Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 17:49 |
|
I fundamentally disagree. You're presenting a slippery slope where none exists. Taking block and firing nigglers are valid team building strategies. Exploiting a loophole in the way TS is calculated is not. Most tellingly, these teams are NOT competitive. They aren't winning (at least not against me, I can't speak for other people). I played a vastly more experienced Khemri team with no rerolls recently, stopped really playing after 4 turns and just concentrated on dodging out of the way and fouling stragglers, and still managed to tie. So one cannot call the build competitive, whatever the coach's motivation.
Frankly, I've half a mind to start a movement to simply forget the win any time I'm matched up with them, and concentrate on gangfouling the team in to dust, but that would be largely counterproductive.
Frankly, the sooner your plan to retool TS goes through the better, Sillysod, as this is really only the most glaring example of problems with TS that have cropped up since [B] started. |
_________________ <PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 17:57 |
|
Quote: | Taking block and firing nigglers are valid team building strategies. Exploiting a loophole in the way TS is calculated is not. |
Labels and nothing more. Nothing in the rulebook tells you that taking block and firing nigglers are in any way valid and nothing tells you that you shouldnt game the TS system. There are definately teams out there that use the technique to win (I'm 100% certain of this as I own those teams) so competitive is a fair label IMO. Obviously some people might not be so good at using it, just like some people arent so good at BB in general. |
_________________ 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." |
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:08 |
|
Edit: I should read from last post to current first. |
Last edited by Shrap on %b %25, %2009 - %18:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
Hero164
Joined: Jan 20, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:10 |
|
Sadly the lowest common denominator always wins. B is rapidly becoming stuffed with these teams. I have played 130 B games and its just got to the stage where its either play the metagaming strategy or be a punchbag for everyone else who is doing it.
So I choose not to play the game. I'm quitting B as its just not fun and heading back to ranked. This metagaming has irked me more than cherrypicking ever did.
Its a shame because B had the potential to be a great division filled with fun but it has become less and less fun over the last couple of months. |
_________________ BEEDOGS FOREVER!!
Stella for President!!
Need a new challenge? Here's all the challenge you will ever need.
http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=19352 |
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:13 |
|
Well Hero164 I wouldn't give up for life...it is in alpha only. You can always watch and see if things are tweeked to eliminate this. |
|
|
Hero164
Joined: Jan 20, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:19 |
|
Sure... I might come back if there are changes. But from the debate here you can see its the usual argument about fun vs win at any cost. Ironically B works much better at higher TS as thats way less open to abuse.
The problem is you have to wade through all the depressed TS teams first. Its the B equivilant of repeatedly making rookie zons in R over and over to improve CR.
To me BB is more than who can cram in the most DPs at the lowest TR possible. |
_________________ BEEDOGS FOREVER!!
Stella for President!!
Need a new challenge? Here's all the challenge you will ever need.
http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=19352 |
|
johan
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:41 |
|
The best way to avoid them is growing your team. After a certain point (TS 150, or thereabouts), it's no longer worth it to stay at 0 RR. |
_________________ ”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 |
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:46 |
|
SillySod wrote: | Quote: | Taking block and firing nigglers are valid team building strategies. Exploiting a loophole in the way TS is calculated is not. |
Labels and nothing more. Nothing in the rulebook tells you that taking block and firing nigglers are in any way valid and nothing tells you that you shouldnt game the TS system. There are definately teams out there that use the technique to win (I'm 100% certain of this as I own those teams) so competitive is a fair label IMO. Obviously some people might not be so good at using it, just like some people arent so good at BB in general. |
You're quibbling about semantics and completely missing the issue. In a system where one cannot avoid games against these teams, they decrease the net enjoyment the participants in the system (much like playing one heavy bash team does). For that reason alone, rules should be put in place to remove them. They aren't competitive (with a few glaring exceptions I can think off). If a coach wants to play this style, there's several great open divisions for him to get his jollies. Because [B] is not really open, it should hold the coaches to a higher standard.
Edit: I drew rerolless khemri again and horsewhipped them with Vampires....competitive...right |
_________________ <PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jan 25, 2009 - 18:56 |
|
Well I agree with you on some levels. But they are competitive and very much so. Metagame some more into the coach you were playing his only other team he's played out of the box, at any length, he was 6/8/26 (his chaos) with which he did no cherrypicking. I think it's made him VERY competitive. He's just a bad coach. No offense to those parties involved. I mean Im a bad coach too. But yeah for a coach of his skill having winning khemri and dwarves in teh box?...I really think you are missing that one piece of this Snap. |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 15:40 |
|
Eddy wrote: | Apparently, Christer doesn't think it's a problem that some team purposely lower their chance to win in order to outbash and trash teams with a similar TS but focusing on winning. From what i saw in chat, he didn't seem to think the rebate for 0/1 RR was a problem. To be completely accurate, his answer was "Do the same, then." |
Reposting from another thread. Thanks to Eddy for providing this info. |
_________________ \x/es |
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 15:41 |
|
westerner wrote: | Eddy wrote: | Apparently, Christer doesn't think it's a problem that some team purposely lower their chance to win in order to outbash and trash teams with a similar TS but focusing on winning. From what i saw in chat, he didn't seem to think the rebate for 0/1 RR was a problem. To be completely accurate, his answer was "Do the same, then." |
Reposting from another thread. Thanks to Eddy for providing this info. |
Problem is it's a fallacy to think it doesnt help with winning. |
|
|
clarkin
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 16:05 |
|
I think those are two seperate issues wrapped in one quote is all:
Eddy wrote: | Apparently, Christer doesn't think it's a problem that some team purposely lower their chance to win in order to outbash and trash teams with a similar TS but focusing on winning. |
I think this has to do with BBR and BR being removed from the scheduler, and as a result some people thinking teams that cause many cas and lose many games would now get a boost. Newsflash: they USED get a boost in the old system (as their low BR counted triple than their high BBR), and now they get no boost.
Eddy wrote: | From what i saw in chat, he didn't seem to think the rebate for 0/1 RR was a problem. To be completely accurate, his answer was "Do the same, then." |
And this is his response to teams getting -TS for having 0/1 rerolls, which is where I think he's wrong. The rebate is unneccessary and gives teams who use it a lower TS than they deserve. |
|
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 16:10 |
|
clarkin, if i may, i think you're mistaken. When i had the very short chat with Christer in #fumbblblackbox, i only talked about how some teams used no RR to get a lower TS and thus outbash other teams. He answered "Do the same, then." and (paraphrase this time) "TS reflects the chance to win the next game, and without RR your chance to win is lower". No mention of BR or BBR in this. Of course, the chat was quite lapidary, so i didn't have the opportunity to gather more details. |
_________________ 'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
clarkin
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 16:15 |
|
Fair enough - you should know!
But in fairness, you don't have to be a bash-and-kill team to use 0RR to get an advantage. Any team that does will get an effective 10TS advantage in their matchups, which means easier games and more wins. I've been doing this with my 0RR dark elves for example. |
|
|
xcver
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jan 27, 2009 - 16:21 |
|
these have an excellent record with 1 RR + Leader which essentially gives them 2 rerolls most of the time saving about 10 TS this way. |
_________________ "Power without perception is virtually useless and therefore of no true value!" - Ryouken - Master of the Hokuto no Ken Martial Arts |
|
|