Gencon 2005 Event Registration Information

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.
106 answers Last reply
More about gencon 2005 event registration information
  1. 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
  2. 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!
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. 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.
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    Frederick Scott wrote:
    > "Andreas Nusser" <a.nusser@vekn.de> wrote in message
    > news:dam423$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
  12. 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
  13. 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.
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    "Johannes Walch" <johannes.walch@vekn.de> wrote in message
    news:dalkjc$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
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. 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.
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

    "Andreas Nusser" <a.nusser@vekn.de> wrote in message
    news:dam423$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
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. 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
  26. 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.
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. 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
  31. 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...
  32. 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
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. 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.
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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
  49. 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
Ask a new question

Read More

Games American Video Games