licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
 Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 19:45 |
 
|
God this rule...
It's so pointless it should be dropped.
Now someone will chime in with 'but but, what about someone abusing it for a tournement!'
If you can't figure out how to handle that than you don't give the tournament staffs enough credit. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 20:02 |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 20:16 |
|
| licker wrote: | | what about someone abusing it for a tournement!' |
Just think of how many MVPs a minmax player can send to oblivion with loners. In fact, just think of how we could minmax with 0RR Loner only teams. All we'd need is a way never to get any FF.
A click-click-pow-kill paradise. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 20:34 |
|
if my popcorn goes below 11, can I get some free popcorn? |
_________________
 |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 20:58 |
|
fyi, i didn't handle this specifically, but i can almost guarantee it had exactly *ZERO* to do with boxed, vs ranked, so i don't know why you seem to want to drag that irrelevant point in here...if your team is abusing the journeyman rule, it doesn't matter what division they are in, they're abusing the rule...
your high elf team has had 4+ SI/RIP exactly 4 times in their 71 game career...
5% of the time...
while the definition of the word "multiple" does apply....you can't expect someone to reasonably think that you suffer this many casualties enough that it is a serious problem
(hint: it's not)
but more importantly...on a high elf team, 400K+ will maximize *any* specialist slot...
2 blitzers? 200K, done
4 catcher? 360K, done
2 throwers? 180K, done
want to get frisky?
2 blitzers & 2 catchers? 380K, done...
if you have that much money, you are *MORE* than capable of replacing players, save for the 4 matches in your career where all hell broke loose...
running journeymen with 400K in your inventory is a blatant violation of the rules, and i think you're well aware of that...
you're not saving for a rainy day, you're just taking advantage of a rule, and you got called on it...
build a bridge, get over it...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2015 - 21:07 |
|
Still begs the question of what this rule is actually supposed to prevent...
But yeah, who really cares that the rule serves zero purpose anyway. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 02:36 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | | 5% of the time... |
There's nothing special about +4 MSG bumps, but let's look at them.
It happened the 1st time on the 12th game (8%): 3/1/5, right after two other deaths in three games. Seven deaths in 12 games means around a 35K loss per game. More or less how much one can hope to win per game.
The MSG sequence seems to start at around 1400 TV. Omitting that lucky bounce 3/4/0 against a minmax CPOMB team (no "you're just taking advantage of a rule" there, of course), the next bump is 7 games later: 5/2/1 and 3/1/1. The following 5-games sequences shows that +2 MSG comes in steady.
Long story short, this team has an average of 0.9 MSG per game, and 0.4 death per game. Assuming a MSG is worth 25K and a death is 70K, the margin room to save for rainy days should be quite thin.
Unless my estimation is incorrect, that team got lucky earnings and/or loners are involved in the MSGs and deaths.
***
| shadow46x2 wrote: | | you're not saving for a rainy day, you're just taking advantage of a rule |
So keeping around 350k could be saving for a rainy day, but keeping 470k is just taking advantage of a rule. Is that correct? |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 02:51 |
|
^^ you will not get an exact answer. the rule is grey to stop people abusing the line.
live with it. |
_________________
|
|
huff
Joined: Dec 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 02:59 |
|
I for one couldn't care less about a teams treasury to jmen ratio... They are really only handicapping themselves for that particular game, and if that will help long-term team success then so be it. So many monstrosities are based upon, "it's your team, manage it how you want" (minmax), I don't see how this self-handicapping of taking jmen is even an issue. You could really have 3 mil in the bank and 11 jmen, I really wouldn't be bothered, especially if I was playing against you. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 03:38 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | the rule is grey |
Yet's it's dark enough for an admin to step in this discussion and basically shame a guy who has more than a point. |
|
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 11:10 |
|
No no, the admin didn't shame anyone.
A ticket would have come in or the team would have been reported.
Whichever admin dealt with this would then have sent a PM explaining the situation and pointed out that you are breaking one of the sites rules. Rules which everyone here agreed to play to when they signed up.
Nerdbird then decided to take this public. In reality what he should have done was have a discussion with the admin who sent him a PM to understand why the decision was made.
We have sais many times in the past that you will never get a black and white ruling on what is a suitable treasury for teams to have as each case will be looked at on it's own merits. But a general rule of thumb is twice your most expensive player.
It is not unheard of for coaches to approach the staff with a plan on how they are going to rebuild a team after a massive beating. We can then let you know if your plan is acceptable or not, if it is then we will make a note so if the teams gets reported we know whats going on. |
_________________
 |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 15:56 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | | No no, the admin didn't shame anyone. |
Of course he did. You can't expect someone who came here to have the issue discussed to reasonably think that any argument offered so far to justify the mind probing, the question begging, and the moralism of
| Quote: | running journeymen with 400K in your inventory is a blatant violation of the rules, and i think you're well aware of that...
you're not saving for a rainy day, you're just taking advantage of a rule, and you got called on it... |
This is more than "you're an idiot" forum bantering. This goes beyond any mandate I've ever seen of what an admin is bound to do. Not only that, but the very secrecy of these judgment calls refutes the whole stance. There's nothing "blatant" about an arbritrary ruling void of any explicit rationale. As if justifying such a rule was trivial anyway, when we have regulars who don't even know why it's still a thing. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 16:09 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | | the rule is grey |
Yet's it's dark enough for an admin to step in this discussion and basically shame a guy who has more than a point. |
your life must be very dull sir, for you to imagine such drama
grow up |
_________________
|
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 16:10 |
|
Yes if I could change one thing about Fumbbl I would abolish this rule. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 13, 2015 - 16:12 |
|
| thoralf wrote: |
This is more than "you're an idiot" forum bantering. This goes beyond any mandate I've ever seen of what an admin is bound to do. |
so, you know the mandates for fumbbl admin, do you sir?
please let us know (in detail, according to said mandate), what exactly an admin is "bound" to do, or not.
curious minds wish to know. |
_________________
|
|
|
|
Draft League Expansi...
Search
