FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

treborius

Joined: Apr 05, 2008

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 15:42

oh great - i guess this will turn into "batter me" - thread - i'll just watch, enjoy Wink

panzerpig

Joined: Feb 24, 2008

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 15:47

/signed
Do anything to keep blackbox alive. ranked sucks! Smile

odi

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 16:02

I think the actual problem is that we've driven a lot of possible coaches away from B. The problem isnt the minimum coach limit, but the number of coaches playing these days Very Happy

Zeke73

Joined: Feb 08, 2007

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 16:14

/signed.

BiggieB

Joined: Feb 19, 2005

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 16:31

odi wrote:

I think the actual problem is that we've driven a lot of possible coaches away from B. The problem isnt the minimum coach limit, but the number of coaches playing these days Very Happy

head on! So the question should be instead:

how can we get more coaches to play in B? (Note I am not playing in B Smile

but for discussion sake)

Verbalcody

Joined: Jun 12, 2007

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 16:35

why does anyone play blackbox again?

Shivkala

Joined: Jun 07, 2007

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 20:18

/signed

After not getting a game in on a Saturday afternoon(!) due to low number of coaches, I agree that with the 6 coaches limit, too often no match can be made. This actually means that Blackbox is nearly dead. Lowering the coach limit would prolong the withering period a bit, but if the major problems aren't solved fast the best thing that happened to Fummbl (at least in the short time I'm playing here) will just vanish... Sad

Balle2000

Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 23:04

signed

surprised it hasn't been dealt with yet...

_________________
Join the SWL

Get your team bios here!
Putting the romantic in necromantic since 2010

shadow46x2

Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 23:48

maybe you should worry about issues like the 0 reroll exploit being fixed, which will in turn, encourage a little bit more traffic in the division.....

you can start by dealing with this team first...

because i know all kinds of coaches that would love to play against that team with their 3 game 119TS team

--j

_________________

origami wrote:

There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet.

johan

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: Feb 21, 2009 - 23:50

The problem with having few coaches is that it's harder to set up good matches. But if one or two good matchups are possible with few coaches, why not go for them? The only risk I can see is the possibility of abuse, but that ought to be pretty small.

_________________
”It's very sad
To see the ancient and distinguished game that used to be
A model of decorum and tranquillity
Become like any other sport, a battleground...”
—Benny Andersson & Björn Ulvaeus, Chess

SmilinMatt

Joined: Oct 03, 2007

Posted: Feb 22, 2009 - 00:13

shadow46x2 wrote:

maybe you should worry about issues like the 0 reroll exploit being fixed, which will in turn, encourage a little bit more traffic in the division.....

you can start by dealing with this team first...

because i know all kinds of coaches that would love to play against that team with their 3 game 119TS team

--j

QFT

/notsigned

_________________
Proudly occupying a spot on three Blacklists

Balle2000

Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Posted: Feb 22, 2009 - 07:51

shadow46x2 wrote:

maybe you should worry about issues like the 0 reroll exploit being fixed, which will in turn, encourage a little bit more traffic in the division.....

you can start by dealing with this team first...

because i know all kinds of coaches that would love to play against that team with their 3 game 119TS team

--j

sure, changing the 0RR Leader thing would be an even better improvement.

but that's hardly an argument AGAINST changing the coach limit - which could be done in one minute, changing "if coaches <6" to "<5" for example.

EvolveToAnarchism

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: Feb 22, 2009 - 08:54

I'm definitely in favour of dropping the limit down to 4. I'm stunned by the number of rounds that I've seen come so close to being startable. I've got two extreme teams (high TS and very low TS) and I've been tempted to activate them at off-peak hours just to help out those who want to play. Then hoping that my TS would be incompatible with the other coaches' teams as I'm usually doing other things online...

My experience in [B] has been fantastic. My mind boggles at all the complaints. I fear the appearance of widespread abuses and the near constant whining about the problems with [B] is probably scaring away a lot of coaches from trying out a very interesting and fun division. I would have thought Christer's new [B] features might have led to a boost in [B] activity, but sadly that appears not to be the case.

I just hope things pick up by the time I'm done with Project Mayhem and can devote a bit more time to playing something other than [F].

_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism

odi

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: Feb 22, 2009 - 10:21

So, clearly C removing BR and BRR from the equation didnt help. Ofcourse most of the Boxers are against it considering all those 0RR and "I got nearly half a million, when I get to million I'll go to Vegas!" coaches. But those coaches should also realize they are one of the reasons why B has lost quite a few players. And the "Cant beat them, join them" attitude isnt helping. Yes, there will always be plenty of powergamers, but using every possible exploit is just gonna do the same to B as removing G access from big guys did to stunty. After that, thy will spend hours in ranked waiting for a game again. But no worries, I'll still be here with my rats, since I do enjoy the challange.

Though, I havent run into that many 0RR+Leader or 500k in the bank teams, just a few of them. And even out of those some games have been really fun. For example I had a blast playing westerner's Dwarves twice in a row with my rats. I know he'll foul every rat that is down, even on T16 if he can, but he is a fun and chatty coach so it was quite fun.

Still, I do think that everyone should be allowed to play the way they think is fun. So we cant really limit what they do. The only downside is, what other coaches consider fun, other coaches consider a waste of time. So that will keep some coaches away from B.

BiggieB

Joined: Feb 19, 2005

Posted: Feb 22, 2009 - 13:23

odi wrote:

So, clearly C removing BR and BRR from the equation didnt help. Ofcourse most of the Boxers are against it considering all those 0RR and "I got nearly half a million, when I get to million I'll go to Vegas!" coaches. But those coaches should also realize they are one of the reasons why B has lost quite a few players. And the "Cant beat them, join them" attitude isnt helping. Yes, there will always be plenty of powergamers, but using every possible exploit is just gonna do the same to B as removing G access from big guys did to stunty. After that, thy will spend hours in ranked waiting for a game again. But no worries, I'll still be here with my rats, since I do enjoy the challange.

Though, I havent run into that many 0RR+Leader or 500k in the bank teams, just a few of them. And even out of those some games have been really fun. For example I had a blast playing westerner's Dwarves twice in a row with my rats. I know he'll foul every rat that is down, even on T16 if he can, but he is a fun and chatty coach so it was quite fun.

Still, I do think that everyone should be allowed to play the way they think is fun. So we cant really limit what they do. The only downside is, what other coaches consider fun, other coaches consider a waste of time. So that will keep some coaches away from B.

they are not hoarding cash to get rich, they are hoarding cash to give away handis, which aint nearly worth the ts they count as. So they do it to effectivly lower they ts, another cheesy exploit