Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
 Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 14:19 |
 
|
| GalakStarscraper wrote: | I'd be fine if you brought back traits ... one trait in each category and make it so you can only get the trait if you have access to the category and roll doubles:
Then do:
General: Block
Agility: Dodge
Passing: Leader
Strength: Guard
Mutation: Claw
And it is valued like a doubles roll so +30 to the player.
Then I'd be fine with bringing back traits for Garion and Darkson. And yeah ... I am serious with this suggestion. You want VARIETY in rosters ... that should do it for you. Would be interesting to see what would happen with the game if the above were in the rules.
Tom |
Holy crap no no NO.
Those as traits is by far the dumbest thing I have ever heard relating to BB. This means that elves would NEVER have access to guard. Good luck finding an elf team ever willing to play against any basher.
Traits should be better than normal skills since they require access and doubles. Bring back old SF and make it a trait. Keep Claw as a trait. Jump Up, Leader, and Frenzy can all be traits.
___Synn |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 14:19 |
|
I get what Tigga is after, and I feel it could be a good system (matching by BWR). I also support dode's OP idea of matching by the length of team career.
Similar results would be gained by matching by the FF. Still, this lends us to the question, why do we not match by FF and why do we match by TV?
(Fluffwise, one could theoretize, that in real life, the sports is matched by FF in some sorts.  ) |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 14:29 |
|
| Synn wrote: | | GalakStarscraper regarding houseruling traits wrote: | | General: Block, Agility: Dodge, Passing: Leader, Strength: Guard, Mutation: Claw. You want VARIETY in rosters ... |
Holy crap no no NO. |
Indeed. Still, I agree that if you want to vary the skillpicks of teams, designerwise the correct way to go is to make the currently most popular skills harder to get, therefore forcing people to think outside of the box. In that point of view, the trait suggestions of Galak are spot on.
Still, if somebody wants to go in more detail with the trait discussion, perhaps it would need its own thread. This thread is about the 15% limit. I am sorry for wandering to offtopic with the traits piece. |
|
|
VoodooMike
Joined: Nov 07, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 14:37 |
|
| dode74 wrote: | | Not necessarily. The most popular sports and games have a luck factor in them. This element of the unknown adds to the (subjective) excitement of the game. Otherwise we'd all be playing synchronous chess |
The point was that the typical game does not involve a deliberate handicapping of one of the two sides. An "element of luck" such as the use of dice still applies evenly to both sides, so while luck may affect things, the rules of the game do not favour one side or the other.
| dode74 wrote: | | That is exactly what I am saying, and it is backed up by Galak's statement quoted in the OP of this thread. |
Then the difference in opinion you're facing may simply be about how much stock we should put in Galak's opinion.
| dode74 wrote: | | It is entirely subjective, as you say. It does appear that the mood here is such that min-maxing appears to be considered boring, although I may have entirely misread that and look forward to hearing from those who think that min-maxing adds to the game. |
What does it subtract from it, objectively? It is really nothing more than a personal choice. This again goes to whether someone else's valid choices within the game's design can really diminish your ability to enjoy it. If it did not add to the individual's enjoyment of the game, it is unlikely they'd do it. Some people do it, so it must add to the game for them.
| dode74 wrote: | | I'd suggest that people play here despite it because FUMBBL is the best available option. Best available and best possible aren't the same though, and as good as FUMBBL is I think this is an area which can be improved upon. |
That's not really a response to what you quoted. What I said is that obviously not everyone agrees that minmaxing is boring or they wouldn't be doing it. Changing the 15% limit wouldn't discourage minmaxing at all, it would simply highlight the fact that certain teams have sweet spots at higher TVs, and it would allow those teams to more consistently beat lower teams rather than be forced to face off against their own kind.
Inducements won't fix that. They're not even designed to do so, by Galak's own admission.
If anything, the current FUMBBL design discourages the minmaxing problem, because if you play a TV optimized team, you're most likely to run into other TV optimized teams that hit their sweet spot in the same range, or teams that are on the way past you to get to their TV sweet spot. The teams that peak at the highest TV levels are most likely to face off against each other, rather than stomping the lower teams into dust, as the game seems designed to allow them to do.
What, pray tell, makes you think that things would be improved in anything approaching an objective fashion, if the 15% limit were removed? You say yourself that FUMBBL is the best available option, so what, if anything, are you citing as your reason for this belief other than Galak's casual say-so? |
|
|
ahalfling
Joined: Aug 16, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 14:53 |
|
| Quote: | | The number of [B] games has dropped from 1700 p/w to 900 p/w in the last 30 weeks, despite total games staying roughly constant. Is this because people are getting frustrated at minmaxing? |
Perhaps it's because other divisions have reopened, and/or because you cherry-picked a particularly high-traffic time for [B]?
Granted, I came back less than 30 weeks ago -- but when I did come back, I was playing [B] all the time... until [L] started rolling. These days, either I play one of my league games or I play sevens, mostly. I have no issues with the box... I honestly don't have as much time for it, though. I'm sure a lot of people are in the same boat. |
_________________
Beat Claw, Play AV7
(Hell, I ran a forward passing orc team back in the '90s. You probably shouldn't listen to me. Ever.) |
|
KhorneliusPraxx
Joined: Jul 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 15:52 |
|
Black Box - you can't pick...you don't know what you are going to get. Unless there is an odd number of teams, nobody should be unscheduled.
Ranked - 15% is way too tight. It suck to get on the finder and see a bunch of team but still not be able to play because there are none with a TV within the NARROW window. |
_________________
Hopefully my pulsating avatar will remind you to always take +1 Strength...ALWAYS! |
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 15:56 |
|
| KhorneliusPraxx wrote: | Black Box - you can't pick...you don't know what you are going to get. Unless there is an odd number of teams, nobody should be unscheduled.
Ranked - 15% is way too tight. It suck to get on the finder and see a bunch of team but still not be able to play because there are none with a TV within the NARROW window. |
+1.
I think this sums the most mainstream argument against tight 15% rule: it means there will be less games on the site. |
|
|
Smeesh
Joined: Oct 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:02 |
|
+2.
Also in Ranked everyone can coose what he likes to play. No need of limiting.
In box you can schedule tight first but if not possible break the rule befor writing: not scheduled xxx, yyy, zzz. Or even like five coaches found, no games scheduled .... That sux.
Greetigns
Smeesh |
|
|
Shraaaag
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:12 |
|
| Smeesh wrote: | +2.
Also in Ranked everyone can coose what he likes to play. No need of limiting. |
The 15% rule in [R]anked isn't there to stop you having fun, it's to stop people from abusing the system (ie. only playing weak teams (TV-wise)). It's the same reason we have speed limits. Most people can handle their car at higher speeds, but there's always people who can't, and they (or some innocent passerby) will end up with their teeth spread out on the pavement. The rule isn't perfect, but it does filter out the worst abuses. (I do agree that it can be increased abit though, but not removed completely) |
_________________
 |
|
happygrue
Joined: Oct 15, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:14 |
|
In an ideal world there would be a slider on the activation screen that would let you set the percentage of TV you are willing to play when you activate. Then coaches who don't mind the occasional underdog matchup can have fun with it without disrupting the rest of the box. Since I expect that would be a nontrivial amount of work to redo the matching algorithm I wouldn't expect it to happen but I'll put it on my personal wishlist.
Personally, I don't want to play against a developed norse team with my rookie slann when I am hoping to build them into something that is not a pile of blood on the pitch. On the other hand, I'd love an occasional match of 500 TV difference sometimes to really shake things up, depending on my mood and the teams that I activate.
On the other hand, allowing any kind of big TV difference opens up some chance to game the system in a variety of ways (low TV 'fling teams anyone?).
Just spitballing here, but maybe some truely blackbox tournaments would be interesting. Set a TV range like 1200-1800 or whatever and then if you want to enter you enter at least five teams of different races so you don't really even know what you'll be playing in the tourney. That could lead to some epic games (and crushing blowouts as well - no doubt). |
|
|
Smeesh
Joined: Oct 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:23 |
|
I wouls love playing a 800 TV fling team against a 2400 Clawpomb team ^^. I am not shure how it will end. Of cours halfling blood will paint the lawn.
Otherwise i agree deciding TV diffrence would be perfect. 15% is then just standard if nothign is set.
Greetings
Smeesh |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:31 |
|
Well there is one way around all this 15% stuff...but it requires effort. Play SMACK's.
Automate SMACK's for Ranked. The current "system" for getting a SMACK together is a barrier that limits coaches attempting to play in them.
the idea is simple. Go to gamefinder, hit SMACK and apply team. The SMACK screen shows how many coaches are active for each type of SMACK, once it hits 8..bam off we go. Now of course that is the easy part. Christer and his "team" need to code it and so forth. Its just an idea guys, not the be all end all of FUMBBL, Yeah I hear yah yelling and your keyboard getting mauled by your sausage like fingers.
********
The issue of Box participation going down: We are allmost one year now with the new client/rules for all the Divs. I think FUMBBL has now found a groove. Would not be suprised at all if the # of games between box and ranked are basically split and legaue bouncing up and down daily. Nothing wrong with that at all. The only problem with all that is that some coaches feel that the Box needs more active coaches to work porperly, that is a seperate thread in itself.
*********
This idea of a perpetual league. Ranked and Box for some, like me, it is a perpetual league. I play matches to get my team in shape for Majors. But there are a lot of coaches who do not approach the open divs like that. There is variation and that causes some of these problems. Like the guy who play Box with his CLPOMB team that only plays to have fun by causing CAS, more power to him, but he has no intention of ever entering any type of [B] tournament. Thus his style causes friction with other coaches who are building to a certain tournament goal.
We have all heard the lamentations of a coach who is a week away from a tournament start and has his team slagged by some coach who is portrayed as a team killer because he does not care about anything else, he is said to ruin the fun for others.
True league play atempts to atleast force the coaches involved to have a similar goal, win matches and your league. Open play has hundreds of "other" reasons for coaches to participate and some of those reasons are polar opposite and thus cause friction.
Thus coming full circle...the 15% rule is such a small issue in the big picture. IMO the core problem is to many coaches with to many diffrent "views" on what is fun and why they keep coming back playing hundreds of matches. |
_________________
Comish of the: 
Last edited by PainState on %b %10, %2011 - %16:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:33 |
|
I think we need a new, LRB6-oriented, derivative strength mechanic. Different inducement values mean different things. This will be even more apparent when all the inducements are fixed and y'all start seeing the (sometime-) horrors that are Fezglitch, Boomer, and the TT classic DP Lino Merc. You'll see that 15% is way too tight, but that the relative value of the matchup is a more subtle difference.
Then there are the racial disparities. An Orc team down up to 140k doesn't have anything great to do with its money, except maybe a Chainsaw or a Bribe. By contrast, Amazons at 100k have tons of good options. Dwarfs get 4/9 mileage from Bloodweiser Babes. Halflings should always have 100k added to their "Team Value" for every match, for matchmaking purposes: they're not competitive unless they're munching on your TRRs. Amazons hate being 150k overdogs. They also hate Skritter and his buddies.
You certainly can't make the blanket claim that inducements aren't as good as hard TV, or that handicap matches are always unfair. The aforementioned Halflings have a 100k inducement that's worth on average about 240k TV. There are matchups where certain Star Players are EASILY worth their handicaps. Wizards are maybe not quite worth the TV difference, but it's pretty close. How many tournament games have you seen where Eldril or Morg played a decisive role? |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:36 |
|
Great and constructive post, Painstate! Thank you!
By the way, how do the Blackbox smacks work? I have a Box team with 2M+ and I have some troubles getting games with it, so my sprint has been lagging. |
Last edited by uuni on %b %10, %2011 - %16:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 10, 2011 - 16:36 |
|
| uuni wrote: | Great and constructive post, Painstate! Thank you!
By the way, how does the Blackbox smacks work? I have a Box team with 2M+ and I have some troubles getting games with it, so my sprint has been lagging. |
Thanks for the support.
There are no SMACKS in Box...that is a Ranked Div only perk. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
|
|
| |
Borg Invasion
Search
