NAF Ranked with 24/26 Teams

Moderator: D_Arquebus

User avatar
tribalsinner
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 5000
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:32 am
BB League: SWL
Favourite Race: Human
Location: Jesters Court

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by tribalsinner »

Rabid_Bogscum wrote:Tribal loses one of his spots

Rabid 2
Tribal 2
Azza 2
Gardengnome 2
Thomsy 2

Virral is close to 2 while Tribal and Thomsy both almost have 4
You can thank people that don't sign up for NAF as to why I dropped one. Tourneys should all be NAF mandatory. Have to sign up to attend. It's not like you need to re-mortgage the house to afford it....
Image

User avatar
D_Arquebus
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 6578
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:45 pm
BB League: SLOBB + SWL
Location: Sydney

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by D_Arquebus »

Or, attending tournaments is about being inclusive and not exclusive?

I would love to sign up everyone to encourage becoming part of the community. Especially as as the NAF works towards being more relevant to all Blood Bowlers and not just tournament attendees. But i wouldn't see people turned away because they didn't want to sign up. We're a niche enough market (fantasy football board gsme playing nerds) without becoming elitist about attendance?

Besides which NAF ranking is not Sheep Stations? It's more about remembering your games and maybe working to achieve some personal goals than beating up on new players to bolster some relatively meaningless number? So if new players don't see the value or would prefer to improve before they sign up for a record then we can as a community work on the value proposition of what is being offered first before 'enforcing' anything.
NAF Regional Tourney Organiser (Oz/ NZ)

13th Worldwide to 24 Teams :)

Results by Team: Play the 24+2 :)
Sport: Necro, Ogre
Painted: 24hr Painting Challenge
Wins: 15/26 Teams (enjoyin the 26)
Podiums: 25/26

www.ausbowl.com or Ausbowl (FB) - Oz BB
NZ Blood Bowl Community (FB) - NZ BB

User avatar
D_Arquebus
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 6578
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:45 pm
BB League: SLOBB + SWL
Location: Sydney

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by D_Arquebus »

Now i quite like the current value proposition offered. :)

Record of all/most ( :P ) games and a shiny gift. Not bad for a one time cost of $15 and then the option to renew should you want the new shiny :).

Me? I enjoy playing all 24 teams and working to get a positive record for all - coincidentally leading to more Blood Bowl against new players :) (thus the purpose of this thread :) ). Now I occasionally lose a game or two to history due to someone not signing up, but over all I'd prefer to play 100 new opponents who never signed up then not get a chance to play them.
NAF Regional Tourney Organiser (Oz/ NZ)

13th Worldwide to 24 Teams :)

Results by Team: Play the 24+2 :)
Sport: Necro, Ogre
Painted: 24hr Painting Challenge
Wins: 15/26 Teams (enjoyin the 26)
Podiums: 25/26

www.ausbowl.com or Ausbowl (FB) - Oz BB
NZ Blood Bowl Community (FB) - NZ BB

User avatar
tribalsinner
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 5000
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:32 am
BB League: SWL
Favourite Race: Human
Location: Jesters Court

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by tribalsinner »

Everyone is welcome to their opinion.

Tournaments could quite easily subsidize the cost for new players. Join them up as part of their rego. Then they also get shiny gifts as part of their players pack and possible incentive to jump into the hobby more. It's completely up to the organiser though.

The easiest fix is for the NAF to introduce a neutral robot account so that all games would count. That's the main issue. Having all results count for validity. Of course the NAF struggle with the smallest things at the best of times. Hopefully they start to turn a corner soon.
Image

User avatar
fnord23
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 6:31 pm
BB League: FOTM
Favourite Race: Vampire
Location: left off centre

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by fnord23 »

This came up in a conversation at EucBowl briefly, I tend to agree with you Pete but if someone has been told all about the NAF, its job, its stats, its history & how the rankings work - and then still doesn't want to join; I don't think they should be forced to. We are so close to 100% on the East Coast its annoying though.

Also, part of the tourney sanctioning guidelines allows members to opt out of ranking points for a given tourney, no one has done this in OZ AFAIK but the fact that is there perhaps suggests that NAF membership will never be mandatory.

"....No member has to play for Coach Rating points. If he or she views a tournament ruleset particularly disadvantageous to his/her chosen race, they can simply opt out of putting Coach Rating points on the line. Note that this has to be for the entire tournament, they can???t pick and choose which games will count for rankings, and it has to be declared prior to the opening game, i.e: pre tournament not during or post tournament...."
NAF RTC for Penriff

yeah lots of 2nds & lots of draws

User avatar
Rabid_Bogscum
Frank N Stein
Frank N Stein
Posts: 16312
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 6:19 am
BB League: SLOBB
Favourite Race: Skaven
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Rabid_Bogscum »

Ha ha wasnt aware of that decree
Commish of SLOBB
ATC Champions 2012, 2016, 2018
NSW State Rep 2011, 2013, 2015 (Champs), 2017 (Champs)

Champion: Leviathan '08, Eucalyptus Bowl 4, Sandgroper V, Southern Shrike Bowl 4, Dragon Bowl, TSP '13, GOM '13, Gosford Gauntlet '14, Jokerbowl '15, MOAB '16, Cancon '17, Eucalyptus Bowl 14

User avatar
D_Arquebus
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 6578
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:45 pm
BB League: SLOBB + SWL
Location: Sydney

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by D_Arquebus »

sangraal wrote: "....No member has to play for Coach Rating points. If he or she views a tournament ruleset particularly disadvantageous to his/her chosen race, they can simply opt out of putting Coach Rating points on the line. Note that this has to be for the entire tournament, they can???t pick and choose which games will count for rankings, and it has to be declared prior to the opening game, i.e: pre tournament not during or post tournament...."
Yeah that is funny because it goes against the main benefit (to me) of the record keeping aspect. Who is so enamoured of their "ranking" that they would "protect" it in that way? ::)
NAF Regional Tourney Organiser (Oz/ NZ)

13th Worldwide to 24 Teams :)

Results by Team: Play the 24+2 :)
Sport: Necro, Ogre
Painted: 24hr Painting Challenge
Wins: 15/26 Teams (enjoyin the 26)
Podiums: 25/26

www.ausbowl.com or Ausbowl (FB) - Oz BB
NZ Blood Bowl Community (FB) - NZ BB

User avatar
Moraiwe
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 5739
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:11 pm
BB League: MBBL
Favourite Race: Khemri
Location: Richmond, VIC

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Moraiwe »

To be honest, I'd be tempted to opt out of NAF rankings. Not because I want to protect them (I have nothing worth protecting), but now that I know how they work I'd rather not support them as I consider them fundamentally flawed. Also I'm not particularly enamoured with NAF anyway. I only allow my games to be ranked now because others want it so.
I feel only two things: nothing and nothingness.

User avatar
Fassbinder75
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:06 pm
BB League: MBBL
Favourite Race: High Elf
Location: North Melbourne
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Fassbinder75 »

Somebody remind me why we subscribe to this organisation again? That is an honest question by the way.

The nicely coloured block dice are now OOP. The rankings it turns out are optional, never mind that they reward those that play more games (ie Europeans) and they offer no leadership or vision in terms of reviewing the rule set.

I pay my subs because Hutchie still has a big sack of block dice. The NAF is moribund.

User avatar
fnord23
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 6:31 pm
BB League: FOTM
Favourite Race: Vampire
Location: left off centre

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by fnord23 »

@fassbinder
If you are going to beat me again in a tourney I have no problem with you opting out........ :-)

In all seriousness though, we pay $15 to join once (renewal is not mandatory but all games still count) --- even if the ONLY benefits are the "Grudge Match" & "Aust Tourney Legends" threads in here its IMO STILL WORTH IT. The personal tourney stats page is IMO worth it alone.

No other system has this, in no other system can I say the equivalent of "I've scored over 100 touchdowns with Dwarves" & be able to prove it in 10 seconds.
NAF RTC for Penriff

yeah lots of 2nds & lots of draws

User avatar
Foad
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 1847
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:15 am
BB League: SWL+DIBBL
Favourite Race: Underworld

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Foad »

At my first CANCON I was running skaven, and I opted out...

I wanted it to be fun, and if I got mauled in game #1 I didn't want it to bury my rating...

User avatar
fnord23
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 6:31 pm
BB League: FOTM
Favourite Race: Vampire
Location: left off centre

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by fnord23 »

I wished I had opted out of last CANCON :-(

Not really....... :-)
NAF RTC for Penriff

yeah lots of 2nds & lots of draws

User avatar
Rabid_Bogscum
Frank N Stein
Frank N Stein
Posts: 16312
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 6:19 am
BB League: SLOBB
Favourite Race: Skaven
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Rabid_Bogscum »

Yeah look.. if I bring my son to a tourney I would probably join him up but If he stays interested I wouldnt discourage hom from rejoining under a new moniker and have rankings more reflective of his abilities.
Commish of SLOBB
ATC Champions 2012, 2016, 2018
NSW State Rep 2011, 2013, 2015 (Champs), 2017 (Champs)

Champion: Leviathan '08, Eucalyptus Bowl 4, Sandgroper V, Southern Shrike Bowl 4, Dragon Bowl, TSP '13, GOM '13, Gosford Gauntlet '14, Jokerbowl '15, MOAB '16, Cancon '17, Eucalyptus Bowl 14

User avatar
lolvenom
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:25 pm
BB League: SLOBB
Favourite Race: Ogre

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by lolvenom »

Jeez, if I could wipe out my early results I would too.

You're such a dirty stat whore ;)

User avatar
Fassbinder75
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:06 pm
BB League: MBBL
Favourite Race: High Elf
Location: North Melbourne
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Fassbinder75 »

sangraal wrote:@fassbinder
If you are going to beat me again in a tourney I have no problem with you opting out........ :-)
I wonder when you can opt out? After your opponent rolls a blitz ;)

The money is not an issue for me, its the fact that they occupy the position of 'official organising body' for the player base but offer a lot of the player base very little (league players) and nothing for those that play other formats (FUMBBL, Cyanide).

There's a lot of scope, but little vision from a blinkered leadership (especially towards Cyanide) and a slavish devotion to Jervis Johnson and the vain hope of winning back GW's heart.

I don't really want to be incendiary, but the continued underachievment baffles me at times, thats all. I can't fault you for representin' :)

User avatar
Rabid_Bogscum
Frank N Stein
Frank N Stein
Posts: 16312
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 6:19 am
BB League: SLOBB
Favourite Race: Skaven
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Rabid_Bogscum »

lolvenom wrote:Jeez, if I could wipe out my early results I would too.

You're such a dirty stat whore ;)
we dont all start playing great eh...at least you've gotten better poor virral won his first tourney and has done nothing in 10 years since (besides a few submariner podiums)
Commish of SLOBB
ATC Champions 2012, 2016, 2018
NSW State Rep 2011, 2013, 2015 (Champs), 2017 (Champs)

Champion: Leviathan '08, Eucalyptus Bowl 4, Sandgroper V, Southern Shrike Bowl 4, Dragon Bowl, TSP '13, GOM '13, Gosford Gauntlet '14, Jokerbowl '15, MOAB '16, Cancon '17, Eucalyptus Bowl 14

User avatar
D_Arquebus
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 6578
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:45 pm
BB League: SLOBB + SWL
Location: Sydney

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by D_Arquebus »

sangraal wrote:In all seriousness though, we pay $15 to join once (renewal is not mandatory but all games still count) --- even if the ONLY benefits are the "Grudge Match" & "Aust Tourney Legends" threads in here its IMO STILL WORTH IT. The personal tourney stats page is IMO worth it alone.
This. Shiny toys are shiny and worth $15 ($5 of which goes back to AUS and NZ tournaments as prize support - thanks Babs :) ) . Otherwise one time sign up is sufficient at this point for life for the purposes of recording your games. If anything i would like to see the records developed further so (like SSB) we could easily see what rulesets and tourneys have attracted what types of teams as time passes.

My NAF record has all the scars of learning to play all 24 teams (plus 80 games of Stunties ;D ) . But I really could not care less. I personlly feel the lack of every game that hasn't been recorded because I like to remember who I have played and when. 400 odd games plus leagues they do tend to blur together and having a reminder is cool.

Fact: People who play more games will be able to build a higher ranking. Who cares?

I think you'll find that the majority of AUS and NZ coaches with a ranking over 200 have played a lot of games with that team relative to or to the exclusion of the others. Who cares?

You get a bigger ranking through grinding the same team over and over. Does that make you a "better coach". No. At best it is an indication that you'll be a tough match up when using that particluar team. That is all. Heck, it may also gives some random trash talking creds you can spend frivilously on here and other forums.

I cannot imagine opting out from any tournament to protect a ranking or avoid the results counting. My biggest lament is the loss of my first Eucbowl results because I didn't get clued in to the NAF until the following year. The rankings give you something tangible to play with. Whether aiming for 24 teams (as more people are advising they are on Ausbowl all the time) to getting more rankings up over 200 (by being consistent with the win/ loss), to playing in more tournaments around AUS/ NZ or the Globe then others ;) . Encouraging more games of BB is a reward in and of itself :) .
NAF Regional Tourney Organiser (Oz/ NZ)

13th Worldwide to 24 Teams :)

Results by Team: Play the 24+2 :)
Sport: Necro, Ogre
Painted: 24hr Painting Challenge
Wins: 15/26 Teams (enjoyin the 26)
Podiums: 25/26

www.ausbowl.com or Ausbowl (FB) - Oz BB
NZ Blood Bowl Community (FB) - NZ BB

User avatar
D_Arquebus
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 6578
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 9:45 pm
BB League: SLOBB + SWL
Location: Sydney

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by D_Arquebus »

Fassbinder75 wrote:The money is not an issue for me, its the fact that they occupy the position of 'official organising body' for the player base but offer a lot of the player base very little (league players) and nothing for those that play other formats (FUMBBL, Cyanide).

There's a lot of scope, but little vision from a blinkered leadership (especially towards Cyanide) and a slavish devotion to Jervis Johnson and the vain hope of winning back GW's heart.

I don't really want to be incendiary, but the continued underachievment baffles me at times, thats all. I can't fault you for representin'
And I suppose that comes into the changes that have occurred recently (admittedly few) but a sign that change is possible. Voting for positions on the Committee and then holding them accountable to following through is what all good Democratic institutions are based upon? :)

I for one really feel the lack of Electronic representation and relevance (whether Cyanide or Fumbbl). I would love to see this developed more and to broaden the appeal of the offering from NAF to include all BB. Because at the end of the day the game is kept alive only in the consumer world of fans and bringing all those people together helps keep it so.
NAF Regional Tourney Organiser (Oz/ NZ)

13th Worldwide to 24 Teams :)

Results by Team: Play the 24+2 :)
Sport: Necro, Ogre
Painted: 24hr Painting Challenge
Wins: 15/26 Teams (enjoyin the 26)
Podiums: 25/26

www.ausbowl.com or Ausbowl (FB) - Oz BB
NZ Blood Bowl Community (FB) - NZ BB

User avatar
Fassbinder75
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 3066
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:06 pm
BB League: MBBL
Favourite Race: High Elf
Location: North Melbourne
Contact:

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Fassbinder75 »

Without wishing to pan NAF much further, its a further indictment that I'm (and probably others) are most excited to make James' list eventually.

Is it possible to take a periodical extract of the NAF's result's database - so that some enterprising soul might shape the data into meaningful ways of interest to the community - as James is doing in a manual capacity currently (I'm assuming)?

User avatar
Moraiwe
2011 Legend
2011 Legend
Posts: 5739
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:11 pm
BB League: MBBL
Favourite Race: Khemri
Location: Richmond, VIC

Re: NAF Ranked with 24 Teams

Post by Moraiwe »

D_Arquebus wrote:You get a bigger ranking through grinding the same team over and over.
This is only true if you keep winning. For some players, more games simply means lower ranking. Never really understood the argument that more games = higher ranking.

What D_Arquebus has said about having a place that stores all your results is true. I love that aspect. I'm happy to say that I'm sad enough to have recorded every competitive game I've played since I returned to Blood Bowl on my own spreadsheet.

My problem is that I see the rankings as a product of Garbage Input. They should have been reset (partially or fully) with the change to CRP. Khemri rankings are a joke, and any rankings affected by playing against pre-nerf Khemri have been tainted.

By allowing my games to be ranked, I'm giving tacit approval of the system. I really don't want to do that.
I feel only two things: nothing and nothingness.

Post Reply