Dobbler said:

I certainly wasn't trying to make an all encompassing statement. But referring strictly to AGOT.

Why would FFG want to remove Overall when biggest identified downside in having Overall gets more people to play in melee who would otherwise not play in melee?

How does it benefit the community to have one less identified champion? One less champion card design?

I would agree that looking at changing the overall formula is something that they could do for next year...but to suggest to remove it because you didn't like the result this year is the ultimate in 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'. <insert obligatory Tyrion joke>

papalorax said:

well, read this thread and i am sure you will find an answer there:

www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp

in short: having players play a toruney they dont like very much is likely to create a no fun experience for many.

papalorax said:

if its only to have another opportunity for another champion card, i even more prefer the winner of the Drunken Draft to create such.

I have never really been a big fan of the overall champion, despite the fact it has benefited me (MN overall regional champion - I placed 2nd in Joust and 3rd in Melee).

And just because it gets more people in the melee event, it doesn't mean the melee event is better for it. I'd rather have people playing in the melee event who love melee rather than people who feel that they have to.

And the biggest indentified downside to overall is that more people play melee? Huh? From your argument, wouldn't that be an upside of having an overall champion?

Downsides of having an overall champion would be this:

- People gaming the system just to try and gain "overall" points

- Individual melee games meaning more to some people than others

- Size of meta "teams" having significant influence on the overall champion.

- People playing Melee who don't enjoy it but feel the need to compete for the "overall Champion"

- People worried about how many points they get as opposed to simply trying to win each game

Dobbler said:

This is my point (just said differently). If you feel there is a significant population that joined the melee only because of the overall, the result of removing the overall is then less people playing in the melee. FFG would be acting against their own interests to support something that did that.

Dobbler said:

What does this even mean? To the degree that people may have dumped games in the melee, I would fix that by pairing tables by swiss. In fact, in the final melee table Corey and Erick acted with a sole purpose to win the melee (resulting in Erick getting 3rd). If the overall was the most important thing it would have been more beneficial to have Erick win.

Also, to that end, if it were up to me I would have final placing be the criteria for Overall.

Dobbler said:

Seems to be the nature of melee. Swiss pairings would help.

Dobbler said:

Yes, but this is where removing the Overall doesn't benefit anyone. So instead of having a benefit for growing your meta...FFG should remove the potential benefit? Makes no sense to them.

I think I'm going to be sick posting this...

I believe that Overall Champion is good for GenCon and most tournaments. It gives an incentive for folks to play both formats which is good for the game. As some of you know, I only played in the melee because my other tourney was canceled. And I totally regretted playing. While I hate the idea of letting go of the opportunity of winning overall champion I am a much happier person not playing melee in a tournament format. This is just a personal choice.

The overall champ is a nice tip of the hat towards some folks that put in the time and effort. Hopefully they enjoy the formats too. If they don't, maybe they should reevaluate playing in one of them.

Honestly, I can't wait until they do an LCG overall champion and hold the invasion championship at a different time/day.

I have no problem with personal meta size affecting the Melee championships. Melee is a social game, and it will always be so. So going into a melee event, people can expect meta size to matter. But I don't think meta size should affect two different titles.

As for gaming the system, did you not read Zeiler's (Intentionally annonymous) post about the final melee table at the Missouri regional? (it was in a different thread)

Basically, at our final, two people were trying to win the table while two people were just trying to beat each other down due to total points standings. Basically, two people played due to "system" and two people played to win the game. Afterwards, everyone felt a little dirty.

FFG doesn't need more people at the melee tournaments. Melee, by definition, is such a social game, that most people play it as a fun format anyways. This game has grown exponentially over the past few years, but I think we would all agree that it isn't the organized play program that has grown it. Personally, I simply enjoy each format immensely more when they are played for the sake of that format only. My sweet 16 game in Gencon Melee was the an amazing game as each person was trying to win. My final table game at melee was one of the least enjoyable melee games I have ever played in my entire life.

Dobbler said:

Read it - definitely agree that melee should not be played after joust.

Dobbler said:

FFG insists on making melee competitive, it is not just a social fun format. They give a big prize and a card design to the winner. It is going to have circumstances where it just feels awful for people, with or without the overall prize. The final table this year is proof of that.

I would much rather try to envision a system that best accomplishes the goal of crowning an overall champion then suggest it would be better to drop it.

papalorax said:

I hear you. And if they can accomplish that, awesome. I guess I'm just pessimistic on this particular subject and I don't see it being possible.

papalorax said:

Well look at the numbers from the tournaments this year. 78 in melee and 71 in Joust. What do you think happened to those other 7 people that had played in Melee the day before but did not come out for the Joust? My guess is that after doing poorly in Melee(because they were required to play in order to compete for the overall title) they decided not to come to Joust since there was no point. The overall champion title would have been out of their reach. So you can also argue that having an Overall Champion title can reduce the number of players in Joust.

papalorax said:

Well I guess that Erick saw fit to help out his friend Corey for all the years of Corey building his decks for him. Corey had the stronger board position so it was easy to ensure that he won by him directing all his challenges at either Greg(because he had nothing on the board) or Erick(who just let them all go unopposed). Also a timely Citadel Custom by Erick targeting Corey was blatantly obvious as to what was happening.

papalorax said:

The benefit of growing you meta is that you have a bigger meta and more money goes to FFG to keep making a great game. A bigger meta means you have more players for the other 363 days a year that Gencon is not going on.

Dobbler said:

I felt bad for you just standing there watching. It was like a train wreck that you just could not look away from. Sorry about how that went down, Greg.

clu said:

I'll get Mike to send you a picture of yourself in a kilt, that'll make you feel better.

clu said:

~Wait, people play W:I?!?!?

Here's what we are going to do to save the Overall Championship, now granted I have no idea HOW to do it, but that's what smart people are for. Make Organized Play some sort of year long thing with actual rankings and include Regionals and Gen-Con results in it, and that's how the Overall is determined. Sort of like the League champ in the Prem with Joust being the FA Cup. (Ok not a perfect analogy since I suggested counting Gen-Con results but still, you get my point. And I guess that'd make Melee the Carling Cup? Ouch)

Or, more ill. I had a pretty good "lunge" going on if I remember correctly... Ranking are another issue that i'd love to see come back. However, I understand it's more work on FFG's end with very little pay out. You could crown a Player of Year sort of thing though. (i can already hear the point system arguements...) We still haven't seen results from the leagues that FFG has run already.

I guess we need positive ideas. Math to the rescue!

widowmaker93 said:

___

___

finitesquarewell said:

This isn't even close to true. My final table during the "swiss" portion of Gencon Melee was also a "game the system" round. Just ask Mallesh, Sandy, or Robert Rief about that table. It was not an actual game, but a puppeteering of placements.

___

___

I did it. it was more of a response to a couple of the other players banding together early and I didn't want them to win, but I played kingmaker based on overall.