Prof Clay
New Member
Word.
There are so many decks I like to play but are not good enough for more competitive tournaments.
That's right, but the problem is, many players can't benefit fromthat. Free entry is nice, however, you usually have to pay for getting to the event, unless you are lucky and live near the location or have some kind of universal ticket for your are.
Second problem is that the prize distribution isn't proportional to the player number. Great, we have 1 display shared to 30 players. Sounds fine to me on the first view. But in reality (at least here in Germany at many Battle Roads) 12 of the 36 booster packs are reserved for the 2 junior players attending the Battle Roads, leaving 24 only for the other 28 players.
It's ok to treat all age groups equal. But this is not equal treatment, this is the highest form privileging for the age groups with less attendance. If that means I enter a tournament and there are only 2 masters, I have no problem in recieving only 1 booster pack for winning, since I didn't really have to do something for it and I still get the victory medal.
And it's not only about the age group thing - prize support should be dependant on the player number anyway. Big tournaments have to get more prizes than small ones - nothing is more reasonable. Just give an ammount of booster packs per player in one age group to the pool. Let's say, 1 per player for Battle Roads, 3 per player for Cities or something like that. It wouldn't be much effort since most stores have boosters anyway that can be paid afterwards by TPCi or the LD. But it would be a huge advance compared to what we have now.
You miss my point....the amount of product sent by the Company for prize support is equal to other companies prize support in company cost. PCI has no control over how many attend the event and should not be required to adjust the prize support after the fact. Some Battleroads have 20 people, others have 50.