Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gencon 2005 Event Registration Information

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 1:28:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Event Information:

Game ID: TCG00298
Title: North American Championships Last Chance Qualifier
Event Description: The last qualifier before the North American
Championships. This is a standard constructed tournament with three
rounds plus a final. No elimination (everyone plays all three rounds).
Each round is three hours. The first round starts promptly at 4:00 pm,
so arrive early.
Event Type: TCG - Tradable Card/Dice Game
Game System: Vampire: The Eternal Struggle CCG
Rules Edition: Current
Age Requirement: Teen (13+)
Experience Required: Some Experience Needed
Event Duration (hours): 8
Event Start Date: 8/18/05 4:00 PM
Event End Date: 8/19/05 12:00 AM
Event Cost: $6.00
Gaming Group/Sponsor: White Wolf Publishing / Camarilla
Game Master Name(s): Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
Location: TCG HQ
Event limit: 80
Registrations Available: 64


Game ID: TCG00299
Title: North American Championship Round 1 and Shadow Twin
Event Type: TCG - Tradable Card/Dice Game
Game System: Vampire: The Eternal Struggle CCG
Rules Edition: Current
Age Requirement: Teen (13+)
Experience Required: Some Experience Needed
Event Duration (hours): 8
Event Start Date: 8/19/05 12:00 PM
Event Cost: $6.00
Gaming Group/Sponsor: White Wolf Publishing / Camarilla
Game Master Name(s): Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
Location: TCG HQ


Game ID: TCG00300
Title: North American Championship Round 2 and Shadow Twin Draft
Event Type: TCG - Tradable Card/Dice Game
Game System: Vampire: The Eternal Struggle CCG
Rules Edition: Current
Age Requirement: Teen (13+)
Experience Required: Some Experience Needed
Event Duration (hours): 8
Event Start Date: 8/20/05 12:00 PM
Event Cost: $6.00
Gaming Group/Sponsor: White Wolf Publishing / Camarilla
Game Master Name(s): Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
Location: TCG HQ









Thanks for Jay Kristoff (http://columbusvtes.tripod.com) and LSJ for
the info.

















Carpe noctem.

Lasombra

http://www.TheLasombra.com

Your best online source for information about V:TES.
Now also featuring individual card sales and sales
of booster and starter box displays.
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 6:17:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

The Lasombra wrote:
> Event Information:
>
> Game ID: TCG00298
> Title: North American Championships Last Chance Qualifier
> >
> Game ID: TCG00299
> Title: North American Championship Round 1 and Shadow Twin
> >
>
> Game ID: TCG00300
> Title: North American Championship Round 2 and Shadow Twin Draft

Don't forget:

Event ID: 1865
Game ID: TCG00301
Title: Create-A-Clan Open
Event Description: An unsanctioned format. Each player brings a crypt
of custom vampires he or she creates for this event (see for rules on
vampire creation and other details).
Event Type: TCG - Tradable Card/Dice Game
Game System: Vampire: The Eternal Struggle CCG
Rules Edition: Current
Age Requirement: Teen (13+)
Experience Required: Some Experience Needed
Event Duration (hours): 6
Event Start Date: 8/21/05 9:00 AM
Event End Date: 8/21/05 3:00 PM
Event Cost: $4.50
Gaming Group/Sponsor: White Wolf Publishing / Camarilla
Game Master Name(s): Vampire: Elder Kindred Network
Location: TCG HQ
Event limit: 150
Registrations Available: 145

-Ben Swainbank
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 6:21:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Thanks for the insight. I would say I agree mostly with why it is two
days. Doesn't really answer any of my main beef's however which is why
its held at gencon? and why you have to pay so much to some other
company to play in the championship. Look all i'm saying is if you are
going to start having an event that is 3 days long...trying to paste it
on top of another event that is only 4 days long isnt such a steller
idea. in my case gencon is 4 days of gaming. there are things other
then VTES that might be fun to do, but this championship is basically
an all or nothing deal. they are saying, if you want to play VTES we
are going to own your whole weekend, and you are going to pay and pay
and pay for it. i dont think that kind of hardline strategy is good
for a game seeking player growth. i would imagine it would be better
for gencon to be showcasing VTES in smaller 1-2 round tournaments that
people could stop in for between other events and give it a try rather
then having to commit such a tremendous amount of time to. it is,
after all, gencon: the game convention and not, VTES the weekend. as
much fun as it would be to have VTES: the weekend i think those 2
should be seperate and the bigger picture should be examined.

and when, exactly, would you do demoing for 8 hours if you are playing
8 hour tournaments 3 days straight? maybe i will. VTES iron man!
Related resources
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 7:28:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"The NosferatuStuff" <roansteele@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1120771311.065055.137990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks for the insight. I would say I agree mostly with why it is two
> days. Doesn't really answer any of my main beef's however which is why
> its held at gencon? and why you have to pay so much to some other
> company to play in the championship. Look all i'm saying is if you are
> going to start having an event that is 3 days long...trying to paste it
> on top of another event that is only 4 days long isnt such a steller
> idea.

Yes, I see what you're getting at. If reducing the cost for participants
is a priority, you're right: a better way to do that would be to hold the
NAC at some other venue. In theory, they could even hold it alongside
Gencon at another venue in Indianapolis over the same days. That way,
people who want to go back and forth could still do that.

I don't know exactly what considerations lead White Wolf to do the NAC
the way they do. However, were I the one in charge, I would be want
the maximum exposure for my game which translates into having my big
year-end super-cool championship-of-da-hol'-woild tournament actually
take place _in_ the biggest game convention of the year where lots of
players, retailers, and game business luminaries could see it on the
schedule and in the flesh. I think it's especially impressive that
scores of players are sitting around playing in a single tournament
and if that tournament is a 2-day affair, so much the better. That may
not be much help for you in the short run, but if it drums up more
business in the long run, that means more players for us and hence,
more opportunities to play. Anyway, just my $0.02. I don't really
know one way or the other, myself.

Fred
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:25:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Frederick Scott wrote:
> "The NosferatuStuff" <roansteele@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1120771311.065055.137990@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > Thanks for the insight. I would say I agree mostly with why it is two
> > days. Doesn't really answer any of my main beef's however which is why
> > its held at gencon? and why you have to pay so much to some other
> > company to play in the championship. Look all i'm saying is if you are
> > going to start having an event that is 3 days long...trying to paste it
> > on top of another event that is only 4 days long isnt such a steller
> > idea.

What's especially funny is that V:TES players have been known to tack
on a few extra days of our own *before* GenCon even starts. So the
Week of Nightmares is 7+ days of V:TES pasted on top of another event
that is only 4 days long. Frankly, I'd be just giddy to ditch GenCon.
I think a roving event might be nice. I'll fly to Mexico City one
year, somewhere in Canada the next, then Boston or Atlanta or Las Vegas
or Seattle... yum!

> Yes, I see what you're getting at. If reducing the cost for participants
> is a priority, you're right: a better way to do that would be to hold the
> NAC at some other venue. In theory, they could even hold it alongside
> Gencon at another venue in Indianapolis over the same days. That way,
> people who want to go back and forth could still do that.

The smarties at GenCon are all over this. They go out of their way to
make sure people don't run events in Indy as a way of bypassing the
entrance fees.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 8:33:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
news:1120778708.792529.154770@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Frederick Scott wrote:
>> Yes, I see what you're getting at. If reducing the cost for participants
>> is a priority, you're right: a better way to do that would be to hold the
>> NAC at some other venue. In theory, they could even hold it alongside
>> Gencon at another venue in Indianapolis over the same days. That way,
>> people who want to go back and forth could still do that.
>
> The smarties at GenCon are all over this. They go out of their way to
> make sure people don't run events in Indy as a way of bypassing the
> entrance fees.

Hmmm. That's interesting. How do they propose to do that, if then entities
involved are completely independent of GenCon? I can see an approach to
regulating, say, a company like White Wolf if White Wolf wants to run a
booth and any activities at GenCon. But if some group that kept GenCon at
arm's length in their business dealings just ran some event in parallel with
GenCon, I don't see what GenCon could do about it.

Fred
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 9:54:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
> news:1120778708.792529.154770@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Frederick Scott wrote:
> >> Yes, I see what you're getting at. If reducing the cost for participants
> >> is a priority, you're right: a better way to do that would be to hold the
> >> NAC at some other venue. In theory, they could even hold it alongside
> >> Gencon at another venue in Indianapolis over the same days. That way,
> >> people who want to go back and forth could still do that.
> >
> > The smarties at GenCon are all over this. They go out of their way to
> > make sure people don't run events in Indy as a way of bypassing the
> > entrance fees.
>
> Hmmm. That's interesting. How do they propose to do that, if then entities
> involved are completely independent of GenCon? I can see an approach to
> regulating, say, a company like White Wolf if White Wolf wants to run a
> booth and any activities at GenCon. But if some group that kept GenCon at
> arm's length in their business dealings just ran some event in parallel with
> GenCon, I don't see what GenCon could do about it.

For starters, no hotel in Indy is going to risk their relationship with
GenCon so they can cater exclusively to VtesCon that just happens to be
running the same weekend. So that places your event at the airport
hotels instead of downtown.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 10:52:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Johannes Walch wrote:
> Robert Goudie wrote:
> > For starters, no hotel in Indy is going to risk their relationship with
> > GenCon so they can cater exclusively to VtesCon that just happens to be
> > running the same weekend. So that places your event at the airport
> > hotels instead of downtown.
>
> Why stick to Indy (and GenCon) anyway? Indy is totally boring and in the
> middle of nowhere. I could imagine a bunch of better places all over the US.

I think (thought?) Fred was talking about running an event in Indy
without actually making people pay the GenCon admission. I could have
misunderstood, of course.

You are sooooo right. We can do much better than Indy. I think the EC
is a fine example of how a rotating event can work. Of course, the EC
could have instead been located centrally or located at Euro GenCon and
everyone be forced to travel every year but what could be more fair
than sharing the hosting privilege. :)  I was daydreaming with a buddy
yesterday about someday hosting a NAC event in Los Angeles on the Queen
Mary or at a Hollywood landmark or Las Vegas. I'd also love to go to
Canada or Boston or Atlanta or New York.

I can understand WW wanting *exposure* for V:TES but GenCon V:TES
events would still exist at Indy even if the NAC were held elsewhere.
I mean, people go to Origins, right? I flew to GenCon event before the
NAC existed. Frankly, I think that if people are looking to try new
games, they'll demo in the dealer room. I doubt many people even
realize V:TES is in the CCG room let alone actually become interested
in the game by seeing it played at GenCon. And we aren't getting
casual V:TES players to just stop by for a game...the only people
playing V:TES at GenCon are hardcore V:TES players--especially now that
the V:TES events take up 3 of the 4 days at GenCon.

Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:07:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Andreas Nusser wrote:
> I doubt that there has been ever a VTES demo game at GenCon at the WW booth!

Having been in one, I would disagree.
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:19:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Andreas Nusser wrote:
> Robert Goudie schrieb:
> > You are sooooo right. We can do much better than Indy. I think the EC
> > is a fine example of how a rotating event can work. Of course, the EC
> > could have instead been located centrally or located at Euro GenCon
>
> Using the EURO GenCon would increase the entry fee again. Better be
> independent and rent cheap locations.

I agree. I brought it up because some people view Indy as a good
location because it is centrally located. But of course "Centrally
located" is just a fancy way of saying "always far away" or "always
close", depending on where you live. :) 

> > I can understand WW wanting *exposure* for V:TES but GenCon V:TES
> > events would still exist at Indy even if the NAC were held elsewhere.
> > I mean, people go to Origins, right? I flew to GenCon event before the
> > NAC existed. Frankly, I think that if people are looking to try new
> > games, they'll demo in the dealer room. I doubt many people even
> > realize V:TES is in the CCG room let alone actually become interested
> > in the game by seeing it played at GenCon.
>
> I doubt that there has been ever a VTES demo game at GenCon at the WW booth!

I don't think I'd go that far. :)  Oscar is currently getting
volunteers for demoing at GenCon. I'm just saying that aspect can
continue even if there's no NAC.

> > Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!
>
> Yep! I am all for it.

Excellent! Okay, now we've got two of us on board with the plan. :) 

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:50:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
news:1120835986.710565.82520@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> > Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!
>>
>> Yep! I am all for it.
>
> Excellent! Okay, now we've got two of us on board with the plan. :) 

Strategicon left a bad taste in your mouth? Los Angeles broke free of
the convention mode for tournaments after years and years. Now you're
trying to export the revolution? ;-)

Fred
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 1:11:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Andreas Nusser" <a.nusser@vekn.de> wrote in message
> news:D am423$p7k$1@news01.versatel.de...
> > I think it is better to do a benefit-cost analysis. IMO it is hardly worth the money to be present with VTES at GenCon.
>
> I'll put it this way: a *LOT* of game companies seem to disagree with
> the concept that it's not worth being present at GenCon. And if you're
> going to be present, why not put 80+ gamers on display playing your
> game on multiple days in front of the precisely right group of people
> you want seeing that? Demo, support, and advertise all you like, I
> just don't know HOW a game company is going to buy that kind of
> publicity by other methods.

I'm not sure about how all of this works together. Is the actual
tournament itself meant to attract new players? It would seem different
companies have different goals. For some, they make a big spectacle and
try to attract attention and gain interest in their games--the CCG room
becomes an extension of the dealer room! For others, the CCG room is
just where the game is played and the dealer room is where they try to
attract new players.

For me personally, I explore new games in the dealer room. The CCG room
is where people go to play whatever game they spent all that money
(entrance fee, plane tickets, etc.) to come play.

In any event, V:TES has never made much of their convention
appearances--even when we had those fancy 6ft tall standees. I doubt
anybody even knows we are playing V:TES in the CCG room. Other than
the listing in the book, V:TES gets little publicity by holding the NAC
event at GenCon. If WW doesn't want to sponsor the con itself and put
V:TES in a big spot by the door and hang 50 foot banners, give out demo
decks to all attendees and display the games on TV screens then we're
not really putting 80+ gamers on display anyway--we're just leasing the
tables.

If the players must spend money to use GenCon's venue so that WW can
get publicity for the game, I'd rather take up a collection and buy
some additional magazine advertisement. :)  Hell, I'll bet we could get
a couple of pages writeup in a game magazine about a standalone V:TES
event held outside of GenCon. Whereas, at GenCon itself we're a small
fish in a big pond.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 1:15:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Frederick Scott wrote:
> Los Angeles broke free of
> the convention mode for tournaments after years and years. Now you're
> trying to export the revolution? ;-)

Well,

It seems to me (in my opinion) that the quality of Gencon has declined
in the last couple of years. Yes, Indianapolis is a better location
for travel and hotels. But I agree with some previous responses that
perhaps a rotating location might be better, especially with a
multi-day championship.

Of course this year I'm staying home, saving a week's worth of time and
approximately $1500 (and this doesn't count the time and money saved by
not having to attend a Qualifier). To get the same prize support as
the NAC finalists, I'm going to spend about one minute online and order
2 boxes of KMW for $130. Look, I made out better than if I had
attended the NAC at Gencon.

Perhaps WW should come up with some kind of incentive to make spending
a week's vacation time and $1500 more attractive-to encourage "local"
players to branch out and play in higher level events. Now here comes
the "play for the love of the game" responses.

Ben Spaulding
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 3:24:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Robert Goudie wrote:
> In any event, V:TES has never made much of their convention
> appearances--even when we had those fancy 6ft tall standees. I doubt
> anybody even knows we are playing V:TES in the CCG room. Other than
> the listing in the book, V:TES gets little publicity by holding the NAC
> event at GenCon.

You don't count the (local?) TV coverage at GenCon 2004?
They interviewed Steve Wieck during either the Championship or the last
chance qualifier last year.
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 3:43:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

LSJ wrote:
> Robert Goudie wrote:
> > In any event, V:TES has never made much of their convention
> > appearances--even when we had those fancy 6ft tall standees. I doubt
> > anybody even knows we are playing V:TES in the CCG room. Other than
> > the listing in the book, V:TES gets little publicity by holding the NAC
> > event at GenCon.
>
> You don't count the (local?) TV coverage at GenCon 2004?
> They interviewed Steve Wieck during either the Championship or the last
> chance qualifier last year.

Yeah, I remember that. I think it was for the Game Show Network. I
looked for it on TV for a long time afterwards and never saw anything.

So no, I don't count that. :) 

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 3:50:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

James Coupe wrote:
[clip]

> A good solid show of tournaments and events (newbie tuition,
> competitions, promo giveaways etc.) can have a beneficial effect on
> keeping the game, especially if you can get a large number of players
> involved. (Where "large" is "bigger than any current non-Magic/Pokemon
> type game.)
>
> I mean, I might pick up a deck or two of a game if it looks interesting,
> but if I can play a newbie tuition thing now and join in a tournament
> this evening, I'm going to enjoy it more. And quite possibly buy more
> stuff.

That's probably a good way to go. Though, that sounds better suited to
a GenCon with more and smaller tournaments instead of a Last Chance
qualifier and two-day championship. People rarely play in a demo and
then commit 6+ hours to a tournament.

> Also, with a game like V:TES which has been around for ages, a good show
> of tournaments can make people think "Oh, that's still going. And it's
> not just 10 players in the championship. Coo. Maybe I'll dig out my
> cards..."

Certainly true.

> Of course, on top of that, you're aiming to get all the existing players
> enjoying things, buying new cards to compete with, or whatever.

Of course. That part is the same even if you rotate the event. I don't
see the European players suffering from the rotating format.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 4:27:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

The NosferatuStuff wrote:
> I'm sure this is some how the fault of the europeans! haha

Certainly not. The "European" proposal was a 2 day event, the 3 day
suggestion was made by US players. And we did our European Championship
separated from any type of convention. It costed 10EUR for the whole
weekend and we had nearly 200 players in total at the event. Most of
them had good fun AFAIK.

--
johannes walch
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 4:30:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Robert Goudie wrote:
> For starters, no hotel in Indy is going to risk their relationship with
> GenCon so they can cater exclusively to VtesCon that just happens to be
> running the same weekend. So that places your event at the airport
> hotels instead of downtown.

Why stick to Indy (and GenCon) anyway? Indy is totally boring and in the
middle of nowhere. I could imagine a bunch of better places all over the US.

--
johannes walch
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 4:30:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Johannes Walch" <johannes.walch@vekn.de> wrote in message
news:D alkjc$dcq$2@news01.versatel.de...
> Robert Goudie wrote:
>> For starters, no hotel in Indy is going to risk their relationship with
>> GenCon so they can cater exclusively to VtesCon that just happens to be
>> running the same weekend. So that places your event at the airport
>> hotels instead of downtown.
>
> Why stick to Indy (and GenCon) anyway? Indy is totally boring and in the middle of nowhere. I could imagine a bunch of better
> places all over the US.

Well, for Robert's purposes, just because that was the theorectical question
I was posing for him: "How can GenCon stop other entities from running
events in Indianapolis in parallel with GenCon?" It was kind of a side
question.

To play Devil's Advocate, the reason to hold a NAC in Indy over the GenCon
days is so players who WANT to can go back and forth between it and GenCon
and those who don't won't have to pay for a GenCon badge fee. In this
whole thread, I'm hearing a lot from gamers who's incentive it is to get
only VTES play for the plane-fare/car-rental/hotel-accomadations/badge-fee
money. There are a lot of VTES players who wouldn't mind dabbling in other
games and GenCon is a huge orgy of other games. It's why Fabio Macedo said
the South American Continental Championship was held so early this year:
because that was the weekend when the big South American game convention
was held. A lot of people like to do it all in one week.

That said, I personally don't think it's written in stone that the
Continental Championship has to be held that way. I'm just saying it has
its appeal.

Fred
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 4:32:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Wouldnt that be 3? cause I seems to remember starting the complaining
about this. (cause that's all i really do is come out of torpor to
complain about things that are screwing with my lovely game)

seriously the one side seems to be saying: "we need people taking up
space at con's" and the other side seems to be saying "we need to hold
our big tournaments someplace other then con's" Well it seems to be
that those 2 things are not mutually exclusive. just because we save
our big tournaments for our own VTES:Con doesnt mean no one would show
up and play at gencon ever. Think about it this way, we are already
packing full time tournaments into the con's. Origins was running 5
thursday nights, 2 on friday, 2 saturday, and another 1 sunday. when
does the VTES population have a chance to get out and do any demoing?
word of mouth advertising? i'd seriously venture to say that no one
that plays vtes has time to pick up on interest people show by checking
out the cards for the games because of how long we are trapped in
tournaments.

new guy: "hey this game looks fun. i just checked out the white wolf
booth and got a couple precon's"
any VTES player: "sweet, this game rocks and you will love it. its got
everything that the other CCG's are missing"
new guy: "alright, well do you want to play or can you help me tweek my
deck"
any VTES player: "sure, just stick around till after this tournament
and we'll all help you, we're already half done!"
new guy: "awesome, half done huh, so you should be done and ready to
help me soon?"
any VTES player: "yeah half done, so there is only more hours to wait!"
new guy: "uhhh, i'll stop back later then..." <---famous last words
from a person who will never show up again

i really think the best way to solve the VTES problem is to change the
way tournaments run at the big conventions. there should be small
every other hour tournaments, 1 round each. make it more of a parallel
to the magic arena style where you may play in five different 1 round
events over the weekend, 1 of which may have been sealed, 2 constructed
and 2 draft...and then tally the results at the end for a final final
or a couple of finals. give diversity to the events. give breaks to
people so that we, the VTES people can actually leave the fuzzy green
tables and go experience the rest of the con and not miss out on
playing for the next 4-6 hours. let new players get in for a short
time commitment, with the ability to try new decks or tweek their
existing ones.

-Stuff
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 5:50:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"The NosferatuStuff" <roansteele@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1120851148.631443.144750@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> seriously the one side seems to be saying: "we need people taking up
> space at con's" and the other side seems to be saying "we need to hold
> our big tournaments someplace other then con's" Well it seems to be
> that those 2 things are not mutually exclusive. just because we save
> our big tournaments for our own VTES:Con doesnt mean no one would show
> up and play at gencon ever.

No, but I think you're missing the point. The attraction of an NAC is
much higher than just some random VtES tournaments. Though admittedly,
it sounds like the way Kevin did up Origins has a separate form of appeal.
But it's not the same thing as attending a "big, important" tournament.
So the point is EXACTLY having the big championship tournament in the
same place as the all-games orgy. So people can enjoy both in a single
trip.

> Think about it this way, we are already
> packing full time tournaments into the con's.

When I did WoN, I actually liked that schedule. Night and day VtES
for the few days leading up to GenCon, then official tournaments during
the day mixed in with roaming the dealer room and other types of games
during the evening. Late at night, more VtES back in the hotel and then
sleep was gotten....I forget...when did I get any sleep? Whatever.
The point is, you can only get that mix at GenCon.

> i'd seriously venture to say that no one
> that plays vtes has time to pick up on interest people show by checking
> out the cards for the games because of how long we are trapped in
> tournaments.

But, again, you're missing the point. Just getting someone's attention
with large tournaments going on the floor is the point. I don't think
it's necessary to understand the exact process through which each
individual new player gets hooked. Many may not do anything about it
at GenCon at all but the game will register when they see it played back
in their home city. Or they may wander by the WW booth and see it later.
Who knows? The point is that you've made an impression by showing them
a zillion people playing it at one place at one time.

> i really think the best way to solve the VTES problem is to change the
> way tournaments run at the big conventions.

I guess to me, it's conjectural that there even is a "VTES problem". No
one way of doing things is optimal. The Origins model has its appeal and,
to me, the GenCon model also has its appeal. I'm sure Robert or someone
else could come up with a pretty nice setup for the CC run away from any
conventions, too. But I'd miss the opportunity to do GenCon in its
current form.

Fred
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 8:59:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Robert Goudie schrieb:
> You are sooooo right. We can do much better than Indy. I think the EC
> is a fine example of how a rotating event can work. Of course, the EC
> could have instead been located centrally or located at Euro GenCon

Using the EURO GenCon would increase the entry fee again. Better be
independent and rent cheap locations.

> I can understand WW wanting *exposure* for V:TES but GenCon V:TES
> events would still exist at Indy even if the NAC were held elsewhere.
> I mean, people go to Origins, right? I flew to GenCon event before the
> NAC existed. Frankly, I think that if people are looking to try new
> games, they'll demo in the dealer room. I doubt many people even
> realize V:TES is in the CCG room let alone actually become interested
> in the game by seeing it played at GenCon.

I doubt that there has been ever a VTES demo game at GenCon at the WW booth!

I think it is better to do a benefit-cost analysis. IMO it is hardly
worth the money to be present with VTES at GenCon. Use the money to demo
the game at 2-3 tables, do a small tournament and save the rest of the
money to support stores and princes.

And btw: Let the NAC be organized by princes organizes and have the NAC
move around! Indy gets boring after the second or third year!

> And we aren't getting
> casual V:TES players to just stop by for a game...the only people
> playing V:TES at GenCon are hardcore V:TES players--especially now that
> the V:TES events take up 3 of the 4 days at GenCon.
>
> Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!

Yep! I am all for it.
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 8:59:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Andreas Nusser" <a.nusser@vekn.de> wrote in message
news:D am423$p7k$1@news01.versatel.de...
> I think it is better to do a benefit-cost analysis. IMO it is hardly worth the money to be present with VTES at GenCon.

I'll put it this way: a *LOT* of game companies seem to disagree with
the concept that it's not worth being present at GenCon. And if you're
going to be present, why not put 80+ gamers on display playing your
game on multiple days in front of the precisely right group of people
you want seeing that? Demo, support, and advertise all you like, I
just don't know HOW a game company is going to buy that kind of
publicity by other methods.

Fred
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 11:03:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

In message <1120839798.809267.112470@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Goudie <robertg@vtesinla.org> writes:
>Exactly. :)  Hey, if the Olympics can rotate, then so can the NAC. :) 

Paris or London for the NAC, then?

--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 11:12:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

In message <1120839087.705591.9040@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Robert
Goudie <robertg@vtesinla.org> writes:
>I'm not sure about how all of this works together. Is the actual
>tournament itself meant to attract new players? It would seem different
>companies have different goals. For some, they make a big spectacle and
>try to attract attention and gain interest in their games--the CCG room
>becomes an extension of the dealer room! For others, the CCG room is
>just where the game is played and the dealer room is where they try to
>attract new players.

It's not necessarily about spectacle, or about turning the CCG room into
the dealer room.

A good solid show of tournaments and events (newbie tuition,
competitions, promo giveaways etc.) can have a beneficial effect on
keeping the game, especially if you can get a large number of players
involved. (Where "large" is "bigger than any current non-Magic/Pokemon
type game.)

I mean, I might pick up a deck or two of a game if it looks interesting,
but if I can play a newbie tuition thing now and join in a tournament
this evening, I'm going to enjoy it more. And quite possibly buy more
stuff.

Also, with a game like V:TES which has been around for ages, a good show
of tournaments can make people think "Oh, that's still going. And it's
not just 10 players in the championship. Coo. Maybe I'll dig out my
cards..."


Of course, on top of that, you're aiming to get all the existing players
enjoying things, buying new cards to compete with, or whatever.

--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 11:20:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
news:1120830761.207440.12040@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!
>

I'm all for that.

Raille
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 7:22:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

In message <1120848645.091133.162250@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Goudie <robertg@vtesinla.org> writes:
>That's probably a good way to go. Though, that sounds better suited to
>a GenCon with more and smaller tournaments instead of a Last Chance
>qualifier and two-day championship. People rarely play in a demo and
>then commit 6+ hours to a tournament.

Well, plenty of games other than V:TES can get it down lower. Also,
V:TES can get it down lower if it was (say) a 2R+F tournament - as a
newbie, I probably know I'm unlikely to reach the final. Also also, if
it was something like a Speed of Thought tournament, it could be a
couple of hours of play.

But knowing that I *could* play in a tournament that day if I wanted
does help. I've had people try to talk me into buying into some card
game or other before, and the fact that there was only one tournament
(or no tournaments) on at a major convention is often quite telling
about how much return I'll get on my investment.


I don't think that you necessarily have to have the North American
championship there, of course, but significant tournaments do help.
Storyline tournaments, qualifiers or whatever could also potentially
show a significant presence for a card game.

--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Anonymous
July 11, 2005 3:45:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

David Zopf wrote:
> "Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
> news:1120835986.710565.82520@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > Andreas Nusser wrote:
> >> Robert Goudie schrieb:
> >> > Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!
> >>
> >> Yep! I am all for it.
> >
> > Excellent! Okay, now we've got two of us on board with the plan. :) 
>
> Make it Three.

....we're halfway there now. :) 

> And I'd prefer either a cheap regional convention, or none at all. VTES
> is big enough now to easily host its own NAC without an associated con. The
> growth and popularity of the Week of Nighmares all but proves that.

WoN. That reminds me... The WoN was very difficult to setup this year.
When you are trying to tack an event like WoN onto an existing con,
your options are very limited. We had few choices with locations and
none with dates (had to be near GenCon and had to be set in the days
leading up to GenCon). Then we had to get GenCon to provide us space at
a hotel (which they were very good about) so we'd have dedicated V:TES
space once GenCon began. Much of the WoN this year (up until the con
begins) will be at the RAM--not complaining but noting that we had very
few options.

Now, to be fair, a WoN leading up to a rotating NAC would also have to
be set in the days leading up to the NAC and locations would be
limited, etc. The difference would be that when someone is choosing
dates and locations for the NAC, they would be taking the WoN into
account. A location for the NAC could be chosen that would facilitate
(centrally located and affordable rooms, etc.) a WoN lead-in.

Another point in favor of rotating....

Costs could be reduced for travelling players by locals who are willing
to house them for the duration of the event. This happens at the EC
and many other cons in the US, for example. I don't recall seeing much
of this for GenCon. A NAC with a regional host can more easily make
these types of cost-saving offers.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 11, 2005 3:50:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

James Coupe wrote:
> In message <1120848645.091133.162250@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>
> I don't think that you necessarily have to have the North American
> championship there [GenCon], of course, but significant tournaments
> do help. Storyline tournaments, qualifiers or whatever could also
> potentially show a significant presence for a card game.

Yes, something significant should still remain at GenCon. I
wholeheartedly agree. I think GenCon could even be improved as an
advertisement for V:TES by making the events more suitable and friendly
to noobs.

In any event, moving to an off-site NAC would need to be part of a
comprehensive plan that also addresses the gap left behind at GenCon.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 11, 2005 10:25:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
news:1120835986.710565.82520@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Andreas Nusser wrote:
>> Robert Goudie schrieb:
>> > Let's stop paying GenCon for the privilege of using their tables!
>>
>> Yep! I am all for it.
>
> Excellent! Okay, now we've got two of us on board with the plan. :) 
>

Make it Three. My vote is for an entirely different consideration, though.
GenCon falls every year on my (and my son's) birthday. In future years,
this may be great, as he and I can go together for gaming fun. In the short
term (what with him being one, going on two), it makes travel to GenCon
impossible for me. A rotating location and timeframe will give more players
the opportunity to participate over time (that argument was used to justify
moving the EC around, if I recall correctly. It holds true for the US, too,
I think).

And I'd prefer either a cheap regional convention, or none at all. VTES
is big enough now to easily host its own NAC without an associated con. The
growth and popularity of the Week of Nighmares all but proves that.

DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:40:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Robert Goudie wrote:
> James Coupe wrote:
>
>>In message <1120848645.091133.162250@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>I don't think that you necessarily have to have the North American
>>championship there [GenCon], of course, but significant tournaments
>>do help. Storyline tournaments, qualifiers or whatever could also
>>potentially show a significant presence for a card game.
>
>
> Yes, something significant should still remain at GenCon. I
> wholeheartedly agree. I think GenCon could even be improved as an
> advertisement for V:TES by making the events more suitable and friendly
> to noobs.
>
> In any event, moving to an off-site NAC would need to be part of a
> comprehensive plan that also addresses the gap left behind at GenCon.
>
> -Robert
>

i highly favor a rotating NAC as well.
i dont think that finding space for a WoN would be that hard.
I do agree that gen con should hold a major tournament as well.
So here is my proposal:

Lets have the NAC rotating around the us.
to fill the gap Gen Con should hold the US Nationals, which should be a
2 day event using the championship format. In addition gencon could host
the limited (draft) nationals as well. That would fill the gap pretty well.

I guess the German EC last year set standarts for future Continental
championships (kudos to Johannes, Andreas and all the other
organiziers). having the tourney and housing at the same location was
simply awesome. that could be achieved so easily in the us (more easily
than in europe because of the different structure of the hotels). so WW
please give it a try.

stefan


just my 2 cents

stefan
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 2:22:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

A few points regarding the possibility of moving the NAC from GenCon:


- First off I just want to point out that a lot of the "me too"
responses regarding a rotating system come from European players, who
almost certainly are not representative of most North American VTES
players. I don't expect the European Championship to base their
location and scheduling based solely on my personal convenience and I
don't imagine that catering to international convenience is at the list
of priorities for the South American and Australian Championships.

- Secondly, while a rotating system certainly does have several
advantages, the process of selecting a location can be extremely
cumbersome. This can quickly boil down to lame politicking where
political alliances (and not the merits of each location) seem to take
the forefront. As examples of this, I point to discussions concerning
the Great Lakes Qualifier this past year and the European Championships
from a few years ago.

- I am still extremely disappointed by the lack of cooperation and
communication concerning discussion of the most recent Great Lakes
Qualifier. The actual Qualifier itself was superb and Ankur did a great
job running it. But the e-mails amongst the Great Lakes Princes (or
lack thereof) during the selection process was glaringly disturbing.
Instead of coming to a consensus through compromise, it seems more like
a default decision was made when everyone else simply gave up on the
process. In addition, I quickly grew annoyed by the "hey, vote for me
this year and I'll vote for you next year" discussions.

- In addition, I also recall some of the discussions concerning the
EC location (back when Germany, Hungary, and Sweden were in the
running). At the time, I did my best to not interfere. But as an
observer, I was also frustrated by all those "hey, vote for me this
year and I'll vote for you next year" deals.

- Lastly, I do want to emphasize the importance of exposure at gaming
conventions. From my experiences at Origins and GenCon, I consistantly
see people watching the game who turn out to have played years ago and
didn't realize that the game was still alive. In fact, this past month
at Origins I distinctly recall meeting several such individuals.



So...just playing Devil's Advocate as always.



With regards,
Eric Chiang



P.S. Following GenCon, it may be a good idea to start preparing
discussions about the Great Lakes Qualifier 2006 (assuming that VEKN
makes no significant changes to the qualifying system). Hopefully this
time around, more of the Great Lakes Princes will put in some actual
effort in the matter...
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 3:12:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Stefan Ferenci wrote:

> In addition gencon could host the
> limited (draft) nationals as well.

Now you're talking.

Matt Morgan
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 4:49:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Matthew T. Morgan wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Stefan Ferenci wrote:
>
> > In addition gencon could host the
> > limited (draft) nationals as well.
>
> Now you're talking.

Word Up.

Although if we had a third major American VTES event, it might begin to
strain my ability to attend them all. (Origins, GenCon, some future
rotating NAC...)

It might help if the NAC wasn't in the summer like Origins and GenCon
are, but then it might run into the same time frame as EC scheduling.
:-)


Josh

only has so many vacation days
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 7:25:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

One other thing.

It seems like the issue of a "rotating Championship" crops up at least
once every year or so. I find it interesting that the issue of a
"rotating Qualifier" doesn't come up nearly as often.

Based on my research (and please do correct me if any of it is
incorrect):


- Boston/Mansfield, MA has held a Qualifier every year for the past
four years [2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

- Atlanta, GA has held a Qualifier every year for the past five years
[2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

- Washington, D.C. / Rockville, MD has held a Qualifier every year for
the past five years [2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

- Los Angeles, CA / Montrose, CA has held a Qualifier every year for
the past five years [2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

- The Seattle, Washington area (Seattle / Redmond / Tacoma) has held a
Qualifier every year for the past five years [2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, &
2005].



If people truly think that a "rotating event" is that great, then why
don't they put their money where their mouth is and, in the same
spirit, rotate regional qualifiers as well?


- Boston, why don't you let Connecticut (David Zopf?), Maine (Ben
Spaulding?), New York (Nick Watkins?), or New Hampshire (Ben
Swainbank?) have the Qualifier for once?

- I love Atlanta, but aren't there also decent playgroups in North
Carolina (Charlotte? Durham?) and South Carolina (Columbia?).

- D.C. is always fun but I don't see why Delaware or Pennsylvania
(Harrisburg? Philadelphia? Pittsburgh?) can't give it a try.

- Instead of holding the Southwest Qualifier in L.A., why don't we try
moving it to Northern California? Alternatively, I'm sure Kevin Mergen
in Las Vegas or Frederick Scott in Phoenix would be capable of running
a great tournament.

- And finally, maybe we should experiment and hold the Northwest
Qualifier in Oregon, Idaho, or even the one Princedom in Alaska?





Man, despite how dysfunctional the Great Lakes region can be, at the
very least there's been good diversity in regards to Qualifier
locations (two years in Michigan, one in Illinois, and one in Indiana).
This year, it was also a nice change to see Louisiana hold the South
Central Qualifier since Texas held it in 2001, 2003, and 2004 (trivia
note: it seems there was no South Central Qualifier at all in 2002).


Think of this more as a thought exercise than a serious proposal. I am
interested in seeing however whether those who clamor for a rotating
event do so because they genuinely believe in the principle, or whether
it's just a convenient justification for their personal preferences.



With regards,
Eric Chiang
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:02:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

echiang...@yahoo.com wrote:
> One other thing.
>
> It seems like the issue of a "rotating Championship" crops up at least
> once every year or so. I find it interesting that the issue of a
> "rotating Qualifier" doesn't come up nearly as often.

Don't know much about your recent bad experience but you shouldn't
assume all of the other qualifiers were scheduled the same way.

> - Los Angeles, CA has held a Qualifier every year for
> the past five years [2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

[clip]

> If people truly think that a "rotating event" is that great, then why
> don't they put their money where their mouth is and, in the same
> spirit, rotate regional qualifiers as well?
>
> - Instead of holding the Southwest Qualifier in L.A., why don't we try
> moving it to Northern California?

I send an email to all of the regional princes each year. Through 2005,
no other prince has expressed interest.

BTW, I'm not advocating we rotate the NAC to cities that aren't
interested in hosting it.

> Alternatively, I'm sure Kevin Mergen in Las Vegas

Las Vegas, newly under Kevin Mergen's domain, has yet to hold any
tournaments whatsoever. Jumping straight to a regional qualifier seems
a bit much.

> Frederick Scott in Phoenix would be capable of running
> a great tournament.

If Fred expressed interest it would seem that he'd be able to take a
turn hosting the SW regional event. Sure. If I'm not mistaken, I seem
to recal Fred signing off on L.A. as the location for the last few
years.

> Think of this more as a thought exercise than a serious proposal. I am
> interested in seeing however whether those who clamor for a rotating
> event do so because they genuinely believe in the principle, or whether
> it's just a convenient justification for their personal preferences.

Through 2005 the SW Regional qualifier already rotates between all 1 of
the cities that have expressed interest in hosting the event. If No.
Cal. or Phoenix (those are the only 2 other active cities that I can
think of) or any other active city I'm forgetting ever expressed an
interest in hosting the event, it would certainly be fair to share.

-Robert
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:09:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:
> One other thing.
>
> It seems like the issue of a "rotating Championship" crops up at least
> once every year or so. I find it interesting that the issue of a
> "rotating Qualifier" doesn't come up nearly as often.
> - Los Angeles, CA / Montrose, CA has held a Qualifier every year for
> the past five years [2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, & 2005].

> If people truly think that a "rotating event" is that great, then why
> don't they put their money where their mouth is and, in the same
> spirit, rotate regional qualifiers as well?

Seems like you are assuming your recent bad experience is a common
occurrence in all regions---it's not.

While the SW qualifier has been in L.A. every year through 2005, I have
sent out an email every year and no other prince has expressed
interest. Few even respond. The ones that do have all said "L.A. is
okay with me!"

> - Instead of holding the Southwest Qualifier in L.A., why don't we try
> moving it to Northern California?

If they express interest, it would make sense for them to host an
event. Sure. They've had a vibrant community for years.

> Alternatively, I'm sure Kevin Mergen in Las Vegas

Kevin, having recently become the prince of Vegas, has yet to run any
events. Jumping to hosting a qualifier is a bit much.

> or Frederick Scott in Phoenix would be capable of running
> a great tournament.

Fred's always okayed the SW event being in Los Angeles. If he ever
wants to host one, he should certainly have the opportunity.

So far, the SW qualifier has rotated among all of the cities that have
expressed interest in hosting it. :) 

(this is the re-typed, shorter version of my reply---google ate the
last one!)
-Robert
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:27:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Robert Goudie" <robertg@vtesinla.org> wrote in message
news:1121208299.823931.44160@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> Think of this more as a thought exercise than a serious proposal. I am
>> interested in seeing however whether those who clamor for a rotating
>> event do so because they genuinely believe in the principle, or whether
>> it's just a convenient justification for their personal preferences.
>
> Through 2005 the SW Regional qualifier already rotates between all 1 of
> the cities that have expressed interest in hosting the event. If No.
> Cal. or Phoenix (those are the only 2 other active cities that I can
> think of) or any other active city I'm forgetting ever expressed an
> interest in hosting the event, it would certainly be fair to share.

To back up what Robert is saying, there's been just about zero desire by
anyone involved to ever have a qualifier anywhere else but Los Angeles,
as far as I can tell. Every year Robert has been diligent about
offering the subject for discussion by all princes in the region and
evert year there is no discussion except a chorus of, "OK"s in response
to his proposal to once again have the qualifier in Los Angeles.

It makes a lot of sense for our region for two reasons: organization
and geography.

Los Angeles has an excellent, vibrant group of players, many of whom
are capable of serving as judges and assisting with other aspects of
tournament organization. They demonstrate this periodically by putting
on excellent two-day, four-tournament events, one of which serves as
host event for the qualifier. Other cities probably _could_ do this
as well (particularly Northern California, which has a group of fairly
active, capable princes) if they wanted. But LA just does it anyway,
as a matter of course. The qualifier is basically just thrown on top
of an event I'd still drive to otherwise.

Geography also works out hugely in LA's favor. Large cities in the
region form a diamond, with the Bay Area/Sacramento on top, Phoenix
on the bottom, and Las Vegas and Los Angeles in the middle. But
Las Vegas is not very accessible from any place but Los Angeles due
to how roads and mountains are laid out.

Basically, the largest, best organized city is also in the middle and
is the most accessible. Slam dunk decision - until such time as the
people here want to move it just for the sake of moving it or something.

Fred
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 8:52:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:
> One other thing.
>
> It seems like the issue of a "rotating Championship" crops up at least
> once every year or so. I find it interesting that the issue of a
> "rotating Qualifier" doesn't come up nearly as often.

Or you could simply have *more* Qualifiers.

Why not give each Region the ability to hold two or more Qualifiers? As
long as each one gets the same number, it would at least give the
appearance of fairness. Heck, you could even potentially tighten the
qualifying threshhold somewhat to keep the number of seats roughly the
same. [Aside: I am curious what percent of NAQ qualifiers actually
participated in the NAC. Anyone got that info?]

Speaking as a Westerner, we do have to travel extremely long distances
to get to various events just due to population density and mountain
ranges. Some have more time and resources to make this happen.

Might be another way to both increase visibility and lower travel
barriers. Of course, this says nothing about "quality," but after just
reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I'll take a pass on
that for a while. :) 

Jeff
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 9:08:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:
> John Flournoy wrote:
> You mentioned that "Chicago did not necessarily have access to the same
> site as last year (since the relevant suburban now-ex-Prince stopped
> participating in VTES)." That is actually false. The same site was
> available for the event and the now-ex-Prince only stopped
> participating in VTES *after* the Qualifier discussion was finished up.
> In a discussion with that Prince several months afterward, he told me
> that he felt he really needed the Qualifier in order to maintain
> interest in his playgroup. He didn't get the Qualifier, his playgroup
> is defunct, and he resigned as Prince. I'm sure you can connect the
> dots.

I had "connected the dots" long before he _officially_ resigned, when
said Prince had held a grand total of one poorly-attended tournament
since the last Qualifier. Plus he'd botched the prize support for it,
resulting in many months of excuses and promises never fulfilled -
assuming he replied to email at all. I thus still feel very
comfortable in claiming that he effectively 'stopped participating in
VTES' - certainly as a Prince - immediately following last year's NAC.

> With regards,
> Eric Chiang

-John Flournoy
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 12:08:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On 12 Jul 2005 15:00:38 -0700, echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:

>There was a slipshod and unscientific vote tally on the newsgroup which
>ended up which a valid vote tally of : 3 Chicago, 2 Milwaukee, 5
>Lafayette.

And at least 3 Atlanta.










Carpe noctem.

Lasombra

http://www.TheLasombra.com

Your best online source for information about V:TES.
Now also featuring individual card sales and sales
of booster and starter box displays.
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 2:23:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

jeffkuta@pacbell.net wrote:

> Might be another way to both increase visibility and lower travel
> barriers. Of course, this says nothing about "quality," but after just
> reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I'll take a pass on
> that for a while. :) 

You are aware that _Lila_ was listed as source material/recommended
reading in 1st edition Mage, right? In Lila he talks a lot more about
static and dynamic quality, which is pretty much the beating heart of
Mage. Well, it was until they gutted it.

--

David Cherryholmes

crossing fingers for the new Mage game
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 2:32:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:

> - I love Atlanta, but aren't there also decent playgroups in North
> Carolina (Charlotte? Durham?) and South Carolina (Columbia?).

I'd have to crash a few World of Warcraft servers first.

--

David Cherryholmes
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 2:40:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Matthew T. Morgan wrote:

> Now you're talking.

I also think that would rock, and I'd like to plug it being a sealed
deck event with some booster draft to pad it out. Straight booster
draft is a little *too* random for my taste; it's too easy to get stuck
with a pile that flames out on the launchpad, and organizers don't
necessarily have it figured out which expansion work with which others
(nor do I, necessarily). Of course some starters *seem* better than
others, but each new expansion has shaken that up a bit (e.g. one of the
anarch decks might not be such a bad base). I know I'd stack the
Assamite starter with a few KMW and FN boosters for tuning against any
other starter deck. I'd dare call it focused, and having a focused
anything is an enormous edge in draft.

--

David Cherryholmes
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 9:23:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

fudjo wrote:
> Eric Chiang wrote:
> > - Boston, why don't you let Connecticut (David Zopf?), Maine (Ben
> > Spaulding?), New York (Nick Watkins?), or New Hampshire (Ben
> > Swainbank?) have the Qualifier for once?

Additional Information.

If you look at the US map, you'll see that Maine is basically
surrounded by Canada. A couple of years ago, I had written up a
proposal for another NAC Qualifier to be held in Maine. I was going to
run this event in either Bangor or Portland, which is accessible from
all directions. I contacted all the Canadian Princes North, East and
West of me. I thought we could host a really large event in Maine with
the playgroups to the South (MA,NJ,NY,etc.) and a wide range of
Canadian players (Toronto, Montreal, QC, Nova.S., etc.). Plus since
Maine is vacation land, we have the logistical support to host
travelers (along with other things people could do while here). But I
received only a couple of responses and most stated they just wanted to
attend their local events. So I trashed the idea. A peak behind the
curtain just for you.

Ben Spaulding
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 9:59:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

<echiang777@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1121188972.973263.271060@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>A few points regarding the possibility of moving the NAC from GenCon:
>
>
> - Secondly, while a rotating system certainly does have several
> advantages, the process of selecting a location can be extremely
> cumbersome. This can quickly boil down to lame politicking where
> political alliances (and not the merits of each location) seem to take
> the forefront. As examples of this, I point to discussions concerning
> the Great Lakes Qualifier this past year and the European Championships
> from a few years ago.

Seems you don't have the knack for politics. You need to stick to fashion.
And thats not a jab at your waredrobe. Really.


> - I am still extremely disappointed by the lack of cooperation and
> communication concerning discussion of the most recent Great Lakes
> Qualifier. The actual Qualifier itself was superb and Ankur did a great
> job running it. But the e-mails amongst the Great Lakes Princes (or
> lack thereof) during the selection process was glaringly disturbing.
> Instead of coming to a consensus through compromise, it seems more like
> a default decision was made when everyone else simply gave up on the
> process. In addition, I quickly grew annoyed by the "hey, vote for me
> this year and I'll vote for you next year" discussions.

The whole thing quickly boiled down to NOT Michigan, due to outside
influences.
And Ankar had a good place and Jill was not really ready. It was just one
of those things
where the best was offered first and no one cared to debate, argue or
complain.

Occasionally life tosses you roses.



> - In addition, I also recall some of the discussions concerning the
> EC location (back when Germany, Hungary, and Sweden were in the
> running). At the time, I did my best to not interfere. But as an
> observer, I was also frustrated by all those "hey, vote for me this
> year and I'll vote for you next year" deals.

Politics. You need to shake hands a lot with people, its just how its done.


> - Lastly, I do want to emphasize the importance of exposure at gaming
> conventions. From my experiences at Origins and GenCon, I consistantly
> see people watching the game who turn out to have played years ago and
> didn't realize that the game was still alive. In fact, this past month
> at Origins I distinctly recall meeting several such individuals.

Concur. But there other cons than gencon.


>
>
> So...just playing Devil's Advocate as always.

Your just a good one too!

> P.S. Following GenCon, it may be a good idea to start preparing
> discussions about the Great Lakes Qualifier 2006 (assuming that VEKN
> makes no significant changes to the qualifying system). Hopefully this
> time around, more of the Great Lakes Princes will put in some actual
> effort in the matter...


Good point. Make it so.

Raille
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 12:21:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"David Cherryholmes" <david.cherryholmes@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11d8v6dcp30jo46@corp.supernews.com...
> echiang777@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> - I love Atlanta, but aren't there also decent playgroups in North
>> Carolina (Charlotte? Durham?) and South Carolina (Columbia?).
>
> I'd have to crash a few World of Warcraft servers first.

Dave,
Thanks for crashing a few World of Warcraft servers so I could "enlighten"
myself to the true nature of a competitive playgroup. :) 


--
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 1:02:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Kevin M. wrote:

> 50/50 FN/KMW was really, really good, I thought. Matt? Oscar?

Well, it would be really good, as long as you only have 4 people in each
drafting pod. Assuming 4 per pod, it is likely that, by virtue of "natural
selection", each person will end up with one clan, and so everyone will end
up with a viable deck. With, say, 5 people in a draft pod, two of them end
up drafting the same clan, which will end up either with three people with
good decks and two people with kinda lame decks *or* four people with good
decks, and one person with a super lame deck.

Which I wouldn't know anything about or anything :-)


Peter D Bakija
pdb6@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6

"So in conclusion, our business plan is to sell hot,
easily spilled liquids to naked people."
-Brittni Meil
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 2:50:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

> David Cherryholmes <david.cherryholmes@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Straight booster draft is a little *too* random for my taste; it's
>> too easy to get stuck with a pile that flames out on the launchpad,
>> and organizers don't necessarily have it figured out which expansion
>> work with which others (nor do I, necessarily).

My preference is for straight booster draft. It certainly took some
getting used to before I came to like it, but now it's my favorite format
(yeah, above constructed too). I'm not that big on the idea of sealed
because any two starters will tend to resemble one another while booster
draft decks are all over the place.

Also, seems like the majority of sanctioned limited events are booster
drafts so it would make more sense for the championship to be of the same
format. I don't think I've ever played in a sanctioned sealed event.
Seems they're few and far between.

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Kevin M. wrote:

> All SW works well, as long as you don't have insane 1st or 2nd edition
> packs.

We had a couple weird packs in the Origins draft "hey, this pack has five
vamps and this one has only one!" but I think given the huge pods and fact
that we had ten packs each (which I guess might sometimes be
cost-prohibitive), it all came out in the wash. SW is, I think, a very
good draft set. Tight discipline spread. Plus, there's Gratiano. He's
so good.

> All CE works real well, but is a bit boring.

I think CE has some real power cards. Not that hard to pull a Parity
Shift or KRC. I thought it was interesting that SW decks tended to do
better than CE decks at the Origins draft. I think that might be because
SW is tighter with more good options while the competition over the really
strong prince cards in CE will be very high. Parity Shift and Second
Tradition are both likely first picks.

> Bloodlines is... interesting... but doesn't really synch with anything
> else.

I think a smattering of Bloodlines is pretty good anywhere, actually.
Outferiors look a lot better in limited. Plus, Ahrimanes are quite good
in draft. Sure, there's a lot of basically unusable junk in Bloodlines,
but you can get some real gems. Howler or The Siamese + a few (C2) Speak
with Spirits = a deck.

> 50/50 SW/BH was pretty good.
> 40/30/30 SW/BH/GE was pretty good, but less stable than SW/BH-only.

Personally I've had better experiences drafting Gehenna than I have Black
Hand, but that's probably just random luck. Gehenna has some nice
surprises (Giangaleazzo and any Gehnna card, for example). The vampries
are pretty good. Library cards not so much.

> 50/50 FN/KMW was really, really good, I thought. Matt? Oscar?

Good? Well, I was surprised at how not ridiculously bad it was. I don't
know if that quite makes it good. KMW is a pretty good draft set
especially if you like drafting Assamites (as I do). The most amusing
thing about my deck (other than getting three trophies for burning Mata
Hari in combat) was all the Final Nights Quietus combat which normally
isn't regarded that highly. I sadly didn't get a chance to play my
Eruption of Vitae, but dealt out some pain with Scorpion's Touch, Dagon's
Call and Exuding Blood to say nothing of the not-so-shabby combo of Thin
Blood + Stutter-Step (very nice with Tegyrius or Joe "Boot").

At the same time, everyone involved in that draft was fairly experienced.
It might've been a frustrating experience for a newbie. My first draft
experience was CE and that was frustrating because everybody came up with
much better decks than I did. I thought I was hot stuff because I got a
couple Bondings and guys who could play them. Then Trey ousted me with a
freaking Carthage Remembered!

> Dave, Dave. Just another reason you should have come to Origins, man. ;) 
>
> NEXT YEAR: the 2nd Annual David Cherryholmes Invitational.

It's totally worth it. I wasn't a believer until I saw the schedule.

By the way Kevin, you should email me your mailing address so I can send
you those cards.

Matt Morgan
Anonymous
July 13, 2005 3:01:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Peter D Bakija wrote:

> Kevin M. wrote:
>
>> 50/50 FN/KMW was really, really good, I thought. Matt? Oscar?
>
> Well, it would be really good, as long as you only have 4 people in each
> drafting pod. Assuming 4 per pod, it is likely that, by virtue of "natural
> selection", each person will end up with one clan, and so everyone will end
> up with a viable deck. With, say, 5 people in a draft pod, two of them end
> up drafting the same clan, which will end up either with three people with
> good decks and two people with kinda lame decks *or* four people with good
> decks, and one person with a super lame deck.
>
> Which I wouldn't know anything about or anything :-)

I told you you should've drafted more Tortured Confessions. They can be
played by any clan!

Who would've thought Lorrie Dunsirn would squeal?

Matt Morgan
!