| Poll |
| Is the diversity really that bad? |
| I don't play in the box but think - NO |
|
6% |
[ 9 ] |
| I don't play in the box but think - YES |
|
13% |
[ 20 ] |
| I've had less then 20 box games and think - NO |
|
8% |
[ 12 ] |
| I've had less then 20 box games and think - YES |
|
12% |
[ 18 ] |
| I've had less then 100 box games and think - NO |
|
19% |
[ 28 ] |
| I've had less then 100 box games and think - YES |
|
19% |
[ 28 ] |
| I've had more then 100 box games and think - NO |
|
21% |
[ 31 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 146 |
|
Qaz
Joined: Apr 28, 2004
|
 Posted:
Aug 09, 2009 - 21:59 |
 
|
Orc 25
Chaos 18
Dwarf 16
Dark Elf 7
Khemri 7
Undead 7
Chaos Dwarf 4
Lizardmen 4
Wood Elf 4
Human 3
High Elf 2
Ogre 2
Skaven 2
Necromantic 1
Norse 1
Amazon 1
Total 104
this is for my most played B box team. Is played mostly at TR above 175
It would be nice if Orcs did not have so insainly low TS. |
_________________
Superstition brings bad luck.
"he who has relied least on fortune is established
the strongest"
Niccolo Machiavelli |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2009 - 23:48 |
|
Well, I chose to play Dorfs in the box as I knew I would get games there and not have to go begging, like I would in [R]. The problem with diversity obviously gets worse at higher tr for the more fragile teams as there are fewer and fewer "soft" opponents to recover against. But then frankly that is the opposite of [R} where it is harder and harder to get games as your teams gets more bashy, while all the elves play first to 5 TD fests. Ok, Im exaggerating - but the point is they are different competitions for different styles. Unless FUMBBL was to change into FUMelfBBL, black box is surely a good thing as it is? |
|
|
XtremeXwing
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 00:17 |
|
Currently played 176 box games and my top team i have played is:
Orcs 21 times
then intrestingly joint second is ...
Darkelfs with 17 (joint with dwarfs and Khremi)
followed by Chaos with 13 and then woodies with 11!
 |
|
|
jimjo
Joined: Apr 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 01:30 |
|
around 50% from my around 400 games in the box where bash games
chaos70, orxe60 and dwarf40 and khems 30
as i played 50% of my games rats and h-elf i wanna say :
there is a huge lack of diversity in the BOx
and i love it....
i think i cant play rats vs non bash anymore;)
and i hate it ....
to rebuild is soo hard (exept for rats)
i vote for NO
i dont want BBR in the scheduler
because i dont like to play elfs with my rats;)
but maybe we should arange a only non bash teams in the box month
as a result we would have a lot of high rated non bash teams:)
maybee not for long
better the BlackBox fumbblers change and make themselfs some rats too:)
anyone who know KANT? |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 10:54 |
|
The diversity seems just fine to me. Ofcourse there will be a bit more bashers at higher TR ranges, that was to be expected.
Out of my skaven 146 games I have 25 vs Orcs, 17 vs Dwarves and Khemri. Not that bad, especially considering that most of the games have been played at a TR higher than 180 (just a guess here). I dont have any problems with people who play bashy teams, if they like it fine. I prefer playing a squishy team, and if I manage outbash a bashy team once in a while, all the more fun. Only playstyles I have a problem is the coaches who arent playing to win. Be that bashers that dont try to force my skaven to score, but rather let them stall as long as they want while bashing at the few downed players a long way from the ball, or squishy players running away for safety. That makes the game boring for me. |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 11:09 |
|
The thing that people need to realise is, the bashy teams are mainly building themselves up to take on other bashy team, so if you biuld up and elf team, or rats like myself, jimjo and odi above, you will have alot of fun running rings around the bashers.
Sure, there may be alot of Orc teams out there, but they quickly reach quite a high TR leaving them in the range to play Dwarves, CDs and Chaos, whilst the middle range of teams seems to be a very nice mix. |
|
|
Gran
Joined: Jul 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 11:45 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: | | Gran wrote: | | Igvy wrote: | | If you can't beat em join em. |
I take this as evidence why the Black Box will be(come) the Bash Box. |
I don't. You run usually one tournament team that is an orc, chaos or elf team anyway. |
Well, what I mean is that the Box is virtually a non-stop tournament, and long tournaments will favour high AV bashers (that is, assuming that people will try to get a high BWR*).
I'm not saying that I think we should ban bashers or that I feel trodden on because I can't "elfball" my way through the Box (to tell you the truth I'm rubbish with elves), I'm saying I find it sad that there isn't a more even mix of teams, because I would like to play a wide mix of teams and races. My 20% orcs isn't something I ran into at TR200+. I don't even have a team at TR200+! 20% orcs is what I got between TR 100 and 170.
I just find it a bit boring, that's all. That doesn't mean I will leave the Box, I like the Box! I just think there is room for improvement, and I think that there is a risk of stagnation.
*Edited |
_________________
The trouble is that things *never* get better, they just stay the same, only more so.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Eric)
Today Is A Good Day For Someone Else To Die!
-- (Terry Pratchett, Feet of Clay)
Last edited by Gran on %b %10, %2009 - %12:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 11:58 |
|
Gran, no its not. Because in B, if you get mngs etc, you drop down to play lower teams, so it is nothing like a long tourny. |
_________________
 |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:04 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | Gran, no its not. Because in B, if you get mngs etc, you drop down to play lower teams, so it is nothing like a long tourny. |
Aye. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
Gran
Joined: Jul 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:06 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | Gran, no its not. Because in B, if you get mngs etc, you drop down to play lower teams, so it is nothing like a long tourny. |
True in so far as it means your not going to end up facing much stronger opposition undermanned, but still think my point is valid. It's easier, for most people, to get a strong team and to keep winning in this environment with high AV bashers, so that is what they'll pick in order to hunt for a higher BWR* or to enter into BBox-tournaments.
*Edited |
_________________
The trouble is that things *never* get better, they just stay the same, only more so.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Eric)
Today Is A Good Day For Someone Else To Die!
-- (Terry Pratchett, Feet of Clay)
Last edited by Gran on %b %10, %2009 - %12:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:11 |
|
But BBR is completely unimportant. Coaches are ranked by BWR which is the win rating. And from experience I can say, that bashers rather tend to hurt your BWR. |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:16 |
|
who cares about BBR? In the beginning that was just part of C's plan to hurt coaches who just wanted to bash instead of playing to win, if I remember correctly. But these days it's obsolite, so it could even be removed. Though I was very close to making it into the top ten last week, with a BBR of 139. That would have been fun, making it to the top ten with the lousiest BBR. But then I ended up loosing a game or 2. 
edit: as Circ said... I got those mixed up, corected them now... |
Last edited by odi on %b %10, %2009 - %13:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
Gran
Joined: Jul 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:33 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | But BBR is completely unimportant. Coaches are ranked by BWR which is the win rating. And from experience I can say, that bashers rather tend to hurt your BWR. |
My bad. Obviously I mean BWR. |
_________________
The trouble is that things *never* get better, they just stay the same, only more so.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Eric)
Today Is A Good Day For Someone Else To Die!
-- (Terry Pratchett, Feet of Clay) |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:39 |
|
| odi wrote: | | who cares about BWR? In the beginning that was just part of C's plan to hurt coaches who just wanted to bash instead of playing to win, if I remember correctly. But these days it's obsolite, so it could even be removed. Though I was very close to making it into the top ten last week, with a BWR of 139. That would have been fun, making it to the top ten with the lousiest BWR. But then I ended up loosing a game or 2. |
You are mixing up BWR (Blackbox Win Rating) and BBR (Blackbox Bash Rating). |
|
|
Snorri
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 10, 2009 - 12:49 |
|
| Gran wrote: |
Well, what I mean is that the Box is virtually a non-stop tournament, and long tournaments will favour high AV bashers (that is, assuming that people will try to get a high BBR).
I just find it a bit boring, that's all. That doesn't mean I will leave the Box, I like the Box! I just think there is room for improvement, and I think that there is a risk of stagnation. |
I also find it boring. Just a small fraction of my games are from [R] and [B] because its so stagnant.
Unconstrained tournaments will always favour high av bashers. But it doesn't have to be that way. There are some long term [U] tournaments which foster variety.
Unfortunately, trying to tell the core blackboxers/forumers about that here is nigh on impossible.... In the end it seems like there's some unswayable concensus, but in reality they drive away alot of interested players...even from fumbbl altogether. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Welcome Newcomers - ...
Search
