fly
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:03 |
 
|
i think ogre TS needs some revision too. i think it would be too much effort to code player numbers into the matchup generation process, it would sure create new loopholes too. a bit more TS for ogres, please. |
_________________
I play for fun. I play to win.
Do you play CPOMB 'cause you can't win otherwise?
No, that's a rhetorical question. |
|
treborius
Joined: Apr 05, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:10 |
|
| flyor wrote: | | i think ogre TS needs some revision too. i think it would be too much effort to code player numbers into the matchup generation process, it would sure create new loopholes too. a bit more TS for ogres, please. |
prove, that Ogres are overpowered by playing them successfully in the Box first.
you've only played 1 Ogre team so far with a record of: 0/2/5 
loosing alot vs. Ogres just proves you're not a good coach when playing against them  |
|
|
Naru1981
Joined: Jan 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:19 |
|
i joined blackbox as was sick of coaches saying "no thx i dont want to be bashed to death" yes i play khemri alot but very few ppl complain when paired against them in the box as they are fairly easy to beat. its pot luck what you get. im no where near a decent coach i just enjoy playing. |
_________________
 |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:20 |
|
I can live without Khemris in any div.
Ogres are a complete success. Fun race! go ogres  |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:24 |
|
To be fair, Ogres are a stupid roster design (not as dumb as Amazons, but I digress). And their TS calculation is highly specious. But they are an official roster, so ya gotta play em in the box. That's just the way it goes.
Besides, everyone knows the sociopaths play elves. |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 02:53 |
|
especially Pro Elves.... |
_________________
 |
|
funnyfingers
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 03:17 |
|
The suggestion seems more of fix the TS than to really get rid of the Ogres, I think. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 06:24 |
|
your request would hold much more merit, if you weren't running 1 team in the box...
...and that team being orcs...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
Jeffro
Joined: Jan 22, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 06:48 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | your request would hold much more merit, if you weren't running 1 team in the box...
...and that team being orcs...
--j |
[BOX] |
|
|
Calthor
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 07:43 |
|
Ogre TS is already high enough compared to their TR, and not allowing them in the Box is just absurd. |
|
|
adambomb
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 07:47 |
|
| Fela wrote: | | Since the race is only played by sociopath coaches or as a "fun team" by others there would be no harm done in removing them anyway, the box needs neither. |
"But wait ," you cry. "My poor wittle team was aweady huwt and needed a wecovewy game so they could get bettew. Then these big guys showed up and huwt us some mowe. Those big guys should not get to pway with us anymowe."
Awwww.....poor puppy. 
But seriously, what the hell is the point if there are no fun teams?
Besides, I play ogres in the box and let me tell you they are easy to beat and tough to win with. You'd think they would be CAS machines with all that ST5 and MB but they are not.
They don't have block. Their gobbo cousins are fatally squishy. They are expensive to replace. 1s come up for BH rolls more often than they should. AG2 isn't great at doing anything involving the ball.
More often than not, the agile opponent dodges away (or waits for an ogre to fail a BH roll), blitzes the poor hapless goblin holding the ball, squishes the twerp, takes the ball and scores. Repeat ad nauseum.
If you are the kind of team that isn't going to be dodging away from anything then you probably already have an advantage in block and gaurd and are equal in high AV and thick skull/regen but have the advantage of no boneheads. So while your opponent is losing tackle zones, wasting blitzes and losing gaurds to failed bonehead rolls you gangblock the giant dolts, foul them off the pitch, cage, score...rinse and repeat.
From your post I gather your team is the former and not the latter. If it was the latter then shame on you for you are a half-man and not a man. :p
If you get paired up against Ogres rejoice for you are likely to win and have some laughs watching your opponent's ogres bumble like idiots all over the field. I play them for pure comedic value. The game's are always random and uncertain, which is the same with any bbowl game, but at least with ogres I expect to fail every roll and laugh when I do.
If you don't like it then maybe the box is not for you.  |
|
|
Irgy
Joined: Feb 21, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 09:28 |
|
Ogre roster ogres already have their TS increased (or technically not-reduced) for not having the big guy trait. So your argument about bone head and big guy makes no sense with the way TS is calculated, other than the possibility that not having big guy is particularly more useful for players with bonehead than players without. I think there's some merit to it, because bonehead players could be argued to be making one more roll each turn on average than other players. On the other hand, I also think that the biggest downside to big guy is not the inability to reroll bonehead rolls, but the inability to reroll things that cause a turnover, so the effect is still quite small. It's not the cause of your problem in any case.
The real problem though is that TS is about the team's ability to win games, not the team's ability to bash. As others have already pointed out, Ogre TS is actually too high not too low by that standard. The problem you're having is that Ogres can bash much more effectively than other teams of the same TS. Which means that playing against them is bad for team development. Which is exactly what [B] is for, to force coaches to play against teams that are bad for team development, as long as the match (in terms of chance of winning) is still fair.
So your entire post is completely contrary to the purpose of [B]. |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 09:37 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | especially Pro Elves.... |
Slander!  |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 23, 2009 - 10:42 |
|
I have expressed it in multiple threads:
Ogres are the worst race to play with/against in my opinion. I will be really happy, when they are nerfed down to nothing in LRB5+. The problem is, that their variance in performance is just way too high. In a normal game, you will have stretches where they suck and cause turnovers and lose tacklezones. Those streches can easily cost you the game. That`s where the TS is right. But those games are not frequent enough to have TS being a fair approximation of their strength. The games where the mentioned stretches are spanning more than 1 half or the games where you play me and everything works are just too frequent. The TS might be a good average, but the variance is just too high. Now I wouldn`t be in favor of removing them, as most coaches seem to enjoy them as a durable funrace, but if we could make the transition to LRB5 for ogres a little bit sooner.... |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
The funny thing is that if I were to do anything about Ogre TS, it'd be to lower it. The ogres are one of the weakest teams when it comes to winning games (which is the point of TS), and it'd be completely opposing the purpose of TS to increase it. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Why did GW nerf guar...
Search
