| Poll |
| What is the single biggest factor that would encourage you to play more [B] Games? |
| 1) A competitive goal beyond the single match |
|
34% |
[ 79 ] |
| 2) More racial diversity |
|
24% |
[ 57 ] |
| 3) Greater ease in getting a [B] game |
|
5% |
[ 12 ] |
| 4) Reducing TS exploits |
|
9% |
[ 21 ] |
| 5) Integration of the blackbox concept with other divisions |
|
7% |
[ 18 ] |
| 6) None - I'm happy playing in other divisions. |
|
19% |
[ 45 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 232 |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
 Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:02 |
 
|
My favorite team is in [R] and I don't plan on giving up on them anytime soon. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:03 |
|
4 for sure, but honestly after the removal of BR I'm pretty happy with the division.
I don't play there because I want to recover the hellfish to 11 men first... and because lately my RL doesn't leave me with time for BB at all.
If I had the time, I'd be playing in DivB now. |
_________________
 |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:07 |
|
FeelingMN, thanks for sharing your thoughts on [B] and what you feel could be improved.
Please do not criticize other divisions as that is a divergence from the main topic of how to improve [B].
Again, thanks for your input. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Skolopender
Joined: Jun 17, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:10 |
|
I voted 1... but also 5 and to some extent 4...
Some goal would be a big WOOP WOOP WOOP!
A quick play feature in ranked like the one in B would be a nice option. When you don't feel like looking for a game(picking) and just want to play.
Personally I don't have that big an issue with the TS exploit. But i think it holds of some coaches from playing B, which is sad. |
_________________
Lobbying for a Troll team. If Bonehead Ogres can have one, why not one for Trolls? Power to the Trolls! |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:10 |
|
I think there are a few things that could be done quite quickly to improve [B];
1) Show BR - To give people some meaning to their B games beyond one match.
2) TS Exploit - Adjust the 'Leader' reroll calculation on Zero reroll teams.
3) Exclude Teams - This one isn't on your list, but it's an underlying frustration for alot of coaches. In Ranked coaches can choose which team to play with, but in Blackbox any team can be chosen (regardless of mood) If a player was able to Activate, whilst de-selecting teams, so they could not be matched, people would have more interest in running more teams.
I think lack of racial diversity may be a problem for some coahces, as may lack of majors, but these are possibly issues which do not have such a quick fix available. |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:14 |
|
Duke, I tend to agree with your assessment that showing BR and modifying the Leader/0RR rebate would be a pretty quick fix for 1 & 4.
I didn't think of putting the "exclude teams" option but that could also increase interest. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Juff
Joined: May 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:17 |
|
Ability to hibernate teams, or greater weighting assigned to the team I chose to activate with. Starting new teams and being forced to play my necros gets boring real fast.
Reduce the TS meta-lameness. Somehow. Blackbox is supposed to be about fair matches right? TS Min-maxed team vs. normally developed team is not 'even'. |
|
|
Unstoffe
Joined: Aug 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:25 |
|
Voted 1.
I've not stopped playing [B], but I've snuck back into [R] a couple of times.. .the lure of shed smacks / the tour was too strong.
Would be really nice merely to be able to enter my [B] rats into a smack or minor... I'd have no problem playing against [R] teams with them.
I've personally seen no major problem with racial diversity or TS min/maxing. |
_________________
British or thereabouts? Check out the White Isle League |
|
Oli_B
Joined: Apr 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 18:30 |
|
I love [B] and of the 56 games I've played since the box's introduction 54 of them have been in [B].
Having said that I think a competitive goal beyond the single match would be great.
Just now what would make me play more games would be it being easier to get games. There are lots of 'Not enough coaches' rounds during off-peak times and that could well start a negative feedback loop with coaches reverting to [R]. |
|
|
Aargh
Joined: Apr 07, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 19:21 |
|
#1: While I like this idea, it wouldn't make too much of a difference for me, because winning games and making my teams grow is both a short term and a long term goal for me.
#2: I've heard pretty conflicting stories about the racial diversity. And while it's probably true that 'safe' teams like Orcs or Dwarfs are played more, it's like that in [R] as well. It's just that in [R] you can avoid them, unlike in [B]. It would be nice however to add a small factor to the matching formula that makes a matchup slightly less favourable when you've played that team more often. For example, if 50% of your games are against Orcs and 30% against Dwarfs, make any matchup vs Orcs 5% less favourable and vs Dwarfs 3% less favourable compared to other teams (numbers are made up on the spot, but you get the idea). If you'd do this for each race, the races that you play least against have a larger chance to being matched to you. This would also have the added advantage of discouraging the use of overplayed races (or at least give a reason to have multiple teams), since they'll have a smaller chance of being picked by the matchmaker.
#3: This isn't really a concern for me, unless there is a serious problem with getting matchups (I wouldn't know). Getting a match quickly is a good thing of course, but I'd rather have better matches than more matches.
#4: Voted for this. Seeing teams with 0 rerolls, or people turning down +stat rolls in fear of raising their TS too much just makes me cry a little on the inside.
#5: Don't think this is a good idea.
#6: For now, this is what I'll do, but I do love the Blackbox concept a lot. If I could fill the grid using Blackbox I'd have switched already, but unfortunately that isn't a very viable idea. |
Last edited by Aargh on %b %13, %2009 - %19:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Chingis
Joined: Jul 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 19:35 |
|
One point not in the poll options (which I'd have expected to have been) is the problem with not being able to play a game with the team you want (although I appreciate it may have easily skipped the pollster's mind having had until very recently only one BB team!). Given the preference in this thread for having greater choice over your team, surely that would be the best tweak to make first? Bear in mind that a player only activating one team out of ten is no more "ruining" the blackbox matchup system than someone who only has one team to start with, and that the matchup system relies primarily on a certain critical mass of players to get fair matchups anyway. If by forcing greater team activation than players would like you discourage some from activating at all, it's actually counterproductive!
And I don't think the TS problem is "just" about re-rolls and leaders. |
|
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 20:02 |
|
| Chingis wrote: | | And I don't think the TS problem is "just" about re-rolls and leaders. |
I agree with this, but I know SillySod (one of the first coaches to use 0rr teams and powergame TS) was working on rewriting the entire TS formula to take into account many other things, such as adding more skill combinations like horns + dauntless and so on.
I'm not sure how far he got with this, or whether he's still going with it. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 21:02 |
|
While TS has a lot of little tweaks that could improve it, the 0 rr TS exploit is pretty glaring, and shouldn't wait for a full redo of the TS formula.
Bowlbot match me up with my the cheekiest match up yet, my 131/110 10 man VAMPIRES with a 215 TR Chaos Dwarf team with 5 DPs who were using ye ol 0 reroll BS tweak
And to all those coaches who want to play with the teams they want, you do realize that will result in considerably less games for everyone, right? That a big problem IS all those one team coaches (generally Khemri or Ogre coaches, but even if they're playing flings, it is still a problem). Frankly, a minimum number of teams would be a better solution for injecting new life in to Blackbox |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
arw
Joined: Jan 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 21:49 |
|
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | | And to all those coaches who want to play with the teams they want, you do realize that will result in considerably less games for everyone, right? That a big problem IS all those one team coaches (generally Khemri or Ogre coaches, but even if they're playing flings, it is still a problem). Frankly, a minimum number of teams would be a better solution for injecting new life in to Blackbox |
So how about choosing ~4 Teams to activate?
That way having more Teams is encouraged yet you don't have to play a team not fitting the mood.
I feel limited in races and yet don't want to play my favourite teams less often. Nor do I want "my 12 teams" to need ages just to get the games needed to get them started.
Making a team seems to much of a "grave decision" if you dislike retiring teams... |
|
|
Naboimp
Joined: Dec 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2009 - 22:02 |
|
When the most prevalent complaint is the inability to play with the team people want to play with, I don't see how you can logically argue that forcing people to field more teams will increase participation in the division. Realistically, many in such position would just stop playing in Blackbox altogether.
Even apart from that, forcing existing coaches to field more teams won't result in significantly more games because each coach only plays with one team at a time anyway. I can see that your proposal might improve the quality of matchups, but I do not see that it improves the quantity of matchups. (As things stand, only the odd teams don't get matched up unless there's a coach all of whose teams are extreme outliers. More teams per coach won't improve that situation since most teams will be in the relatively inexperienced range. What's more, the coaches most likely to be affected by that will be those with only one team. And that brings the point back to the beginning since such coaches are choosing to risk not playing at all rather than create another team to improve their odds.) |
|
|
|
|
| |
killing by fun?
Search
