European champ ...Sauron wrote:Team Spain looks a bit weighted. World Champ, National Champ, man oh man.
II. GCCG Nations Cup 2008 (Talk)
Germany is going to be in the house again, too. 
We could win Heiner for our team (ugh, I need a sponsor to pay his fee; so many beer....! please german breweries sponsor us!!)
We could win Heiner for our team (ugh, I need a sponsor to pay his fee; so many beer....! please german breweries sponsor us!!)
[url=http://gccg.sourceforge.net/]Come to GCCG or die a lonely death.[/url]
-
Bandobras Took
- Rules Wizard
- Posts: 3156
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Hooray! Competent USA representation (the GCCG tourney was woefully bereft of such.Sauron wrote:Team USA
Brian "Sauron" Min (Captain)
Mark "Zara" Alfano
Charles "Stone Troll" Jenkins
).How dare you call me competent! Take that back!Bandobras Took wrote:Hooray! Competent USA representation (the GCCG tourney was woefully bereft of such.Sauron wrote:Team USA
Brian "Sauron" Min (Captain)
Mark "Zara" Alfano
Charles "Stone Troll" Jenkins
-
i gwanunig
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:16 am
- Location: Graz, Austria
- Contact:
AUSTRIA will also participate.
Players are
Beornd, Thorondor & i gwanunig
LG
i.g.
Players are
Beornd, Thorondor & i gwanunig
LG
i.g.
What business does an Elf, a Man and a Dwarf have in the Steiermark? Speak quickly!
Hi all,
there are some people complaining about the system in which this tourny is played.
The argument: TP are considered more significant than wins. This could cause the following problem: If Team A plays Team B 6:0, 2:4, 2:4, Team A is considered the better team though loosing 2 out of 3 games. After all it could even happen, that a country looses 2 of its encounters and move to finals cause of a solid 3rd round (that actually happened last year when germany reached finals though loosing 2 times, while austria didnt reach finals though loosing only 1 encounter).
I like to know your opinion!
Keep up the Suisse System or switch that crap? Alternatives?
edit: These things have been discussed last year. That shouldnt mean that there is no need to change or that we shouldnt be open-minded for alternatives, right?
Check here for last years disussion
there are some people complaining about the system in which this tourny is played.
The argument: TP are considered more significant than wins. This could cause the following problem: If Team A plays Team B 6:0, 2:4, 2:4, Team A is considered the better team though loosing 2 out of 3 games. After all it could even happen, that a country looses 2 of its encounters and move to finals cause of a solid 3rd round (that actually happened last year when germany reached finals though loosing 2 times, while austria didnt reach finals though loosing only 1 encounter).
I like to know your opinion!
Keep up the Suisse System or switch that crap? Alternatives?
edit: These things have been discussed last year. That shouldnt mean that there is no need to change or that we shouldnt be open-minded for alternatives, right?
Check here for last years disussion
[url=http://gccg.sourceforge.net/]Come to GCCG or die a lonely death.[/url]
btw, in flanneltina vs spain last year, flanneltina won 2 out of 3 games 4-2 and spain won 1 game 6-0, but they won the pairing because they had more TPs...Alter Tuk wrote:Hi all,
there are some people complaining about the system in which this tourny is played.
The argument: TP are considered more significant than wins. This could cause the following problem: If Team A plays Team B 6:0, 2:4, 2:4, Team A is considered the better team though loosing 2 out of 3 games. After all it could even happen, that a country looses 2 of its encounters and move to finals cause of a solid 3rd round (that actually happened last year when germany reached finals though loosing 2 times, while austria didnt reach finals though loosing only 1 encounter).
I like to know your opinion!
Keep up the Suisse System or switch that crap? Alternatives?
edit: These things have been discussed last year. That shouldnt mean that there is no need to change or we shouldnt be open-minded for alternatives, right?
Check here for last years disussion
i don't have any suggestion (yet) but maybe, i think it needs some work to solve that crap. Anyway, if it gets solved or not, it suited me very well last year, i really ejoyed it and i don't have any complain
Uhh... Those people should try to come up with a working system and present it then. I spent a lot of time on this last year and IMO the current system is the best one for MeCCG.Alter Tuk wrote:there are some people complaining about the system in which this tourny is played.
Consider a hockey match. Home team wins first period 6-0, loses the second period 2-4 and loses the third period 2-4. At the end the home team won 10-8. You need to think of the individual games (player vs. player) as a part of the bigger game (team vs. team).Alter Tuk wrote:The argument: TP are considered more significant than wins. This could cause the following problem: If Team A plays Team B 6:0, 2:4, 2:4, Team A is considered the better team though loosing 2 out of 3 games. After all it could even happen, that a country looses 2 of its encounters and move to finals cause of a solid 3rd round (that actually happened last year when germany reached finals though loosing 2 times, while austria didnt reach finals though loosing only 1 encounter).
sry my friend but that was a bad argument - however 2 periods (soccer) 3 periods (ice-hockey) or 4 periods (australien football) that keeps one game and if you win you get the points.Consider a hockey match. Home team wins first period 6-0, loses the second period 2-4 and loses the third period 2-4. At the end the home team won 10-8.
nationscup is like daviescup in tennis. the winner is who get more victories in the five matches not how often you pulverize your opponent 6:0 6:0 6:0 ........hehe nice the same score table
You don't play for the number of wins in MeCCG tournaments (just like you don't play for the number of periods you win in hockey). You play for tournament points. If the wins are what counts, that will skew the whole game. If someone comes up with a system that is all about the wins but still works in the spirit of the game (One ring wins should be rewarded), by all means post it and I'll have a look-see.
In a normal 2-deck general opponent swiss tournament, that can happen too. During worlds in Barcelona, I was kicked out from the finals when having won 4 out of 5 games, while two of the finalists had won 3 out of 5. That crap is the standard MECCG swiss tournament format, no more no less. And I don't think we should change that. In 5 rounds, I can win all my games 4-2, making a total of 20 points, and someone can win only 3 of them 6-0 and then lose 2-4 and 1-5 and be in front of me.
But we should in nations......You don't play for the number of wins in MeCCG tournaments
swiss works very well but not here. a victory is a victory - dunk is a victory!!!
this is a nations cup, the only time we played it, was here. so it is an exception from the normal tournaments. the arguments - look above flanelltina and austria last year.
the balance in nations cup works very well for good players - is this the sense
AUSTRIA I is in so or so :mrgreen:
There's a reason why the scoring system of this game doesn't strictly adjust to number of wins: A measly dice roll can lose a game for you. I've seen many games where a player wins only by 1 measly MP, and that shouldn't be threated in the same way as a player that wins 30-0.
If someone comes with a good scoring system that can be fair with that, it should be looked up. At the moment people has just complaint but we have seen no alternatives so far.
If someone comes with a good scoring system that can be fair with that, it should be looked up. At the moment people has just complaint but we have seen no alternatives so far.