Talk Fantasy Football

Firstly, well done to the winner of "Best Painted Team" at the NAF Championship this past weekend.
Secondly, this is not intended as an insult to those nominated for the award, more a suggestion for discussion for future years.

I have to say i was very surprised by the way in which the teams were selected for best team this year. I had a brief chat with a referee about the difficulty in properly see some of the beautiful teams that were being used mid-game.
My suggestion, which has been used in other tournaments, is that (post game 1) players that wish to be considered for best painted team should have an opportunity to display their teams on any form of base and manner that best compliments their teams.

All I ask is your thoughts on this?

BeardoSlatford

I am of the opinion that Best Painted is one of the most difficult categories to judge/award/shortlist. And I would welcome any conversation that improves the situation.

I like your solution, however, I do think taht there are a few people out there whose painting ability far outstrips their confidence; as such these people are unwilling/unable to come forward even though they would have a strong chance of winning.

On the subject of feedback on Best Painted, perhaps next year it could be better displayed? E.g. Each team is given a pitch (short side at the front) onto which they can arrange their team. And as for the (badly) torn off strips of paper which were curling up at the ends? If the organisers care so little about the Best Painted event, then why have it? It just looked so scruffy and amateurish/last minute.

I think the NAF Championship should consider introducing a much more sophisticated painting competition to run alongside the gaming event. Its pretty easy to have multiple categories and to allow entry of models not actually being used. Having multiple prizes also means it easier to have a competition judged by suitable people, with then "competitors voting" as a separate award.

Podfrey wrote:On the subject of feedback on Best Painted, perhaps next year it could be better displayed? E.g. Each team is given a pitch (short side at the front) onto which they can arrange their team. And as for the (badly) torn off strips of paper which were curling up at the ends? If the organisers care so little about the Best Painted event, then why have it? It just looked so scruffy and amateurish/last minute.

Agreed, it did look unprofessional. Also, the lighting was very poor in the area designated and was far too overcrowded.....

First, I was not there.

Second, these comments are based around last year's contest and Lunchmoney's twitter pics.

next year it could be better displayed? E.g. Each team is given a pitch (short side at the front) onto which they can arrange their team. And as for the (badly) torn off strips of paper which were curling up at the ends?

This is a great example of what could be done, and what shouldn't be done.

I think the NAF Championship should consider introducing a much more sophisticated painting competition to run alongside the gaming event. Its pretty easy to have multiple categories and to allow entry of models not actually being used. Having multiple prizes also means it easier to have a competition judged by suitable people, with then "competitors voting" as a separate award.

I think that this is something that all the majors *could* do, but the logistics of setting up a completely separate tournament becomes a bit complex. Or might at least.

At many tournaments, the painting contests feel, and I emphasise feel, like they're an afterthought. More than anything else, I would like for the specifications to be in every tournament pack. "Shortlisting will be done in method x, voting will take place at this time on this day, by these people, using this voting system."

Sadly I wasn’t able to make it this year but in previous years on day 1 all teams are left out during lunch and then the judges go round and pick the ones they like best, usually 8-10.

On day 2 the coaches selected name’s are called out and they put those teams on display during lunch. Either at the front of the hall or last year at the side where you register. You used to get an entry pack and this had tear off bits for the game results as well as your voting slips for the painting competition. You could also declare if the team was your own work.

That seemed to work ok, was a bit of a pain getting to see the teams but realistically only 1 or 2 people can look at each team at a time and you want to spend a bit of time admiring them or deciding what to pick. Did something different happen this year?

More importantly has anyone got any pics of the teams they can post?

More importantly has anyone got any pics of the teams they can post?

Patience my friend, patience

(Please note: his is all my own opinion, based on reffing the GT and last years NAFC, not something the NAF have said.)


Last year, Frank, Bren and myself all seperately looked at the teams, made a shortlist each, and then compared the 3 lists - any team that made all 3 went through, those that 2 voted for were looked at again - I think at one point we had nearly 20 teams listed (which we whittled down to 10-12 iirc).

With hindsight, laminated cards with team numbers would have been a way to go (and no, it's not something any of us thought about pre- or post- last year.

As for displaying on pitches, it's always (under GW as well) been up to the individual competitor on how they want to display it - some have ready-made bases, others use the pitch - I don't think "forcing" people to use a pitch is the way to go, I've personally found some teams look better when they're not competing with the colour of the board.

Obviously I wasn't there this year, but I do agree the lighting is (was?) suboptimal where the stage was, perhaps it would be better down one side of the hall, but:
a) it was agreed that the refs should be on hand to keep an eye on the entries, and we still had stuff to do, and
b) the plan was that the coaches would leave Bugmans, go along the front of the entries, vote at the end, and move on so the coaches behind can see - unfortunately trying to get BB coaches to do what's been asked of them is like trying to herd cats.

The other problem with "Best Painted" is it's very subjective - I personally find myself drawn more teams that are well painted with conversions, than superbly painted "stock" figures.

One other issue, which ALL coaches in attendence can help with, is listen to the announcements! When your asked to clear the hall so the Best Painted can be displayed, clear the hall!. Also, shut up! We had at least 4 or 5 people ask if their number had been called for Best Painted (they hadn't), and one coach missed the first 50-100 voters because they hadn't heard the original call, nor the 3 or 4 subsequent ones, so we had started the voting with out them.

Darkson wrote:trying to get BB coaches to do what's been asked of them is like trying to herd cats.

Darkson wrote:The other problem with "Best Painted" is it's very subjective.

These are two massively important issues. However, I think that we can solve both. (just don't ask me how just yet)

Podfrey wrote:On the subject of feedback on Best Painted, perhaps next year it could be better displayed? E.g. Each team is given a pitch (short side at the front) onto which they can arrange their team.

After we put them out, in the only space we thought we had free, we were told the events guy had cleared some room in the display cabinets around the walls for us to use. At least that's how I understood the message. A bit to late to do anything by that point.

Darkson wrote:lots of stuff; see above

Perhaps, given that you have so many issues raised there, something should be done about it by the organisers rather than let it happen again and again and again? If the system doesn't work then look at WHY and try something else. E.G. this year rosters were pre-submitted and checked for accuracy (unless you're in the clique ) and the names, etc entered into Score, so registration was much slicker

@ Lunchmoney - I am suprised that the GW events team and the NAF organisers were not communicating. Surely it should all have been agreed upon, well before the event, where the judging was to take place, etc?

From the NAFC Rules Pack wrote:Best Painted Team:
We hope this will continue to be the Blood Bowl community’s flagship painting contest.

Only from a point of view of quality from the painters. As mentioned previously, trying to herd the cats on the day is too difficult and the process should have been discussed, planned for and agreed upon BEFORE anyone even arrived in Nottingham. And also let us players know! How hard would it have been to list the ticket numbers somewhere obvious (like in multiple locations such as the queue for dinner, next to the stage in an "on the day announcements" board in the hall, etc) rather than have people running around trying to shout them out?

For fear of being way out of order, I felt that there were two teams that very clearly did not deserve to be nominated.
Certainly not ahead of some of the other teams that were there.
There were a couple of incredible teams that were not included ahead of two that were - to be frank - very poor.
The pirate team for one, one of the other (ie not mine) Underworld teams for another.

I have no idea who won. There were to my mind three entreis that were head-and-shoulders above the others short-listed. I hope it was one of them.

I'm still waiting for pictures...

Don__Vito wrote:I'm still waiting for pictures...

Someone tweeted them although I cannot remember who.