PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 01:10 |
|
koadah wrote: | Brainsaw wrote: | whats wrong in counting necros and rats to the clawpomb teams? especially as they in fact have access to it and Necros now won 2 Majors. Might there be some connection in it? ,-) |
Nothing is wrong with it if you make it clear what you have done.
Some people might think that you only meant chaos, Nurgle, CDs & pact. |
Why would anybody think that pact has won a Major since the chart has a big fat 0? |
_________________ Comish of the: |
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 01:23 |
|
Brainsaw wrote: | whats wrong in counting necros and rats to the clawpomb teams? especially as they in fact have access to it and Necros now won 2 Majors. Might there be some connection in it? ,-) |
They can also get Guard on their Wights now with normal rolls. Shall we have a Guardspam classification?
They don't have access to clawpomb on normal skill rolls and neither do Skaven, plus they aren't hyper bashy teams even if they have a Clawpomber or two.
Everyone thinks of a team like WMDs in the Box when you mention a clawpomb team, not a team like Rata Blanca. |
_________________ Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 04:16 |
|
The 10% fewer games people win in the box are probably because of 1000tv amazon, dwarf, and all-marauder pact nonsense.
Seriously, the couple of times I played against one of those 10 marauders + clawpomber teams was enough for me to say goodbye to that division. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 04:33 |
|
Rat_Salat wrote: | The 10% fewer games people win in the box are probably because of 1000tv amazon, dwarf, and all-marauder pact nonsense.
Seriously, the couple of times I played against one of those 10 marauders + clawpomber teams was enough for me to say goodbye to that division. |
Ice up son.
The 10% fewer is also likely because of other quirks of the box like a propensity for less even racial matchups, good coaches keeping good teams alive for a long time with relatively few rookies filtering in among other things.
Come back Rat_Salat, it's worth your while. |
|
|
Wizfall
Joined: Dec 09, 2011
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 09:50 |
|
Rat_Salat wrote: | The 10% fewer games people win in the box are probably because of 1000tv amazon, dwarf, and all-marauder pact nonsense.
Seriously, the couple of times I played against one of those 10 marauders + clawpomber teams was enough for me to say goodbye to that division. |
If that was your main issue you may enjoy B now.
I only play quite low TV and never met a single shameless low TV amazon "lineblodger" or all-marauder cpomb team since the scheduler change (i dislike the change but i acknowledge it has been extremely effective toward this issue). |
|
|
Wizfall
Joined: Dec 09, 2011
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 10:05 |
|
coombz wrote: |
wow, I really thought (from anecdotal 'evidence' from various forum threads) that clawpomb was just a team killing annoyance in perpetual league/matchmaking systems |
And you are right.
It would be unwise to change the ruleset only for the tournament that represents like a generous 1% of all Fumbbl games while perpetual league/matchmaking games make the other 99%. |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 10:19 |
|
mrt1212 wrote: | Ice up son.
The 10% fewer is also likely because of other quirks of the box like a propensity for less even racial matchups, good coaches keeping good teams alive for a long time with relatively few rookies filtering in among other things.
Come back Rat_Salat, it's worth your while. |
There's also the whole queueing up and not getting a game thing. I play elves, and can get a game in about 2 minutes on gamefinder. It's more convenient, and I play teams that people LIKE playing against. I don't need blackbox to trick people into playing against my scary mens. |
|
|
Leilond
Joined: Jan 02, 2012
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 11:01 |
|
Wizfall wrote: | Rat_Salat wrote: | The 10% fewer games people win in the box are probably because of 1000tv amazon, dwarf, and all-marauder pact nonsense.
Seriously, the couple of times I played against one of those 10 marauders + clawpomber teams was enough for me to say goodbye to that division. |
If that was your main issue you may enjoy B now.
I only play quite low TV and never met a single shameless low TV amazon "lineblodger" or all-marauder cpomb team since the scheduler change (i dislike the change but i acknowledge it has been extremely effective toward this issue). |
hehehe... I retired a skaven team due to a team like that, two days ago... |
|
|
Ehlers
Joined: Jun 26, 2006
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 11:45 |
|
koadah wrote: | I think that I would play the 'competitive' divisions more often if they were merged.
Currently it feels as though there is no point using a soft team in Box as trying to rebuild them would be no fun once they take a beating. Being able to drop out and 'pick' some recoveries would make it all more attractive.
As it stands all I really want is the chance to get some of my teams out of the 'competitive' divs and in to [L]eague where I might actually use them. |
Koadah is exactly also what I am trying to achieve with Project Mayhem and what Project Mayhem is. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 12:02 |
|
Ehlers wrote: | koadah wrote: | I think that I would play the 'competitive' divisions more often if they were merged.
Currently it feels as though there is no point using a soft team in Box as trying to rebuild them would be no fun once they take a beating. Being able to drop out and 'pick' some recoveries would make it all more attractive.
As it stands all I really want is the chance to get some of my teams out of the 'competitive' divs and in to [L]eague where I might actually use them. |
Koadah is exactly also what I am trying to achieve with Project Mayhem and what Project Mayhem is. |
Have you had official word that it is legal?
And if you do it in Ranked you have no CPOMB nerfs.
PLEASE CHRISTER LET MY TEAMS GO! |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - 19th June! ---- All Star Bowl XII - Teams of Stars - Sign up NOW! |
|
Ehlers
Joined: Jun 26, 2006
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 12:07 |
|
Not yet, was not able to send it yesterday due to I got accepted to a job interview and had to do some preparations for that.
Not to derail this thread, will send a message to you Koadah about my concerns then. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 12:10 |
|
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 12:17 |
|
You wont be able to do this in Ranked, you can send Christer a PM but I can pretty much guarantee the answer will be no and move it to League. |
_________________
|
|
Brainsaw
Joined: Sep 27, 2005
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 15:01 |
|
Wizfall wrote: |
It would be unwise to change the ruleset only for the tournament that represents like a generous 1% of all Fumbbl games while perpetual league/matchmaking games make the other 99%. |
Lets try staying with the facts!
Way too many people doing way too many statements they FEEL true but are far from it.
https://fumbbl.com/p/stats
Eg: Number of Ranked games is about the same number as are B and L combined.
How many of these are for Tourney Preparation? We will never know. Does it matter? I dont think so!
I dont care about the Reason coaches play a game.
I care about how often they in fact do and have a closer look if the Number of Games is decreasing.
Additonally its irrelevant (but clearly may be interesting for some Coaches) to determine one Races effectiveness by counting its entry Numbers, if there isnt one Race clearly outstanding the Stats.
This not (yet) being the Case, at this time only the Number of Teams which have Access to ClawPOMB winning more than half of the Tourneys is the one striking interesting Number.
Some say its coincidence, as the sample Basis isnt that big. The lovers and haters will always try to bend the numbers, but paired with what we can SEE actually happening in B
i come to the conclusion, that there is some big flaw existent.
Its all a matter of Perspective!
EG: For the Coaches who love to hear the Splat sound playing the same 6 Races most of the time, wont be a Problem ,-)
Personally i am convinced a broad Variety of Races whom the most of have a Chance to Win a big Tourney is a sign for a good and healthy Ruleset.
And what other Criteria would be meaningful for Evaluation, if not a Concepts or Races Ability to win several Games back to back as given in a Major Tourney? |
|
|
tmoila
Joined: Nov 25, 2012
|
  Posted:
Mar 31, 2015 - 15:24 |
|
I can feel that this thread is going to get drawn towards the C-subject. |
_________________ gg |
|
|