uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Location: Finland
|
  Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 22:36 |
 
|
Do we fumbblers get the 11 man rule?
You can answer any one answer that you feel is correct. If you feel there are many answers that you feel fits your opinion, please pick one of them. I am sure the answers of the community will average it out.
My intent with this poll is, that perhaps we as a community will get more insight of our collective thinking in this matter. Many recent threads have got at least me to wonder, how people feel about their knowledge and understanding of the site rules (http://www.fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=help&op=rules) in that particular part. It certainly seems to have caused a lot of discussion.
Good luck in your games and have fun on the site!  |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 22:42 |
|
|
Dalfort
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 22:48 |
|
The way I understand it goes like this : Journeymen are to be used to achieve 11 players for the next game. Hoarding on the other hand is open to interpretation. I feel that money over the amount of the most expensive positional or RR cost should prevent a coach from using Journeymen. This would allow coaches to save up for a positional or RR without over using (abusing) the rule.
I understand this would be more advantageous to certain races but then I think we can all agree nothing in the rules say they are fair. |
|
|
Dalfort
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 22:55 |
|
of course if more than 1 journemen were needed after purchasing a positional then that would be fitting.
I.E. Team suffers 2 rips : treasury holds (with game winnings) enough to buy the most costly positional or 2 lineman/thrall. It would be perfectly acceptable to buy the positional and take a journeyman, or to buy 2 basic players as the coach sees fit. |
|
|
blader4411
Joined: Oct 18, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 22:56 |
|
It should also depend on the team. I'd want to keep about 200k in the bank for Elves to prepare for "That game", but probably wouldn't need that much on a Dwarf team.
I think that as long as you keep it reasonable, it's fine.
That rule should be a guideline.
-Blader |
|
|
RandomOracle
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 23:00 |
|
I have heard no good argument for this rule whatsoever. It used to be to prevent teams from being uncompetitive, but now it seems that it's enforced because the admins perceive teams to gain an advantage by using journeymen. All I see the rule doing is limiting team building options of coaches for no good reason. |
|
|
stej
Joined: Jan 05, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 31, 2011 - 23:57 |
|
So long as journeymen are fully taken to make your team up to 11 then you gain no ingame advantage from running such a team so it shouldnt be a problem (in my eyes)
Doing so does let you horde lots of cash which could give you a team development advantage of offsetting spiralling expenses. This however is easy enough to do with certain team anyway so again, is not much of an advantage (in my opinion)
If you are not hiring journeymen to run teams of sub 11 players in order to field super stars vs rookies then it is a bit of a poor show and is abusing the system (although some lucky dice and your killer is dead). In that sense, a loophole of running sub 11 players should be closed by auto filling journeyment up to 11 players for each match |
|
|
Carnis
Joined: Feb 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 00:03 |
|
| RandomOracle wrote: | | I have heard no good argument for this rule whatsoever. It used to be to prevent teams from being uncompetitive, but now it seems that it's enforced because the admins perceive teams to gain an advantage by using journeymen. All I see the rule doing is limiting team building options of coaches for no good reason. |
+1
Furthermore, I think RO has with his chaos box team shown that even if you hoard money "and exploit this", if you stay on the top TVs eventually you run out no matter what.. |
|
|
Woodstock
Joined: Dec 11, 2004
Location: Netherlands
|
*yawn*... why do people always make useless threads because one guy QQs too much...
EDIT: QQ is slang for crybaby... emoticon, two eyes with tears. |
Last edited by Woodstock on Nov 01, 2011 - 00:16; edited 1 time in total |
|
Dalfort
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 00:10 |
|
does the team page not already auto fill when you click the ready team button? I know in the 7's League we have to move the journymen to 0 before readying.
but there was alot of discussion about the treasury and the bank before and whilst it may not affect the actual game being played it certainly is not reasonable to hoard enough money to create another team. (although I did have a Ranked team that had half a million coins at one point, but that was due to the fluff of not retiring anybody. I blew it all in 1 game by transfering it in and gave my oppo at great time too  ).
Have fun and take care. thats my lot for this thread |
|
|
backelie
Joined: Jul 20, 2010
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 00:30 |
|
No, no one gets the 11 man rule.
"Teams in competitive divisions are expected to strive for at least 11 players on the roster. While this doesn't mean that any team below 11 players must immediately hire a new lineman, coaches are expected to not let the team deteriorate on purpose."
Are journeymen 'on the roster' or not? It's certainly not 100% clear. Is consistently fielding 1-3 journeymen on the LOS 'letting the team deteriorate'? I'd say obviously not (rather the opposite), but that's a matter of opinion.
Seriously, if you want an anti-hoarding fumbbl house rule then just go ahead and make a clear anti-hoarding rule, instead of trying to shoehorn new meanings into unclear rules made muddy by the change in the ruleset. |
|
|
Ehlers
Joined: Jun 26, 2006
Location: DK
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 09:38 |
|
| backelie wrote: | No, no one gets the 11 man rule.
"Teams in competitive divisions are expected to strive for at least 11 players on the roster. While this doesn't mean that any team below 11 players must immediately hire a new lineman, coaches are expected to not let the team deteriorate on purpose."
Are journeymen 'on the roster' or not? It's certainly not 100% clear. |
I would say it is when you read CRP rules.
| Quote: | | 7. If a team can only field 10 or less players for the next match, the team may bring Journeymen onto the roster for free until the team can field 11 players for the next match |
Seems like people forgot this important rule. If you have 1 million on your team, then you ARE able to field 11 players.
Also remember that journeymen can take you over 16 players. A team can only field 16 players and therefore I would say that journeymen are NOT part of your roster. But a tool for teams still be able to field 11 players if they somehow should not be able to. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Location: in a treee
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 09:41 |
|
lock this thread.
it is just a whine thread spawned by the crybaby thread. |
_________________
https://fumbbl.com/i/366915
***************************
Avatar-image courtesy of JarvisPants-guy. Blame him. He made me do it. |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
Location: in a treee
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 09:42 |
|
| Carnis wrote: | | RandomOracle wrote: | | I have heard no good argument for this rule whatsoever. It used to be to prevent teams from being uncompetitive, but now it seems that it's enforced because the admins perceive teams to gain an advantage by using journeymen. All I see the rule doing is limiting team building options of coaches for no good reason. |
+1
Furthermore, I think RO has with his chaos box team shown that even if you hoard money "and exploit this", if you stay on the top TVs eventually you run out no matter what.. |
I thought you had rage quit the site after conceding vs the WMDs? |
|
|
Skolopender
Joined: Jun 17, 2006
Location: Skanderborg, Denmark
|
| Posted:
Nov 01, 2011 - 10:05 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | lock this thread.
it is just a whine thread spawned by the crybaby thread. |
|
_________________
Lobbying for a Troll team. If Bonehead Ogres can have one, why not one for Trolls? Power to the Trolls! |
|
|
|
If I were to 'fix' p...
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
