77 coaches online • Server time: 13:16
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post BB2020 - Current thi...goto Post Osbbl Season V meet ...goto Post Blackbox Trophy Seas...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic

Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 11:47 Reply with quote Back to top

It is designed to keep teams in the 1200 - 1800 tv range, which is where the game is more balanced. at high tv the races that can truly compete are severley diminished, you either have to be elftastic, or ultra bash.

In terms of blackbox it would make getting games more likely as well as the tv difference would be reduced.

Again it comes down to taste ultimately. I really dislike high tv play and always have, some people really enjoy it. Neither is right. My opinion is just more in line with the design goal in the official rules.

D_Arquebus wrote:
WTR = Want to Retire... a roll that has to exceed no# of played 'seasons' or add 20k*Seasons to each rebuy thereafter to retain that player.

Thanks, Ive never seen it to referred to as WTR. Smile


Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 11:51 Reply with quote Back to top

Without syncing the rebuy though you will end up with 2mil+ rated teams on their 10th-15th+ game vs just rebought teams etc anyway.

Teams that Min/Max to the extreme at the moment and have couple of Legends and rookies will be able to carry them anyway under this system. It literally will just shake some of the weight out of the tenured Monster Teams that prey on those long tenured Min/Maxers.

As well as make everyone have to get used to removing good players from their team.

NAF Regional TT Tourney Organiser (AUS/ NZ)
TT Bloodbowl in AUS (FB)
NZ BB Community on FB

Joined: Feb 26, 2009

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 11:52 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm all for it.

People will quit box though. No more bigger better toys. How do you apply this to a team thats already played 200 games. Thats 8 seasons right there.

Too messy, too dividing, no fun

si non modo numquam pragmaticam


Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 11:56 Reply with quote Back to top

Please use appropriate thread for discussion Wink https://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=28459

Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 12:08 Reply with quote Back to top

I LOVE B, and R, and want them both to thrive (possibly as one) and wonderfully Christer has stated many times there will ALWAYS be a perpetual division on FUMBBL.

Reasons for Seasons:

A new managing challenge. BBT has been hugely popular, and seasons kicks that up a gear, a perpetual team with actual aims and deadlines to manage.

A more level playing field. Everyone faces the same deadlines and hard stops.

More sane team sizes. We live in the age of fat, EM replacing SE was never a great idea, as EM was designed to prevent cash pile hoarding for season end. EM actually encourages rampant TV growth and spending.

Higher Player turnover. With CPOMB gone, or semi gone, or can be gone, or reroll using, or whatever we have now, there is too little attrition in the game, especially of high armour teams. Seasons redresses that through 'Wants To Retire' and 'Cant afford the Bloaty SOB'

USP. NO other site has open play seasonal leagues. Yet.

Closer to TT experience. BB is, if it is designed at all, designed to be played in small leagues on TT. That is most peoples experience prior to FUMBBL or BB2, recreating that environment, with the twist of huge open perpetual play seems likely to attract and retain new players.

Closer to the rules. As above.

Nerdgasm. The opportunity for stats, Personal Bests and Site Bests and in general new numbers to coo over seems rampant.

Tournament excitement. No more 'i have the time to build Major sized team, you dont Hahaa'. Tourneys in seasonal league would have a structure much harder to meta and much easier for the casual gamer to engage with. Finish your season whenever, at whatever pace, then park that squad for the net tournament, knowing every other entrant had exactly the same chances you did to build and be ready.

Easier team matching, the lower variance of team size should mean easier and better matches generated.

Probably others.

Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor ulli
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone

Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 12:52 Reply with quote Back to top

Rawlf wrote:

Granted, sometimes the Blackbox will match you with a high tv team at a big tv gap. It happens far from often though, I could not find a single instance in the 3 recent matches pages from MattDakka that I checked.

Yesterday I watched at least 4 huge TV gaps:


The fact you don't notice them doesn't mean they don't exist.

About the fact you don't find huge TV gaps in my recent pages, the reason is simple: I activate several teams, 1 of them is generally quite high TV (1800-2000) to reduce the TV gap in case of a high TV monoactivator.
That said, even assuming both teams are at the same high TV, is not the range at which races are more balanced or meant to be played, as Garion said.
More damage skills and more super developed players have the potential to massively break a game.
The fact that some coaches monoactivate forces coaches not liking high TV to play at high TV themselves, even if that's not an ideal range in terms of balance.
Also, please notice that not all coaches playing in Black Box have high TV developed teams to activate to be paired with a high TV monoactivator.
I know that BB is not meant to be perfectly balanced, but high TV games have more premises to be unbalanced.
High TV puts more emphasis on having super developed players, stat freaks, one turners and clawmb killers and less on coaching (please, notice, I'm not implying high TV-lover coaches are stupid or bad by any mean, just that the high TV games are more affected by rosters and skills synergies or at least, have the potential to be more affected by them, that doesn't mean there is no coaching skill required or involved in playing at high TV).
When skills play the biggest role in the match, the coaching part gets less influent.
Would I love to play with super developed teams?
Yes, if I didn't like to play with developed teams I would play only low TV, cycling teams or NAF non-progression tournaments, but to allow a proper high TV gameplay the whole BB game system should be changed, as it is, high TV games are not very balanced.
Any system to prevent too much growth would be ok, I suggested Season just because it's an official (although optional) rule and I know that Christer is interested only in official rules.
Even a more crude system could be ok, for example a simple TV cap, 1800 or 1900 or 2000 (at 2000 TV there is enough build variety and development for any race): if your TV is higher than the cap you can't activate that team in the Box until you decrease it by firing players of your choice, no hard calculations required.
Monoactivation would still be possible but the TV gap would be limited.

Joined: Sep 23, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 13:21 Reply with quote Back to top

Three of those matches involved the same TV 2400+ Chaos team though.

And when a team like that gets matched against another TV 1900+ team, I really don't consider it a "huge mismatch". Inducements exist for a reason.

I played the high elf team in the second game you linked, and that was a really fun match! I wouldn't want any change to Black Box that would prevent that match from being scheduled.

I also don't agree with coaches who think that teams become homogenous at high TV... my high elves are about TV 2000, the chaos team as mentioned was even larger, neither of us had a cookie-cutter squad and both of us had gaps in our builds. If anything I feel like high-TV teams are often more distinctive than low-TV teams (although the greatest variance is at mid-TV) because stats and doubles give them more unique players, and different play styles can be reified in different builds since you've got the "no-brainer" bases (block, Sure Hands, Guard etc.) covered -or decided to skip them, as in this case! Smile

Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 13:32 Reply with quote Back to top

You had High Elves though, able to deal with Clawmb thanks to AG 4 + Wizard.
I play HE too:
and I can deal with Clawmb with a Wizard but you should consider that racial variety is important and not everybody plays agile teams/Clawmb.

Joined: Nov 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 15:49 Reply with quote Back to top

Rawlf wrote:
Like for Dalfort, seasons dont feel right for me in a perpetual league like Blackbox, too. It just feels forced and artificial.
And still I would say let us do it, if there is a need for it. But is there?

What exactly is the problem we want to solve with seasons?

Is it that teams grow too big? What is so bad about that? I mean I understand if it doesnt go along with your idea of aesthetics or fun. I find it a bit silly, too. But there are supposedly also the high TV monoactivators, so some people seem to like it, and their opinion isnt of less value than mine, or yours.
And also, you can keep your own tv low, and the scheduler will do its best to find a matching partner for you. Blackbox isnt like a scheduled league where old high tv teams and newcomers are forced to play each other once every season, before the newcomer could even build up a bit. That is where the season rule feels right to me.

Granted, sometimes the Blackbox will match you with a high tv team at a big tv gap. It happens far from often though, I could not find a single instance in the 3 recent matches pages from MattDakka that I checked.
And this type of game is something you can prepare your team for and is part of the deal. And it is a much softer deal than the league I mentioned.

Even if such a game happens, it is not necessarily onesided. I just played Arktoris high tv Chaos team with my (rookie protected) Pro Elves at -480TV. The wizard absolutely tilted the game, I didnt even need a good Eldril. I should say thanks to inducements, I had the stronger side here.
Sometimes people link more insane matchups, and some are plain evil. But most of the time they have a really close result or even an underdog win, so how much of a problem is it, really? I mean in reality, not in theory bowl?

And if there were seasons, wouldnt a game between a redraft-minmaxed 19 games into a season killer chaos and an old, worn down Pro Elf team still happen? And be just as bad if not worse?

Seasons in Blackbox seem to me like throwing out the baby with the bath water. You create a lot of hassle and ill feelings for many for next to no improvement realistically.

Seasons would also mean that if you get hit with that high tv chaos team you wouldn't be stuck with 6 loners forever

Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 16:58 Reply with quote Back to top

IMO the season should not cut teams below around 1900. It should cap teams at around 2200.

A season should probably be around 10 games. You don't want teams grow too big. You don't want teams to have to soldier on too long before recovery.

If you cannot tweak it to do that, you are probably bettor off not bothering.

There are probably better ideas but hey, they won't be official.

[SL] Rookie Rumble - 16 teams - 100+ Races to choose from - ALWAYS recruiting

Joined: May 20, 2017

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 17:35 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm interested in this idea but I have a question: It sounds like this is all about avoiding high TV matches. Currently those who don't like high TV are free to fire their own players. Those who do like high TV can keep the bloat. Seasons would force coaches who like bloaty teams to cut players - which they obviously don't want to do.

So is this just an attempt to reduce high TV games, at the cost of forcing some coaches to not be able to play with bloaty teams?

An alternative would be to set a hard limit on the TV gap Box scheduler can draw. (The negative of this is that the odds of you getting a pairing in an activation decreases).

Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 17:39 Reply with quote Back to top

If you fire your players to trim your own TV (which I already do sometimes) you could still be paired with a monoactivator, if your team is old.
You could say: well, just create a new team, rinse and repeat.
Some coaches do that, but some races are not interesting to play without some development, for example, playing Vampires for just 20 or 25 games then retiring them is not worth the effort if you want to have some fun with them and not just because you are playing in the Box Trophy.

About the scheduler TV gap cap: I've already suggested that, it's not going to happen.

Joined: Aug 03, 2010

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 17:44 Reply with quote Back to top

I think seasons should be tied to tournaments:it evens out the playing field.
Treat tournaments as playoff stages.
Everyone else can dismiss seasons all along.

Of course needs tweaking and fine tuning,but it would improve the scene, imo.

Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 17:47 Reply with quote Back to top

I'd like Seasons for non-tournament Box teams as well, for the record.

Joined: Jun 23, 2017

Post   Posted: Jul 08, 2020 - 18:15 Reply with quote Back to top

I don't suppose there'd be an option to collapse Box and Ranked to one division, as was suggested in the past with hybrid game matching options but leave seasons off, then implementing a new competitive division with seasons?
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic