westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
 Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 13:36 |
 
|
I think it would be neat to be able to "hibernate" some teams, or remove them from consideration by the scheduler for a while. Sometimes I don't feel like playing a particular team, but currently the only way to do that is retire the team. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 13:44 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | TS is a terrible tool to use as a cap for leagues and tournaments. TR is a much better measure of how good a team will be over the course of several games. |
Interesting point.. I guess it comes down to what the competitive goal for [B] will be and what tournament formats will exist.
| SillySod wrote: | | ... but what it dosent let you do is cherrypick and elfball your way to that really good team like ranked does. |
Yup. That's the key differentiator. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 14:11 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | Theres bravery and then theres stupidity. Bravery is taking on all challengers etc. Stupidity is playing a game where there is no possible scenario that dosent damage your team... |
What about "winning another game" and "improving an already stellar record"?
I mean in general, i'm not talking about a particular scenario in a particular game. |
_________________
'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
Peter_Thorpe
Joined: Oct 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 14:43 |
|
the off season idea is good but (and i havent read all the posts so this might be covered)
there should be a time on how much teams can be "off season" whereby if you click for them to be off, they have to stay off for a certian amount of time, like 2 weeks or something
that way it would sort out the loophole of resting all your teams except for the one you want to play with |
_________________
[url=http://www.sloganizer.net/en/style3,Peter-spc-Thorpe.png] [/url] |
|
morraywolfymax
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 15:01 |
|
| SillySod wrote: |
TS is a terrible tool to use as a cap for leagues and tournaments. TR is a much better measure of how good a team will be over the course of several games. TS deliberately sacrifices that kind of judgement so that it can better evaluate the team for a single game. Even if you replaced TR with TS as a cap you would have the same problem with injuries, aging, and extra skills/FF pushing your team over the TS borderline. |
Was disagreeing with you until you made this very vaild point, there are limited amounts of "Squishy" teams in [B] as it is we shouldn't try an deter more.
I vote yes! |
_________________
Anyone named Vampy is ace! |
|
treborius
Joined: Apr 05, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 15:13 |
|
| johan wrote: | | I like the idea of "hibernation" as well. Maybe deactivate the team for schedulingn for one month? That should be pretty hard to abuse. |
| Igvy wrote: | Olny if it activates 1d6 games after you select it, and comes back 1d6 games after you deselect it.
That way there is no chance of abuse. maybe 1d3 games, however my point is it should not start untill you have played at least 1 more game.
It should have at least a 1 game cooldown. this way it can't be used for matchups.
Also limit it, so that you can only do it with 3+ active teams or something. Stopping everyone form only having 1 active team. |
i think having a way to deactivate / go offseason / put a team in hibernation is a very good option.
as far as "abuse" is concerned, i don't see how that is related at all - i think this word gets abused way too much 
(afterall, when it's really to your disadvantage to play a certain team - u can retire that team at any time you like - i don't see why it should be "abusive" to just temporarily deactivate it instead...?)
(or in other words: i don't get it, why it would be considered abusive to deactivate a team for any amount of days / games when it's not abusive to retire that very same team)
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | and what this allows you to do is sit on that really good team until tournament time, a la Ranked.
For what it's worth, I vote no. If you want to baby and not risk your teams, go play in ranked. Blackbox should be for the brave. |
while i think i understand what you mean - i don't think that's true: should B ever have any tournaments (which i hope as well), many coaches would like to not play certain teams because they just built it up to that magic TR-limit where they can still enter the tourney but bring a lot of (TS-) bang for their TR-bucks.
it's not just that they might be scared of loosing that bang (players with good skills, etc.) but also they might be afraid of gaining so many spp on their players that they will cross that magic TR-limit making their team not eligible for a tourney (possibly even if they throw away excess-gold ) unless they start sacking healthy players - also i think that most players will still choose not to play any of their B-teams if it's about jeopardizing that tourney, which starts in 1 or 2 days...
...imo that's not about being brave or not brave its just about being willing to jeopardize a tourney-entry for a good team or not |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 15:34 |
|
It's a good thing that you could make a team hibernate. I m for. And hypothetic tournament discussion about hypothetic tournaments are a bit off topic. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
funnyfingers
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 16:47 |
|
I think 1 in 3 teams to hibernate is too high. I think it would at least be 1 in 5. Thinking also a month would be too long, maybe a certain amount of games, like 5 to 10. And a certain amount played after bring them back from the offseason, 1-5ish.
Not too sure about the paying for it though. |
|
|
treborius
Joined: Apr 05, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 16:59 |
|
i see, why some coaches view the possibility of putting a team in "hibernate" as threatening to the quality of match-ups in DivB.
(less teams to match -> fewer or more uneven match-ups)
i think in the longrun, though, a lot of coaches might create new teams they otherwise wouldn't 'cause there are teams that are more straining to play - i've enjoyed playing a few Vampire-games in R, but i'm not always in the mood to put too much thought into games and play some delicate race - sometimes i just wish for a simple not too complicated match of Orcs bashing some Khemri...
(a bit pathetic maybe, but that's just how i am )
...the fact i can't put a team in hibernate when i'm just not in the mood to play it is what keeps me from creating more teams at the moment.
...so in the longrun i think, that hibernation might actually produce more teams in DivB and maybe even more matching-possibilities - eventually DivB would profit, i think  |
|
|
Reisender
Joined: Sep 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 17:03 |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 17:42 |
|
Instead of a ratio, let's say you need 5 teams beeing active before having the ability to make one hibernate. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 17:46 |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 17:47 |
|
Voted against it, a bad idea. |
_________________
 |
|
funnyfingers
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 18:10 |
|
Coaches who only have 1 or 2 teams, hibernation wouldn't matter. Getting up to 5 teams and more is where you think the only way to narrow what teams yu want to play is full retirement, which I don't want to do so I don't make anymore teams. It's an vicious cycle. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 07, 2009 - 20:43 |
|
While I appreciate that people gaming the system is innevitable. I feel that Black Box is the one environment on Fumbbl where it should be harshly discouraged. RANKED is about building teams and fudging the rules to get an uber team in to a tourney at the zenith of it's potential power. BLACK BOX should be about being king of the pile. If you want to have a good team, that team has to stay a good team. Remember, if you get the ability to baby your team that got the sweet stat increases, and save it for tourneys, then everyone else can do the same thing, and we get the same ridiculousness that exists in ranked tournaments. I'd much rather present a real alternative to ranked, where teams enter, maybe somewhat less than optimally, and have to actually win with coaching as opposed to coaching AND having really lucky skill rolls. If not, then there is no point to having Black Box Tourneys, and I vote we scrap the whole idea.
As for how to get around getting your team in at optimized TR, that does present a problem. One which doesn't have an easy solution. But violating the integrity of the whole division, and turning it in to Ranked 2.0 isn't really the solution I think we want. |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
|
|
killing by fun?
Search
