Grum's Eurobowl Suggestion

s031720 · Post by **s031720** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:14 pm

I have no opinion of change vs no change, but I would like to suggest changes to Matts list:

I would change places with:

Move down lizards, move up Chaos Dwarves.

Move down Chaos, move up Chaos Pact

Move down Dark elves, move up High Elves.

Based on leagueplay mainly, but also my intuitive feeling about tourney strength and starting skills. : o )

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:39 pm

Sounds like a good idea.

Grum having a good idea...
Now I wait for the sky to burn, the seas to boil and the 4 horsemen to ride again...

SillySod · Post by **SillySod** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:43 am

How about getting nations into groups of three. Then you let the nations choose teams in order:
Nation 1, Nation 2, Nation 3, Nation 3, Nation 2, Nation 1, Nation 1, Nation 2... etc

That way you could get some interesting mixes although its bad news for everyone else if a strong nation gets paired up with some muppets who let them have dorf, chaos dorf, amazon, orcs, and lizzies.

Alternatively you could just randomise the teams each player/nation has to use

Turin · Post by **Turin** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:59 am

Actually I don't like the idea. I personally had no problem in choosing my team, as my DEs are in pot D, so others would have to quarrel about their Woodies and Dwarves.
Btw: Move Gobbos up and Vampires down. Furthermore, There will never be pots that are generally accepted. Especially as nobody knows exactly how the rules review will eventually effect the tourney statistics.
Still, how would such a lineup look like?
The bottom 4 Pot-Teams (E to H) would be basically the same for each country while the only real choices are in Pot A and C, if you have effectiveness as maor criteria. So the problem, which I don't see as a problem, would not be solved.

Hangus wrote:although i think it is a good idea would you not get Would a points system work? So each team gets set number of points to spend and each race has a points value.

I do think, if there shall be a change concerning race combinations, a point-system is the better idea. Each year, six month after the last eurobowl, there could be a point value from 1 to 10 for each race that takes into account the statistics for all tourneys from the last eurobowl on (including the eurobowl itself). However, that means someone has to do the work.
Each nation can pick (8 different) teams with a maximum allowance of 50 points.

Dave wrote:a lot of the fun is drawn away from the tournament because of the 'have to be the best' feeling that's around. There's less fun there.

You've never been on a large 40K or a WHFB tourney. Eurobowl is very comfy and nice. Still if there is any feeling of 'have to be the best' we cannot change that by restricting the race choices. We have to work on ourselves and our points of view concerning BB-tourneys.

As the in-team-swiss-system has also been mentioned, I do think we could easily omit that. The team captain could set the players for pitch 1 to 8 prior to the game.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 12:37 pm

why would the bottom 4 pots be the same race for each nation? the idea is to set the pots to not have an obvious best team in them

Pipey · Post by **Pipey** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:09 pm

There are lots of interesting things that could be done to change Eurobowl. At the end of the day it's a pretty straight TR110 / skill after each game tourney.

Grouping the races, making each coach play a random race... all of that would be cool.

But I must say I didn't hear too many people complaining about the rules set this year. No-one I spoke to had any problems with it. As far as I could see the tourney was a massive success, as it has been previously.

So to me this goes back to a case of fixing what isn't broken.

Given that EB is a kind of 'major' event, shouldn't the rules be kept pretty straightforward as they are with BBGT, DungeonBowl, Chaos Cup etc.? Shouldn't the experimental stuff be tried at the smaller events?

Anyway, it's up to the Italians so we'll wait to see what they decide for 2009...

Magictobe · Post by **Magictobe** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:12 pm

I like the tought of making a ruling that prevents every nation to take the same teams.

I prefer a ruling with points given to blood bowl teams and giving nations points to spread over the teams. I think this will give more diversity in the bloodbowl teams and this is what it would give more fun.

I am not a big fan of the pot system because it will be very hard to spread the teams over the different pots without having a favorite in each pot.

TuernRedvenom · Post by **TuernRedvenom** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 3:06 pm

Having played vs wood elves 4 out of 6 games I would much prefer a more varied racial mix.

Turin · Post by **Turin** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 4:32 pm

Grumbledook wrote:why would the bottom 4 pots be the same race for each nation? the idea is to set the pots to not have an obvious best team in them

mattwhile wrote: Group E High Elves, Elves, Human

The hardest choice, as some people prefer AG 4 players while others would like to field a big guy. Still I think having the chance of fielding 4 block-players who will get guard during the tournament, is one of the best arguments for playing humans.

mattwhile wrote: Group F Nurgle, Chaos, Slann

Slann. Neither Nurgle nor Chaos can really compete with them.

mattwhile wrote: Group G Underworld, Vampire, Chaos Pact

Nobody would pick Vampires as they should be located in pot no. 3. Chaos Pact is an all&nothing team. They've got some big guys, some nice linemen (always up to one) and that's it. Not a good chance to bring the ball into the opponent's endzone. Probably a nice team for longer leagues but not for a tourney. underworld is far better as the've got plenty of players who can dodge through almost any wall your opponent will bring up against you.

mattwhile wrote: Group H Ogres, Halflings, Goblins

Gobbos, for sure. They've got nice secret weapons and almost any players needs at least one assist for a 3-dice-block. Furthermore you'll get a heavy mortar after choosing your trait.

So in my opinion these pots are not at all one level of capability, which is imho not really possible to manage. If there should be another ruleset for race-combination, then use a point based system but not those pots.

PubBowler · Post by **PubBowler** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 5:13 pm

I think my thoughts mirror Pippy's.

I feel that this is one of the 6 biggest (4 majors & WC being the other one) that should stay simple and, for want of a better term, traditional.

Obviously the Italians can do as they please regarding the rule set but if they wanted to break the stranglehold of the ten teams there are other ways to do so (which don't involve any controversial ranking procedure).

Options that come to mind (not an exhaustive list by any means, none of which I advocate and some have been mentioned before) are:

No normal skills, one double skill after each game.

Random teams (D20 after removing Tier 3 and adding new teams should cover it).

Nominate each yr to be the yr of the "insert race name".
Every team needs to include one of these.

Only one race from each page of the rulebook.

The list goes on...

Joemanji · Post by **Joemanji** » Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:56 pm

PubBowler wrote:Nominate each yr to be the yr of the "insert race name".
Every team needs to include one of these.

Sounds good.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:42 am

I like this idea enough I'm going to try and copy it. What do you think about the following 6 buckets:

A: Wood Elves, Norse, Amazons, Elves
B: Undead, Necromantic, Chaos Dwarves, Khemri
C: Slann, High Elves, Dark Elves, Skaven
D: Dwarves, Nurgle's Rotters, Orc, Lizardmen
E: Humans, Chaos, Chaos Pact, Vampires
F: Ogres, Goblins, Halflings, Underworld

I've tried to balance flair/bash as well as performance.

Bevan · Post by **Bevan** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:04 am

Would it help to require each coach to play two different races (e.g. first race on day 1, a different race on day 2). Still no duplicates allowed so a team would use 12 races. There would probably be more than 12 chosen among all the teams.

Of course it would be more fun to play three different races each, making 18 races in total.

Or you could use obvious next step that each coach plays a different race in every game and all races must be used among the whole team.

Duke Jan · Post by **Duke Jan** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 10:54 am

For the match ups: leave it to the captains. The captains will nominate who will represent their nation on which table.
Highest ranked nation select their player on table 1.
Lower ranked nation select their players on tables 1 and 2
Higher ranked nation select their players on tables 2 and 3 etc.

Hangus · Post by **Hangus** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:16 am

Duke Jan wrote:For the match ups: leave it to the captains. The captains will nominate who will represent their nation on which table.
Highest ranked nation select their player on table 1.
Lower ranked nation select their players on tables 1 and 2
Higher ranked nation select their players on tables 2 and 3 etc.

Like this idea as it give the captain more control