koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 12:04 |
 
|
| dode74 wrote: | | No argument from me, but that doesn't necessarily make the game "better", it just gives those who have been playing with the previous ruleset something different to whine about. |
Generally it might not if your ruleset is all ready good. It could make it worse.
But we're talking specifically about CPOMB here.
IMO tweaking CPOMB would make the big perpetual leagues better. But we'd have to try it to find out. |
_________________
New teams. Secret League or Official. ALWAYS recruiting! |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 12:30 |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 12:33 |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 12:51 |
|
Let's assume, for a moment, that I can't. What metric? |
|
|
Zlefin
Joined: Apr 14, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 13:01 |
|
Overall user satisfaction and enjoyment ratings? |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 13:52 |
|
| Zlefin wrote: | | Overall user satisfaction and enjoyment ratings? |
Ooh, where are they published? |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 14:03 |
|
Should we rename this to dode74 (and soon Frankenstein) ping pong spam thread?  |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
gjopie
Joined: Oct 27, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 14:04 |
|
| dode74 wrote: | | Zlefin wrote: | | Overall user satisfaction and enjoyment ratings? |
Ooh, where are they published? |
Any half-decent league admin would keep a rough track of user satisfaction and enjoyment. |
_________________
  |
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 14:56 |
|
| member1234 wrote: | | Seriously, how much energy can folk expend on this? There must be thousands of pages of text on it around now. |
Hey man, most of us play BB instead of spending time with our children. It's THAT important! |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
WingedHuman
Joined: Aug 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 16:17 |
|
IMHO, this debate isn't about pixel hugging. Playing against a CPOMB spam team produces not only an NPE but also removes nearly all chances of winning. I.e. remove the pieces of the game, how are you suppose to continue playing?
BB wasn't meant to be played in such a manner. Injuries and turnover are a part of the game, yes. But never at the scale that is present when facing a team with 2+ CPOMBers (elves or not).
Does it need to be tweaked? Yes. How? Well I'm not sure.
Just my humble opinion. |
_________________
 |
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 17:06 |
|
*Dons flame proof suit*
OK, OK. Yes there are certain coaches that do very well with ClawPOMB teams. There is no disputing that. But the vast majority of people who play these teams are not know for their tactical genius. They are beatable. Quite easily in fact as position gets sacrificed early for the chance to hurt some pixels. For those who are constantly complaining that you are losing players too easily I have a very simple solution for you. Don't let them block you so much.
The BBRC didn't break CRP. FUMBBL did.
Just let that sink in for a minute.
OK? Sucks doesn't it? The rules work exactly how they wanted TT to play. However, we don't play like TT so teams here get much bigger than anticipated as the sheer volume of games played makes it easy. We have massive perpetual leagues which the BBRC didn't take into consideration but then again they were writing rules based on the GW format of TT teams playing a relatively low number of games. FUMBBL would not have come into the thought process at any point during the rule review, and I think it's pretty safe to say that they were probably told to ignore us  |
_________________
 |
|
xnoelx
Joined: Jun 05, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 17:23 |
|
CPOMB teams are definitely beatable: see?
And yes, that's at least partly just gloating. OK, mostly. Alright, FINE! Entirely.
But while I'm at it, big TV gap games in B? Not a problem either. |
_________________
 Nerf Ball 2014 |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 17:24 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | What is your point? |
This is my point stated in a diffrent way.
| easilyamused wrote: | | OK? Sucks doesn't it? The rules work exactly how they wanted TT to play. However, we don't play like TT so teams here get much bigger than anticipated as the sheer volume of games played makes it easy. We have massive perpetual leagues which the BBRC didn't take into consideration but then again they were writing rules based on the GW format of TT teams playing a relatively low number of games. FUMBBL would not have come into the thought process at any point during the rule review, and I think it's pretty safe to say that they were probably told to ignore us |
Which was the point I was going to get to in the dreaded thread that sent Lorebass off the rails and made a CPOMB only thread.
CPOMB is not the problem...FUMBBL is the problem.
That weekend 3-6 match TT tourney..CPOMB does not even come up as a issue..in fact all the issues of CRP go away. The rule set is perfect for that tournament.
CRP issues creep into league play after some time but you can use optional rules to mitigate them OR just ban/amend certain aspects of CRP for the league. Table Top leagues have the best of both worlds. They can use optional rules or just ban/amend certain aspects of CRP to fit their league.
FUMBBL leagues are gimped in the sense they can only use the provided optional rules that work to get around certain aspects of CRP...BUT...none of the optional rules really cover a lot of the other issues with CRP that are just as broken as CPOMB. But since the other broken aspects of CRP do not kill pixels we do not bitch about them nearly as much.
Now of course if you go back to the start of CRP on FUMBBL you will see a lot of posts stating that the problem with CRP is FUMBBL. FUMBBL does not play a style of BB that the CRP designers were even considering. |
_________________
Comish of the: 
Last edited by PainState on %b %08, %2014 - %17:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 17:25 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | | We have massive perpetual leagues which the BBRC didn't take into consideration but then again they were writing rules based on the GW format of TT teams playing a relatively low number of games. FUMBBL would not have come into the thought process at any point during the rule review, and I think it's pretty safe to say that they were probably told to ignore us |
I heard that there is another BB client over there, called Cyanide. CRP was released at about the time GW sold their rights to Cyanide. Yet they neglected the need to take in account perpetual play and very old teams.
I don't know if they were told to ignore us, but being told to ignore Cyanide seems plain stupid to me. (not that GW hasn't shown numerous samples of stupidity before) |
_________________
 |
|
albinv
Joined: Sep 15, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2014 - 17:29 |
|
@gamesetmatch
Isnt it more like 55% of minds who are able to do so? Think i picked that up somewhere.
Now does that make the other 45% weaker BB players? Would be interesting to compare those 2 groups in terms of BB success.  |
Last edited by albinv on %b %08, %2014 - %17:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
Has Cindy Piewhistle...
Search
