Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
 Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 16:00 |
 
|
| NickNutria wrote: | | I would prefer to take as many positionals as possible, why limit it to only five? My main conern with positionals is not to protect them, but to use them! |
Okay, you asked Nick...
Taking a look at your Dark Elves here for example. Literally every player except #4 Ilinia is constructed in a different manner than how I would select skills. I would use four blitzers and 1-2 witches. I would probably skill most of my linemen at that TV, but only with block, guard and dodge. I wouldn't use the runners or assassin at all, and I most certainly wouldn't take five of the six AV7 players available to me. It's your team. You have fun with them. But if you're asking advice in this forum and I reply, I'm not going to suggest the same direction with your team that you took.
| Stonetroll wrote: | I just have a few problems with this so-called rule of 5.
1) It sounds like a meta-game changing paradigm when its just a fancy way of saying its a different kick-off setup, and a team building principle based on that.
2)It is a narrow team building principle because of the limited experience of the maker, who avoids teams/coaches who are hard to play against for these kinds of teams.
3)It is just another disguise for pixel hugging, by limiting your affection to the few pixels who have lots of skills, and even losing games to protect these players. Also these kinds of teams suck when the "stars" are removed early or the rookie are forced to make any kind of plays.
4)Rat assumes that most bash players are idiots, maybe because he only plays against the bad ones. As a bash player I find this offensive.
Mostly I think these "rules" are okay, but not great. Rat is an above-average coach, but not someone who can make or change the metagame. Sorry bro 
PS. Reign of terror was ended |
Oh stonetroll. I'm not trying to change the metagame. And unless you are including yourself in that group of "bad bash coaches", clearly I do not avoid coaches who are hard to play against, as you suggest. Your stand firm orcs with a diving tackle player get perfect defense against low-tv wood elves. By turn three POW/KO one wardancer and successfully foul out the other. Well done. It's a good strategy against wood elves, and better executed than most. You positioned well, my treeman took root on turn one, and I had nowhere to go. I think it's safe to say that you're probably a better coach than I.
I'm also not an idiot. When I took the game I knew it was going to be rough. Stand Firm on 2 black orcs doesn't look threatening, but I'm smart enough to know it's very much anti-elf, and very bad for my team. Despite this, I took the game with my fancy pants wardancers, rather than sit in gamefinder for hours looking for the perfect cherry. I picked the game for 2 reasons. Firstly, I thought I could win. Turns out not, but nobody is perfect. Secondly, I thought the game would be fun. Turns out it wasn't, but that's nuffle's fault and not yours.
It's true. I hate dwarves, and avoid them like the plague. I tend to not serve up my elves to Chaos Dwarves, and I think Amazons are cheap at low-tv. I don't take a lot of games against those 6 mighty blow, 5 tackle, 2 piling on guys either. Do I pick? I pick the best matchup that is offered to me at any given time. As a result, I win 66/75% of my games, which is far more than I should by coaching ability alone... but there is one very important point. When you go to gamefinder, it is actually quite rare to find a majors winning legend coach sitting there with a fun matchup. Believe me, I would take those games all day long.
No, gamefinder is usually filled with coaches of lesser ability than even my humble skills. Most of the time at least one of the players isn't even an option, and won't play me and my scary "superstar" CR with any team, under any circumstances. Others only highlight unreasonably unfair matches, refusing even slightly even options. No, players who play reasonably balanced matches in ranked are quite rare, leaving the majority of my games against lesser competition who simply aren't able to pick even matches for themselves.
Anytime stonetroll. I enjoy playing you, even though I seem to be 0-3. I don't hide my pixels, if it's a fair game I take it. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 17:16 |
|
Yeah, this really isn't about picking, I've said it before, RS is not a picker, at least not in the sense most of us usually throw that term around in. That is to a degree we are all pickers, RS is far more welcoming of any game (with his few exceptions) than most.
There's also a lot of stupidity saying 'it's more like suggestion of 5'.
No, no it clearly isn't, if that's what you think then you quite simply are not paying attention. Feel free to apply that to your own individual style, but we're not talking about that here. If you want to talk about that make your own thread, it will probably be very short and meaningless because I doubt anyone disagrees with 'suggestion of 5'. |
|
|
Leilond
Joined: Jan 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 17:39 |
|
I find the rule of five, a simple min max crap
I score with the player that can. Skill the players that skillup, never fire a not permanent player... because IN MY HONEST OPINION, this is the way the game was intended to be played
And my poor records clearly show it.
If there was a not ranked black box, where you can randomly pick your opponent, without your records to be scored everywhere, without players concearned with victory and pixel more than fun, I will be sooo happy, to simply fight casual games, without being forced to face all this |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 18:01 |
|
| Leilond wrote: | I find the rule of five, a simple min max crap
I score with the player that can. Skill the players that skillup, never fire a not permanent player... because IN MY HONEST OPINION, this is the way the game was intended to be played
And my poor records clearly show it.
If there was a not ranked black box, where you can randomly pick your opponent, without your records to be scored everywhere, without players concearned with victory and pixel more than fun, I will be sooo happy, to simply fight casual games, without being forced to face all this |
Come and play some [L]eague  |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 18:08 |
|
| Leilond wrote: | | I score with the player that can. Skill the players that skillup, never fire a not permanent player... because IN MY HONEST OPINION, this is the way the game was intended to be played |
Funny. We seem to play the same way. Why, then do my Wood Elf teams have no SPP on players other than the wardancers? Let's see if we can figure this out.
1) I don't give up a lot of 8-turn drives, and when I do, I usually try to return the favor with a oneturner. Grab Treemen and Sure Feet first catchers are examples of this philosophy. Thus, 5spp elf linemen don't get to 6 quickly.
2) I don't screw around (much) trying to get SPP on particular players. My first two legend wardancers took forever to get to 176spp because the team's MA9 catcher was simply better at putting the ball in the endzone. IF they didn't both have mighty blow, they probably never would have gotten there.
3) When I do skill a lineman, I take dodge first in most circumstances. If I double, I take guard unless I don't have mighty blow anywhere else on the team. This leads to the line elves skilling more slowly because (a) they don't take many blocks, thus not getting casualties, and (b) I don't block with linemen much at all, usually dodging away to improve position. This also leads to them dying more frequently, as players with Block are more common than ones with Tackle, and Block/Mighty Blow players are infinitely more prevalent than ones with mighty blow/tackle. Kam's treemen notwithstanding.
4) Wardancers start 8/3/4/7 with blodge. They probably take 95% of the team's blitzes. Of the Felhail Ravens' 19 casualties inflicted in 12 games, five came via treeman, 9 by the Wardancers, one lucky catcher block, and two by a single lineman. If one of the wardancers had mighty blow, you would see casualty SPP distribution even more skewed. This cycle leads to even more SPP on the wardancers
5) When you are lucky enough to get a 9/4/5/7 stat freak wardancer, situations where he isn't the best player to have the ball in his hands are going to be pretty rare. This explains why the team's catcher took 12 games to score his first touchdown (and, that was a rare handoff, yes... from a lineman). This continues to spiral as said star player(s) become progressively more capable than your rookies.
I play to win the game I'm playing, not to build my elves up to 2500tv... and certainly not to blodge every damn player. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 19:22 |
|
| licker wrote: |
There's also a lot of stupidity saying 'it's more like suggestion of 5'.
|
So it's not the semantics that makes it seem like you're going to drop dead from a coronary... |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 19:28 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | When you go to gamefinder, it is actually quite rare to find a majors winning legend coach sitting there with a fun matchup. Believe me, I would take those games all day long.
|
This is to juicy to pass up.
The problem with the legend coaches who have won majors and the other coaches who always seem to be in the final 8 of majors offer non fun match ups, your view, not mine. Is rooted in the reality that their teams are built to win, and crush bones and run around like fiends that cannot be stop by mere mortal teams who abide by some rule of 5 rubbish.
Thus the game is lopsided from the start because your team is not capable of playing against them regardless of the skill level of the coach. |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
akaRenton
Joined: Apr 15, 2008
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 19:52 |
|
I get the rule of 5, and I see the sense of it but for me the it's the rule of 14 so I've got some to foul with is much more fun. I don't have any problems with any team builds people choose, just so long as people don't expect me to be eager to play them. I'd rather play against crazy team builds, or "fun" coaches. But then my definition of fun isn't the same as everyone elses. I don't really understand why everyone worries so much about the way anyone else chooses to play the game.
When I first joined Fumbbl I was crap, then slightly less crap and a terrible picker (choosing the easiest opponent I could find. I played with only winning in mind. It didn't work for me. The wins felt hollow, and the defeats annoyed me. Now I play silly teams, for the most part, against people I think will let me enjoy the game whilst they do. I do turn down a lot of match ups, and rarely play Legend coaches, but it is usually because I don't think I'll enjoy playing them regardless of whether I win or lose. If the only thing in your coach bio is your highest CR rating or similar it's a safe bet we want very different things from the game 
Back to the OP, my main comment is that you should stop worrying about the approval of other coaches for your tactics and team builds and just do what works for you. If you post asking advice for builds/skills etc you've got to expect people to offer their views and that they will differ from yours. |
_________________
Dirty Cranberries - All zombie funtimes
Fumbbl Image Library - Free images to make logos, player bio pics etc |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 20:22 |
|
I think the 'rule of 5' is utter tosh.
Not sure who started it, but the idea seems to have gathered some backers from certain quarters, but there are certainly plenty of teams out there which become next to useless if you have only fixed your sight on 5 players.
As an Elf coach, my target is Blodge on all lineman
As an Nurgle coach I want my Warriors and Pesti's all skilled.
As a Dwarf coach, I want as many guards as I can get hold of, plus some.
As a Lizard coach I want all Saurus skilled, and a ball carrying skink.
The only scenario off the top of my head where it might work is stunties. |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 20:25 |
|
rule of five only protects your premium players for one or two turns. meanwhile all your linemen are easily bashed away, making those premium players more vulnerable as the game progresses...unless you're dwarves. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 20:40 |
|
I think the reason why I fundamentally disagree with the rule of 5 is that the main reason people feel obliged to do it is
1. to minmax
2. as some kind of reaction to the killstack
And, really, these are negative reasons. With the side effect that 11 man squads with so many unskilled players and such reliance on a couple of superstars doesnt make for good gameplay. I wont deny its an effective play style though. |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 20:44 |
|
| PainState wrote: |
This is to juicy to pass up.
The problem with the legend coaches who have won majors and the other coaches who always seem to be in the final 8 of majors offer non fun match ups, your view, not mine. Is rooted in the reality that their teams are built to win, and crush bones and run around like fiends that cannot be stop by mere mortal teams who abide by some rule of 5 rubbish.
Thus the game is lopsided from the start because your team is not capable of playing against them regardless of the skill level of the coach. |
Get the hell out of here. I've played your stupid tacklepomber scrub team four times with elves, losing three in lopsided casualty fests, trying to get a good game with you. You've reciprocated no balanced matches in return. I've offered your current sad state Buccaneers a match, and haven't heard a damn thing. Likely because you, like most ranked players, don't play matches you know you are going to lose... and without tacklepomb humans, you really don't have much of a shot against any of my elf teams.
Meanwhile, I've played the likes of Azure sixteen times, losing almost all of them to various tournament quality monstrosities. I've played everyone because I don't duck legends, I duck scrubs playing bash teams because the games aren't fun and I have nothing to prove against them. Once in a while, out of sheer boredom, I accept a lopsided match (like tacklepomb humans vs elves/skaven) by some mediocre coach, get rolled due to AV7 pomb imbalance, and swear of similar matches for another month.
Yes, I reserve the right to get picked on my own terms. |
|
|
Kam
Joined: Nov 06, 2012
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 21:07 |
|
The Sammiches will happily play again against the Bucs when their strike will be over (not happening anytime soon, but still!). The same Sammiches also have an equal number of victories and losses against Rat's teams.
People hate that kind of "builds" not because it's OP (it's not), but because it makes you more coward than a Fling. |
_________________
GLN 17 is out!
 |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 21:20 |
|
Well in defense of my Tackle Pomber scrubs I would like to point out that with my new schedule up at work and home life I very, very rarely now show up at North America prime time hours to play matches at all.
The vast majority of my FUMBBL matches all happen around 15:15 BB time or 8:15AM in Central North America.
So it is not that I would not offer you a fair match up Rat, it is because for the last year I have not been around to offer you a fair match during the evening hours of North America.
Now if you do not mind playing at 8:15AM Central time send me a PM and we will lock horns. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 11, 2015 - 21:37 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Exempt teams
Search
