Details: Eurobowl XIV | Poland | 2-4 Oct 2020 *POSTPONED*

[Pipey]

Rules rules rules! Love it

No leg up for the group just below Tier 0 makes the usual undead, wood, dark, liz axis as obvious as ever.

CD, skaven, humans - all perhaps worth a look for the Eurobowl 5-8 picks.

Skill stacking remains, so gimmicks are still an option if that's your bag.

I like it. But then I don't think I'm a purist...

[Joemanji]

Yeah the rules are poor. They have taken the WC rules - already sub standard from a competitive standpoint- and made them worse. Not what you want for the biggest event of the year.

Compare these to Brendan’s excellent attempt to modify the WC rules for UKTC and you can see the gap in experience. I think we should consider what we want the next captain, whoever that may be, to say about this at the Poland Captains’ Meeting. The further out we go in terms of nations the less fair it is to ask them to be writing rules for such a large event. Geggster and Lycos have played more NAF games than every single person in Poland combined for example. It’s almost cruel to ask them to be making up rules that the English, French, Italians etc. will be criticising for the next year.

[montanhas18]

I wish they would confirm officially that those are the rules. I keep seeing those but some confirmation would be nice.

[Vanguard]

From Facebook :
- each team may buy 0-1 NAF-approved star Players

Presumably this rules out any of the paired star players, as they take up two Star player positions, or are they an exception to this rule?

[Purplegoo]

Moving away from whether or not we like the rules for a moment, I wonder how many of our 2020 tournaments are going to adopt them? I certainly noticed in the run-up to the WC that, on the continent, it felt like an awful lot of events were either created to run the WC rules or they changed their rules for a year to practice, or whatever. We don't seem so inclined to alter our traditions over here (yes, there were examples, before anyone jumps in. I'm referring to the general trend).

I'm not sure if this really hinders us at all, but I do wonder how often we'll play these rules at the more competitive UK tournaments before we hope to go and defend the EB.

I do have sympathy with anyone asked to make rules for a high profile tournament. People are absolutely going to grumble, regardless of what you do. Some were unimpressed with Cardiff, people moan about the NAFC every year, the WC rules generated a lot of discussion (the balance of which was positive, I think), etc. I don't think any move to take rules writing away from future hosts would be met positively, and I'd be on that side of the argument too. I would have no objections to the committee having some input / oversight or the guidelines being tightened up a bit, however. If Russia turn up in 2020 and win hosting rights, I agree that it is a bit much to expect they'll rock up with perfect rules for 2022.

[straume]

People are absolutely going to grumble, regardless of what you do. Some were unimpressed with Cardiff, people moan about the NAFC every year, the WC rules generated a lot of discussion [...] perfect rules for 2022.

I think the main point here is that there is no such thing as perfect rules. And, as you say, there will be grumbles regardless.

Some would argue that 1.1 3 skills + 3 skills is "Gold standard" others would shake there heads at this. I think it is important to allow whoever organises it some leeway so that things don`t get static. Regardless of the how you feel about the WC-rules, I think we can all agree they shaked up the meta a bit and generated a lot of positive buzz to the Blood Bowl community. All the tournaments with WC-rules is testamant to this. "Figuring out" the rosters and playing with your optins (and then get it wrong as the top4 is best regardless ) is a lot of fun for many.

[fromherashes]

Yeah the rules are poor. They have taken the WC rules - already sub standard from a competitive standpoint- and made them worse. Not what you want for the biggest event of the year.

Compare these to Brendan’s excellent attempt to modify the WC rules for UKTC and you can see the gap in experience. I think we should consider what we want the next captain, whoever that may be, to say about this at the Poland Captains’ Meeting. The further out we go in terms of nations the less fair it is to ask them to be writing rules for such a large event. Geggster and Lycos have played more NAF games than every single person in Poland combined for example. It’s almost cruel to ask them to be making up rules that the English, French, Italians etc. will be criticising for the next year.

I bet it’s really brown, cavernous and smelly up there, climb back out and take a look at how patronising that whole post is...

[Purplegoo]

I don't think that's necessary. Joe is allowed an opinion, and he's at least expressed it in a logical way. If you disagree, or even think the post patronising, you can explain why without the colourful language? I thought his post a little harsh myself, but I do think there is a genuine point in there. As we go through the less experienced nations, does it not make sense for our Eurobowl committee to more formally help them with arrangements, including rulesets? They won't if not empowered to do so by the Captains' Meeting, and that conversation has to start somewhere.

The tone of BB discourse (especially on Facebook) has been particularly exhausting this week. Perhaps I'm guilty of being too easily triggered, I don't know. Please ignore me if so.

Eurobowl.eu is now updated, by the way, so these rumoured rules are confirmed. True, Straume, there is no such thing.

[Loki]

Leaving the colorful language aside - do you really need your hand held to understand why that is patronising?
{can you see what I did there, I have implied my own superiority by saying I should hold your hand or you will get it 'wrong'}

[Purplegoo]

If you mean my post(?), perhaps my intent has not come across. Sorry about that, internet words are hard. I’m advocating that the committee gain a little scope to feed back on things like rules (scope they don’t presently have), not that they take over because [insert new country here] clearly doesn’t know as well as the wise old heads. There is surely a line between patronising and practical, and I’m sorry if I’m not well articulating where along it I am (or indeed, if I am genuinely in the wrong place upon it!).

It’s a shame this conversation has come up with the backdrop of the upcoming rules getting some criticism; I don’t think it’s controversial in isolation. Or, if it is, the several hundred, World Cup flavoured versions of it I’ve heard after this past weekend are all similarly patronising!

Anyway - not looking for a forum ruckus. Anything but, I promise. Consider me tagged out!

[Loki]

I think there’s definitely room for some spirited discussion before we hit ruckus

I think you hit the nail on the head there Phil, there is a line somewhere but we have to be careful not to stray from helpful and supportive into patronising. It is unfortunate that a lot of the discussions happen in an electronic medium as intent can be easily lost.

[fromherashes]

I don't think that's necessary. Joe is allowed an opinion, and he's at least expressed it in a logical way. If you disagree, or even think the post patronising, you can explain why without the colourful language? I thought his post a little harsh myself, but I do think there is a genuine point in there. As we go through the less experienced nations, does it not make sense for our Eurobowl committee to more formally help them with arrangements, including rulesets? They won't if not empowered to do so by the Captains' Meeting, and that conversation has to start somewhere.

The tone of BB discourse (especially on Facebook) has been particularly exhausting this week. Perhaps I'm guilty of being too easily triggered, I don't know. Please ignore me if so.

Eurobowl.eu is now updated, by the way, so these rumoured rules are confirmed. True, Straume, there is no such thing.

“Colourful language” you’d have to be a little over sensitive to consider that colourful.

His post is 100% patronising and very much comes across in a poorly thought out and condescending way. It is almost literally saying “alrighty little runt nations, step aside, big old Blighty is going to step in and tell you how it should be done”. There might be a “legitimate” point in there somewhere but it’s somewhat drowned in the wash of never ending self-aggrandising around it.

Perhaps we should be asking why he felt the need to come out of the blocks like that rather than moaning about the people who picked him up on his misstep.

As an aside, I have no problem with people trying something different. I think the World Cup rules actually encouraged people to think a little bit more outside the box and I enjoyed playing against some weirder builds over the last year in the run up. Surely we want people to pioneer and not grow stale?

[Joemanji]

In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't talking about nations like Scotland. I'm thinking about the long term where nations like Greece or Czech Republic host. Nations who have almost no experience of running any kind of NAF tournament at all, let alone the marquee event of the year for 400-500 people from across the continent. I said it is unfair to expect them to shoulder that burden alone, and I stand by that. You can see from the fallout from the World Cup to see just how hard nerds go when they want to criticize.

[fromherashes]

In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't talking about nations like Scotland. I'm thinking about the long term where nations like Greece or Czech Republic host. Nations who have almost no experience of running any kind of NAF tournament at all, let alone the marquee event of the year for 400-500 people from across the continent. I said it is unfair to expect them to shoulder that burden alone, and I stand by that. You can see from the fallout from the World Cup to see just how hard nerds go when they want to criticize.

I didn’t feel you were talking about Scotland...

I’d expect that the EuroBowl host should submit their rules pack for approval in the same way as anyone else who’s running a NAF sanctioned tournament. If that doesn’t happen, it should. In this case I guess it would be pertinent to put it to the NAF committee rather than who the standard TOs submit to as a sense check.

I don’t personally think that the rules here are “broken” though.

[Joemanji]

I didn't say they were and don't think that they are.