes to get a slight boost, but it shouldn't be at every tourney.

I've added a new option for those who want their cake and to eat it too

I've voted for the mix because I think it is good if the tournaments are different. If some want to change the balance, they are free to do so. And there are other tournaments, where it's more "vanilla", which is also OK.

But I think, that for the major tournaments, the rules should be as "vanilla" as possible.

+1

I don't understand one thing: trying to improve the balance amongst tiers would not improve the mix of different teams as well ?
Why these 2 things are split in the poll?
I think that improving tiers balance is not exclusive of improving the mix of teams.

I think you might be misunderstanding the options, I think the mix option is to have some tournaments that make changes and others that don't, to give a wide variety.

Updated the poll to make it clearer about the "mix"

Chris wrote:I think it is important there aren't any true lemons. This is not so much for the player but the opposition. Its not much fun simply wiping the floor and worse it upsets somewhat progression through a tournament where teams that play lemons get big boosts compared to

Other than a better chance of a win, what boosts?

TD and Cas difference.

If the tourney uses such things.

The vast majority use them as tie breaks I believe?