By all mean propose a system. Can’t guarantee we’ll go with it but if you have an idea we’d love to hear it. Especially as we’re thinking about the format at the moment. As Dan says, we’re keen to emphasise the team element.

_________________

1. Prerequisite is that every team has 1 card per each player. Back of the card is opaque, front of the card contains player's name and the name of their army. These will be used in the pairing system.

2. Each team secretly determines which card will be played first - i.e. which player/army will be their 'champion'. Those cards are then played face down.

3. Teams reveal their 'champions' simultaneously.

4. Each team secretly determines 2 players/armies that will face the champion. They are played face down.

5. All the 4 cards are now revealed. Each 'champion' selects one player/army to play against.

6. The players/armies that were not selected by the 'champion' will now be paired against the last remaining player/army in each team's pool.

7. Tables are now selected randomly for all the pairings.

The procedure takes additional 5-10 minutes prior to the games.


Scoring: game wins primary (20 is the max), objective points as the tiebreaker (100 is the max - i think ).


I can guarantee that there is a lot of fun in this pairing process and it emphasizes the team element as sometimes players/armies will be sacrificed to face a very tough opponent so that the rest of the team can get easy points.

I can see the positives of the system - the choosing of opponents does become fun, and there is a new tactical dimension.

Additionally, I don't think the system has to be perfectly fair in determining who exactly the best players and teams are.

However, I do think on a practical level this would be another complexity in what is already a big project for the organisers and all players/teams to deliver.

I also, whilst seeing the tactical side of sacrificing players, wonder if we should have any player attending to be a sacrifice for a battering from the top players. I like the idea that any player can help get a result for their team by achieving something on the table.

What does also spring to mind is that the hosts normally decide the system and Poland would be a potential future host country in the next few years - and therefore even if the Scots don't go for your system it won't necessarily mean it can't be used effectively in the future.

_________________
Big Gunz don't fly!

This system has been used in the ETC tournament series for so many years and it worked just fine, but hey - I will have fun whatever procedure we use.

I am fine with the swiss system. I do not like the idea of feeding weaker players to top players. Does not sound like fun to me either getting devastated or having no challenge whatsoever. The loser will not want to remember the game and the winner will have nothing from it to remember.

One thing on DRAWs though:
Last year Berlin saw something that I did not like. Particularly as it happened to me. After round 4 the score was 1:0 for me. Scoring BTS and working my ass off for it. Counted draw. So tiebreaker was on points. My opponent came ahead in that. The result was therefor changed to 0:2 win for him. I felt cheated out of my one point for BTS. While achieving nothing directly on the field the win was handed over. Can we look into avoiding mechanisms like that this year?

Thanks

I agree that it is a good system. And in ETC most players are very strong and 'buy in' to sacrificing themselves for the team

The ETC is highly competitive. I think that the EA Euros/Worlds, whilst of course teams want to win, just won't be as ruthless.

I do think that it is a system that can be used - and I reckon a Poland Euros in the next few years would be a good place to do it!

_________________
Big Gunz don't fly!

Reksio, interesting. We used a similar system in the London Club Derby, worked well plus the guildball WTC does something like that with 3 player teams. It doesn’t have to involve sacrificing weaker players, it might be about getting more interesting match ups, facing new opponents/armies etc.

Graff, totally agree on draws. Was interesting to play a different system last year but we won’t be treating draws in the same way this time. Snatching a draw from the jaws of defeat is one of the best things about epic!

_________________

Different system would be that one Team selects thetable(s), the other selects one (or more) matchups.

I would be fine with the proposed system, but I am easy with whatever system you want to use.

_________________
My blog - A man without a mountain of unpainted lead is no real man!

Coming together nicely. - I have updated where the Captain (and full team are in place),

Still waiting for USA to give me a shout and a few places available in the UK Countries.

I'll sort out the team stuff at some point next week... I've been sidetracked breaking my wrist in an accident and getting arrested for the first time in my life at the Extinction Rebellion protests.

Gunslinger and I are looking at tickets, I believe m_folias is all set. Norto is planning on joining us, last I heard he hasn't bought tickets yet though.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Is there a 2nd German team?
Have the team - Sasha, Carsten, Andreas and Fanny face.

I don‘t think so. It was possibly a misunderstanding because of Largo_w‘s Team.

Yeah, I should not have mentioned sacrificing as:
1. It is optional.
2. It is very rarely used.
3. It is a perfect point on which everybody can now co concentrate and bash, forgetting all the positives

But hey, we did have some cases of sacrifices in the ETC and it cant be denied. What is funny is that sometimes the „prey” manages a win anyway:)

Just a wee reminder to teams that have yet to pay / confirm Captains.
I will really need all teams paid and confirmed by the end of June - to allow us to ensure we have enough tables, the right room, and may even look at food....
thanks