MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 12:48 |
 
|
What about considering, instead of the games played, the number of Seasons played by a team?
Something like this, in Season brackets:
A Season 1 team can be paired only vs Season 1-2 teams, a Season 3 team can be paired only vs Season 3-4 teams, a Season 5+ team can be paired only vs Season 5+ teams.
Brackets can be adjusted, it's just a sketched idea.
I would consider the TV as well, not just the number of Seasons, for pairing purpose. |
|
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 13:23 |
|
This should probably have been a poll or a petition, just to show the strength of feeling from the community, seem like the OP has grasped the issue perfectly and come up with the solution. |
|
|
razmus
Joined: Jun 23, 2017
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 13:29 |
|
What about, for folks who want to the full experience of league play with unrestricted TV matching -- actual round robin play? Set up groups of sixteen teams at the start of a season... and play those teams against the other teams which are matched in that exact order. TV matching becomes a non-issue!
Of course, then you get the opportunity to experience the other benefits which come with it. (1) All the forfeit games because one (or two or six) coach's team gets wrecked, and they can't compete anymore and the game isn't any fun for them anymore because they're fighting uphill for the rest of the season. And yeah, that's great for some teams (stunties), but not great for others. (2) The whining of the coaches of the monster teams which reach the end of the season having actually played two of their scheduled fifteen games because no one actually wants to play against them. "Welp... congrats! You're in the playoffs, but you'll need to redraft afterwards because it's the end of the season."
Personally, for a fun game to attempt to relax for a little while, I don't enjoy fighting uphill 300, 500, or 1000 TV. For that matter, I don't enjoy playing as the overdog 300, 500, or 1000 TV. The most enjoyable games, for me, are relatively close TV... maybe someone gets a wizard, or a couple kegs of beer, or a mercenary. The one consolation I have when two or three of my players are out next game in the open environments is that at least I'm going to probably be playing a team close to my own TV next.
And maybe there's something better than TV to make that matching. But I've had way too many wrecked teams to know it's not number of games played. (Well... leaving open the possibility that because I've only played a handful of games under BB2020 rules... maybe it's significantly better with seasons implemented, but I'm skeptical.)
It's those big TV gaps which I personally believe kill league play. I believe seasons as implemented as optional in BB2016, and now required in BB2020 which are intended to tamp down on those gaps. A tabletop league has the disadvantage that it probably only has a handful... maybe a dozen other teams to possibly match against. That's one of the huge advantages the FUMBBL environment has... scores of other possible coaches to play against all the time.
But if folks are interested in "more league-like" play with sixteen teams in a division... with playoffs at the end. Lets do that. I'll even run it, if there's sufficient interest.
Or make it a checkbox in the gamefinder/box scheduler to take off the TV guardrails. But at least leave it there as an option for coaches who want to play fun games. |
|
|
SideshowBob
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 14:08 |
|
I don't have a solution to the original post. But I just want to say that i totally agree with the op 100%. Getting spp and skilling up players is (for me) a big part of what makes Blood Bowl such a fun game. The more I learn about minmaxing, the sadder I get.
EDIT: Maybe that's why I prefer playing tournaments where team progression actually matters. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 14:12 |
|
| SideshowBob wrote: | | Getting spp and skilling up players is (for me) a big part of what makes Blood Bowl such a fun game. |
Agreed. BB2020 removed a huge chunk of the fun in the level-up.
No more unexpected double skills or stat boosts.
You collect the required amount of Spps and get 100% a Secondary you want or a Stat boost. The stat boost is random, but you surely will get a stat boost if you spend the SPPs required.
That's very dull. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 14:51 |
|
|
Thoriin
Joined: Apr 15, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 14:53 |
|
why not pair in blackbox by blackbox CR ? |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 14:58 |
|
Because there are not enough users in the site to pair CR by CR, especially considering that Competitive will use GF and scheduler, splitting further the already small userbase.
A Legend would struggle to find a game, for example. |
|
|
Thoriin
Joined: Apr 15, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 15:26 |
|
you pair with the closest CR coach in the draw, no problem of number of users |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 15:30 |
|
That would encourage monoactivation. Imagine a Legend coach with TV 1000 team vs a Legend (or Super Star) coach activating TV 1400.
It could create TV gaps.
CR is important, but TV is important too. |
|
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 15:46 |
|
As per OP though, using number of games into the season (perhaps also combined with a limited element of CR) should overcome most of these problems though...
There shouldnt be very significant TV gaps in that scenario unless one coach intentionally doesnt skill players (which seems a fair trade off).
Of course there may occasionally be some teams recovering from a beating, but I think that's just part of the game and what inducements are for. BB matches aren't supposed to be "fair", but if everyone follows the same rules there should hopefully be some natural balance preventing people from gaming the system by keeping their teams at artificially low tv. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 15:51 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | That would encourage monoactivation. Imagine a Legend coach with TV 1000 team vs a Legend (or Super Star) coach activating TV 1400.
It could create TV gaps.
CR is important, but TV is important too. |
Also, it can lead to situations where coaches who activate in off-peak hours play the same foes over and over and over (even more than they do now).
Also, also, it would reduce the number of games you get against opponents of different skill levels. The great thing about FUMBBL is how the noobs and the world champs bump elbows, keeping the old blood invigorated and teaching the noobs how to play REAL BB. CR-based matchmaking would diminish that.
I favor the OP's suggestion (matchmaking based on depth of season), with a rookie protection for teams in their first season which are down more than 15% in TV. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| Kondor wrote: | | Given that the rules are written to take into account the difference in TV through inducements, my vote would be for completely random match making with the black box scheduler. |
Having played a tabletop league under 2020 rules, and given the current (albeit limited) tournament stats, I see this being a very viable approach. Star Players reducing in price and increasing in availability has meant inducements bridge the TV gap much better than they did in previous editions, to the point that many teams play better at a lower TV. I certainly think it's worth giving a go.
| koadah wrote: | | ClayInfinity wrote: |
Majors should be for teams with 15 or 14 wins in a season...
|
That is a bit harsh. Prioritise by record and seed the top 16/32 would be better IMO. |
I agree with the principle of having a 'Season' in Competitive replace what was previously Major Qualifiers. The mechanics of it could be discussed, but seeding sounds like the fairest way. You could then have a tracker (like the box trophy page) showing the current qualifiers for the next Major and their seeding position, so coaches know the record they are trying to beat to qualify. |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Gartch
Joined: Sep 07, 2012
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 17:15 |
|
I agree with Rawlf's analysis, I think it's better to make pairing by number of matchs played instead of TV.
I think pairing by TV was bad with previous rules, but with BB2020 rules, as explained by Rawlf in his post in the B part, I expect it to be even worst. |
|
|
Medon
Joined: Jan 28, 2015
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2021 - 18:29 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Old style skill prog...
Search
