45 coaches online • Server time: 16:45
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Conceding v Goblins/...goto Post BB2020 - Kick team m...goto Post What happened?
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Do you think that timeout:
Should be always called without any warning
13%
 13%  [ 24 ]
Should be always called but never the first time (1 warning max)
17%
 17%  [ 31 ]
Should be called only if happen too often in a game
40%
 40%  [ 72 ]
Should be never called
11%
 11%  [ 20 ]
Each coach should agree before the match how to manage the timeout csll
8%
 8%  [ 15 ]
Pie!!!!
10%
 10%  [ 18 ]
Total Votes : 180


MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 13:13 Reply with quote Back to top

RDaneel wrote:


Everyone has his own reaction time, expecially if you are starting to play in Competitive division new team (or if you play Tiers3 team where every single move should be carefully evaluated

If you are new to a specific race then you should try it first in a not Competitive environment. It's a bit like saying: I don't know well how to play Chess but I play Chess in a competitive format and I expect not to use the chess clock. First learn the race, then join the Competitive environment.


RDaneel wrote:
Are you speaking of Human Coach or Machine Coach? I could tell you something about that but my positronic brain has some constraints I can't overcome because the 1st Law Very Happy


I'm speaking about human coaches. What I meant to say is that playing a turn requires an approach akin to an algorithm trying to solve a problem, and the algorithms are judged, along other factors, by the time they spend to achieve their task. I use general "guidelines" to plan a turn, then I go into the details (throwing blocks, moving etc.) and I adapt on the fly. Some people instead start rolling dice and see what happen, without any plan about how to play the turn.

RDaneel wrote:

So if in chess they give you infinite time to make a move would you be able to win against Carlsen?

I don't play Chess competitively and I would lose with and without time, but comparing Chess to BB is flawed. Chess is deterministic, you can learn lots of positions and you know for sure that from a move some variants and pieces' positions will happen. In BB you have to adapt to what happens on the fly, you can't be sure that moving your Blitzer through a Tackle Zone will be successful. Hence you need some mental speed to be ready to the unexpected, not just memorizing positions on a chessboard. Also, having general guidelines about how to play turns helps. Over time you develop some tactics you can quickly perform. This comes from a mix of coach's skill and experience.


RDaneel wrote:

Don't play Blood Bowl then and play Blitz! Chess.

I play Chess too, Chess Titans level 10, for the record, but they are 2 different games. If I want to roll dice and gamble I can't play Chess. They have different mechanics.

RDaneel wrote:
Blood Bowl belongs to the set of sort of role-playing game if you play the tabletop the games can last up to two hours.

I well know it, but when I'm playing online I don't want to waste more than 1 hour.
If I'm playing vs a friend I know in real life there is a "fun & giggles" aspect that makes those 2 hours enjoyable, also, I'm sure that, if he stops playing, he has a real reason to do it and he's not wasting time on purpose.


Last edited by MattDakka on %b %12, %2023 - %17:%May; edited 7 times in total
Spence



Joined: Dec 05, 2012

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 13:13 Reply with quote Back to top

RDaneel wrote:

Self-timeout? Not sure to have understood...


In a very similar place to the timeout button is one labelled 'end turn'. When you hear the buzzer indicating that you've run out of time the option is available to you to click that rather than continuing to activate additional players.
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 14:08 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
RDaneel wrote:


Everyone has his own reaction time, expecially if you are starting to play in Competitive division new team (or if you play Tiers3 team where every single move should be carefully evaluated

If you are new to a specific race then you should try it first in a not Competitive environment. It's a bit like saying: I don't know well how to play Chess but I play Chess in a competitive format and I expect not to use the chess clock. First learn the race, then join the Competitive environment.


Even a coach with experience playing a Tiers3 team in the competitive division will have to use more caution than the same coach playing a Tiers1 team in the same division. Have you ever tried to play 20 games in Competitive with Goblins? No? How come? Try them... Wink

MattDakka wrote:

What I meant to say that playing a turn requires an approach akin to an algorithm trying to solve a problem, and the algorithms are judged, along other factors, by the time they spend to achieve their task. I use general "guidelines" to plan a turn, then I go into the details (throwing blocks, moving etc.) and I adapt on the fly. Some people instead start rolling dice and see what happen, without any plan about how to play the turn.


I agree that there are basic rules (never start with a block but move first, if you block start with players who have Block possibly, don't start a turn immediately trying to pick up the ball unless it has a very high probability of success and serves the development ... etc. etc.) A sort of airline pilot's 'check-list' that you do automatically over time. As you say it is an algorithm but the ones who are really good are those who have a strategic game plan, and sometimes (indeed very often) the dice change this strategic plan especially in the last few turns

dicing is the critical factor here, dice change the tactic and often the strategy: you make your movie and suddenly a push-back push-back reroll: push-back push-back change all the rules in the game, and you need to think more. I was watching one of your match where this happened you exceed 4 mins and your opponent did not call the timeout against you.

MattDakka wrote:

I well know it, but when I'm playing online I don't want to waste more than 1 hour.
If I'm playing vs a friend I know in real life there is a "fun & giggles" aspect that makes those 2 hours enjoyable, also, I'm sure that, if he stops playing, he has a real reason to do it and he's not wasting time on purpose.



Often "online" in games rhymes with "fast." Blood Bowl was not born as a "shoot-and-run" game , it is not Ruzzle. it is a game that takes time. We can agree that a game that lasts more than an hour maybe seems too much but in the original concept of this game it easily goes up to two hours. The FUMBBL client already speeds up a lot of dynamics related to kick tables , injuries, and so on, in general games last between one hour and hour and a half. Rarely two hours unless you play tournaments that involve extra time.

When someone starts a Blood Bowl game they have to set aside at least two hours, if you only have one hour budget you don't have to start a game

Justify timeout as a method to speed up the game: sorry but I have my doubts in believing this statement.
It is not a timeout or two that changes the total time of the game in general.
The reality in my opinion is that who calls a timeout does this to inflict damage on his opponent and gain an advantage to win. Not because he is in a hurry to finish (in this case I can tell my opponent: sorry I have to rush, we can complete now or continue tomorrow) but mainly because it bothers him to see that the other person has a favorable die while it is telling him wrong.

And, again, all of this is perfectly legal , and perhaps even understandable when you are playing against your peer a very tense game. I understand it much less when I see a "Legend" coach playing against a Star with a 300-point lower rating and calling a timeout out of hand. The thing really bothers me to see even if - again- is perfectly legal.
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 14:12 Reply with quote Back to top

Spence wrote:
RDaneel wrote:

Self-timeout? Not sure to have understood...


In a very similar place to the timeout button is one labelled 'end turn'. When you hear the buzzer indicating that you've run out of time the option is available to you to click that rather than continuing to activate additional players.


Ah ok got it. Very honest of you...
Spence



Joined: Dec 05, 2012

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 15:06 Reply with quote Back to top

I just realised my last comment could be interpreted as snarky, so apologies if it came across that way RDaneel! It was serious and I’m not the only one who self-timeouts like this on exceeding the time limit.

If you have Legend or Super Star next to your name you should strongly consider sticking to 4 mins (in the absence of DC turn clock bugs).

We generally don’t want to be timing out rookies, experienced, emerging, as it’s better for the long term health of the game to give them time to think and learn. Even if they have 300 games played. Some coaches are late developers – some are lifelong rookies at a game. Every time a weaker coach develops into a new dangerous opponent then as lovers of competitive BB we win.

Equally, we shouldn’t be taking more than 4 mins versus the weaker coaches as its wildly unfun for the opponent and anti game preservation. When a coach quits the game because their opponents were constantly exceeding the time limit, then as lovers of competitive BB we lose.

Versus Super Stars and Legends we also don’t want to be taking more than 4 mins because by doing so we gain a competitive advantage. Not how we want to win, surely?

You brought up chess. If you’re playing a casual game with a friend you might not use clocks. Whichever of you spends the most time thinking has a competitive advantage, but that doesn’t matter because it’s just a casual game and you don’t put much stock in the result. If you play a competitive game where the result matters it’ll be clocked because failing to equalise the time available to make decisions makes a mockery of the concept of competition – and infinite time is impractical. Before the mid 1800s games were unclocked. The competitive situation became increasingly horrific as game length stretched out of control with increasing complaints from players and spectators alike until the situation was solved.

In Poker players became aware that to avoid timing tells they theoretically wanted to spend the same amount of time folding trash hands (or raising premiums) as they needed to come to a preflop decision on borderline hands. Hands per hour plummeted as the epidemic spread (people wanted to avoid giving away a competitive advantage to the clock abusers) and it became horrendously unfun for players and spectators – driving many recreational players away from the game. Until the problem was solved by normalising shot clocks for a decision.

You’re right that time is a resource in Blood Bowl, but it has to be a finite one if we want a competitive game to exist. Choosing how you spend that time is part of the skill. If you want to spend most of your 4 mins (or 2 mins, 3 mins, whatever the mutual time limit is) pondering your options before actions then great. But once you go over that time limit you’re seeking an unfair competitive advantage.

If you want Blood Bowl to be competitive, to have your results reflect your coaching skill, to be able to take pride in your tournament victories, then you should want to equalise time available to both parties to make decisions.

Now, if you think that Blood Bowl would be better served by say a half hour time bank to make all your moves (so you can usually take 1 min turns but have the option of a 10 min turn at a critical juncture) than a hard X minute max limit per turn, then I agree with you. But campaign for that instead of normalising one player gaining a competitive advantage by exceeding the time limit without repercussion or having unlimited time turns – as in either of those cases we no longer have genuine competition.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 15:36 Reply with quote Back to top

RDaneel wrote:

Have you ever tried to play 20 games in Competitive with Goblins? No? How come? Try them... Wink

No because:

1) using Goblins to play in Competitive, especially outside the Trophy, is not logical, unless you have meta-reasons, for example, you like the race, you like secret weapons, you like to foul, you like TTM;

2) using Goblins, who have no adequate CR gain/loss is Competitive division is not logical;

3) if all coaches had to use a Goblin team, then it could make sense to play it; since I could be facing a coach as good as me but with a better team, playing a Goblin team again is not logical;

4) Goblins should have 0-2 rostered bribes.

MattDakka wrote:

What I meant to say that playing a turn requires an approach akin to an algorithm trying to solve a problem, and the algorithms are judged, along other factors, by the time they spend to achieve their task. I use general "guidelines" to plan a turn, then I go into the details (throwing blocks, moving etc.) and I adapt on the fly. Some people instead start rolling dice and see what happen, without any plan about how to play the turn.



MattDakka wrote:

I was watching one of your match where this happened you exceed 4 mins and your opponent did not call the timeout against you.

Yes, and he was free to time me out, if I notice the timer I stop the move, because I don't want to get slow. It happens rarely to me so, if time out were automatic, I still would benefit from it.


RDaneel wrote:

Often "online" in games rhymes with "fast." Blood Bowl was not born as a "shoot-and-run" game , it is not Ruzzle. it is a game that takes time. We can agree that a game that lasts more than an hour maybe seems too much but in the original concept of this game it easily goes up to two hours. The FUMBBL client already speeds up a lot of dynamics related to kick tables , injuries, and so on, in general games last between one hour and hour and a half. Rarely two hours unless you play tournaments that involve extra time.

I know, but, since many rolls are made by the client automatically, expecting to play a game in 1 hour is not insane or too fast.

RDaneel wrote:

When someone starts a Blood Bowl game they have to set aside at least two hours, if you only have one hour budget you don't have to start a game

To be accurate, it's 90 minutes, i.e. 1 hour and 30 minutes, not 2 hours, according to site rule:

•Don't start a game where there is a chance you won't be able to finish without your opponent knowing about it. Unless you state otherwise, you are expected to be able to play for 90 minutes.

Moreover, there is another site rule:

•Intentionally delaying the game by for example not ending your turn or by waiting for extended periods of time before moving is not allowed.

which suggests that playing slowly a game is not allowed. Not saying that people must play in 1 minute, but they should not exceed the 4 minutes.
RDaneel wrote:

It is not a timeout or two that changes the total time of the game in general.

No, but if you don't time out your opponent could keep on playing slow. After one time out people generally start playing faster. That means that they able to play faster, just they don't do it (and mind, not necessarily new coaches, at least 2 very good coaches I've played against are very slow, they are perfectionists and tend to overthink each and every turn). I still remember a game vs a good coach late in the night, he kept on playing slow even if I asked him politely to play faster. He was not a new-to-the-game coach, very good, but super slow too. That game was a real torture. After some warnings I timed him out because the game was getting tiresome and I was getting sleepy.

RDaneel wrote:

The reality in my opinion is that who calls a timeout does this to inflict damage on his opponent and gain an advantage to win.

The reality in my opinion is that who plays slow could play faster. It's a matter of points of view.
You can either blame the opponent for timing you out or learn to play faster.
I could understand 2 or 3 minutes, but 4 is really a lot of time.


I agree with Spence, well written. Yes, a time bank could be ok, even ArrestedDevelopment suggested it in a chat I had with him. That would be more flexible than 4 minutes per turn.


And mind, as with T16 fouls, at first I was annoyed by people timing me out, I understand that, but after a while I learned to speed up and now I'm happy to play within 4 minutes. I didn't blame my opponents, I worked hard to get better. Unless you are very new to the game (but then you should not be playing in a Competitive division), 4 minutes are enough.
C0ddlefish



Joined: Sep 17, 2019

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 16:41 Reply with quote Back to top

In my experience, admitted not as much as some of you guys, it's very rare for someone to take 4+ mins for the majority of turns. Usually it's 2 or 3 turns at most across the whole game. On that basis it has a very minor impact on how long the total match takes.

Therefore I'd rather that coach had taken the time to do what they think is best, than artificially rush them. I want to know my win/loss to come from my opponent playing their best, not because I/they caught them/me out
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 17:00 Reply with quote Back to top

Spence wrote:
I just realised my last comment could be interpreted as snarky, so apologies if it came across that way RDaneel! It was serious and I’m not the only one who self-timeouts like this on exceeding the time limit.

Oh no ... i did not interpretate at all your comment as snarky.
I have also the tendency to speed up when i come close to 4 mins but anyway should not be an obsesson i think

Spence wrote:

If you have Legend or Super Star next to your name you should strongly consider sticking to 4 mins (in the absence of DC turn clock bugs).


yes, between peers it's true. in fact what I object to is when a CR 1800-1900 makes a timeout against an opponent who has a CR of 300 points and less. It is not class behaviour


Spence wrote:
When a coach quits the game because their opponents were constantly exceeding the time limit, then as lovers of competitive BB we lose.


Honestly, I have never seen matches where there are multiple timeouts. Clearly if we're playing against a person who constantly loses time and we point it out to them, and they continue, there's a chance they're doing it on purpose (in this case a quick 'ping' on Discord to alert an Admin so they can get into the game to check) or they really do have problems ... go figure. These are rare cases in the competitive division anyway.

Spence wrote:

You brought up chess. If you’re playing a casual game with a friend you might not use clocks. Whichever of you spends the most time thinking has a competitive advantage, but that doesn’t matter because it’s just a casual game and you don’t put much stock in the result. If you play a competitive game where the result matters it’ll be clocked because failing to equalise the time available to make decisions makes a mockery of the concept of competition – and infinite time is impractical.


I reiterate that in my opinion the timed game is a particular subset of Blood Bowl that was not meant to be a timed game. In chess there is a peculiarity of the game which is called "fast" or "blitz" where you can set a maximum time per move and if you move before this time you get a bonus otherwise not. You often lose by time. this kind of game type in Blood Bowl does not really exist. There is the concept of a timeout which - I repeat - is totally at the discretion of the league administrator. Also, if you play chess fast you will not necessarily have the same results in a game where there is perhaps a 1h30 timeout and then afterwards every move has to be made quickly... The concept in Blood Bowl that the 4 minute time limit is part of a competitive rule sees me as a bit of a sceptic. In the next Blood Bowl WC in Alicante there is a 4 minute timeout? https://www.thenaf.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Ruleset-NWC-Alicante-2023.pdf I can't find anything written here. If they don't enforce it there which is the most important and professional blood bowl event I don't see why it should be considered a feature of a competitive league.


Spence wrote:

You’re right that time is a resource in Blood Bowl, but it has to be a finite one if we want a competitive game to exist. Choosing how you spend that time is part of the skill. If you want to spend most of your 4 mins (or 2 mins, 3 mins, whatever the mutual time limit is) pondering your options before actions then great. But once you go over that time limit you’re seeking an unfair competitive advantage.



I fully agree that a time limit should be set in order to avoid matches can take too long, but it should be little bit more flexible (like: 1 allowed, 2 no ... maybe... )
So fully agree that there is a need of ruling the time. But should not be "hard" , the first timeout for me should not be called, so i am against the automatic timeout in my opinion (because if your opponent is taking time also you gain of this time, as you are thinking also to counter moving the next turn btw)...


Spence wrote:

Now, if you think that Blood Bowl would be better served by say a half hour time bank to make all your moves (so you can usually take 1 min turns but have the option of a 10 min turn at a critical juncture) than a hard X minute max limit per turn, then I agree with you.



I think that have granted 1 timeout per match can be a sufficient compromise eventually. But also other options could be possible because time is a convention like in Chess there are several tournament which offer different time possibilities:
The idea to have for instance a fixed time of 45 minutes to move and then you have turns which must be of 1 mins only ... yes can be an idea, but not sure this can be applied to BB (think to extra time for instance in KO torunament) . So the easiest one is : one timeout granted for all , never call the 1st timeout. the 2nd called . if players do not agree differently in the beginning.
Spence



Joined: Dec 05, 2012

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 17:09 Reply with quote Back to top

C0ddlefish wrote:
Therefore I'd rather that coach had taken the time to do what they think is best, than artificially rush them. I want to know my win/loss to come from my opponent playing their best, not because I/they caught them/me out


You achieved that then when they failed to find the best continuation in the available time. It's not artificially rushing them if there's a time limit they exceeded.

Or alternatively, if you think there shouldn't be time limits then your opponent wasn't playing anywhere close to his 'best' anyway as he could have played much better if he'd taken more time.

It's a complicated game. Good BB is hard work. Solving even a simple looking turn for optimal play can take hours. Playing to the agreed time is part of the skill. As is setting your opponent problems that he's unlikely to solve optimally in the available time. If your opponent has infinite time to answer a problem turn then setting problems becomes much less valuable and the game becomes much less interesting strategically.

Daneel mentioned not being able to beat Magnus at chess if he had extra time. I'm a mediocre chess player but have a couple of wins over IMs in correspondence (when they essentially treated it as asynchronous blitz) and a draw with a GM in a simultaneous display. These results were achieved through spending much more time thinking about my turns than my opponents did and I'd be extremely unlikely to replicate them given even (competitive) conditions.


Last edited by Spence on %b %12, %2023 - %17:%May; edited 1 time in total
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 17:33 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
RDaneel wrote:

Have you ever tried to play 20 games in Competitive with Goblins? No? How come? Try them... Wink

No because:

1) using Goblins to play in Competitive, especially outside the Trophy, is not logical, unless you have meta-reasons, for example, you like the race, you like secret weapons, you like to foul, you like TTM;

2) using Goblins, who have no adequate CR gain/loss is Competitive division is not logical;

3) if all coaches had to use a Goblin team, then it could make sense to play it; since I could be facing a coach as good as me but with a better team, playing a Goblin team again is not logical;

4) Goblins should have 0-2 rostered bribes.


You do not play at all any Tiers 3 team that's the point. You do not play also Tier2 team that are complex (like IN or Black Orcs) that's the point.
it is not a matter of logic but of convenience. You do it because you know very well that your win rate would plummet in the Box division because the probability of winning with these teams is much lower (which is totally understandable)

That's the reason in my opinion why you don't want to participate in the Trophy. But therein lies the real class of the champion, that of being able to play out of his comfort zone of his super-known Tiers1 and 2 teams and being forced to play a gang of failed screw-ups like the Goblins and maybe make it into the top 10 of the Trophy. It will cost you some of your precious CR but you will gain glory.

Goblins are goblins. they are a mess and they have to be so . They're a Tiers3 team: if you give them two bribes by definition you're promoting them to Tiers2- Blood Bowl predicts that there are half-baked teams where things can go really wrong. And there one has to have the stomach to hold on. That predicts the game.

Same for the Khorne, or the Vampires: they are very difficult bunk teams to play if nobody forces you to play them you don't use them For this the Trophy is really great because somehow you are kind of forced to use them ....

With your history of homemade rules ( the famous 8 dice or giving two bribes to goblins) you want to "NORMALIZE" the game ... all team tiers2 at this point ... but what's the point? You are twisting the philosophy of this game


MattDakka wrote:

Moreover, there is another site rule:

•Intentionally delaying the game by for example not ending your turn or by waiting for extended periods of time before moving is not allowed.

which suggests that playing slowly a game is not allowed.


You should proof that is done intentionally To annoy the opponent : Typically, this can happen in this case: you move all the players (who then stay with the green tick) in two minutes and then wait another two minutes without doing anything. This is often a symptom that something crooked is going on (but before you scream scam maybe hear your opponent : maybe the cat flew his mouse- it happened to me Very Happy) .
But if one plays slow and on average takes 3'30''to make his turns by moving the last player at the 3'20'' go prove that it is an intentional delay . Good luck .

MattDakka wrote:

RDaneel wrote:

It is not a timeout or two that changes the total time of the game in general.

No, but if you don't time out your opponent could keep on playing slow. After one time out people generally start playing faster.

And maybe worst. Again is not a synonym of competitive blood bowl play all the turn fast... fast playing is a subset of blood bowl gaming.
Is not an inherent feature of the game. If you don't "see" the double puschain that brings the prone troll closer to the ball carrier who can then projectilevomit after, you don't see it in two minutes as you do in four. you certainly can't stall for ten minutes because you don't know what to do. Timeout is necessary in extreme cases it is not the norm. If it were it would be a time game, and it is a subset of blood bowl. Legitimate but it would be something else

MattDakka wrote:

I still remember a game vs a good coach late in the night, he kept on playing slow even if I asked him politely to play faster. He was not a new-to-the-game coach, very good, but super slow too. That game was a real torture. After some warnings I timed him out because the game was getting tiresome and I was getting sleepy.


That's understandable if you warned him before. no discussion about this.



MattDakka wrote:

I agree with Spence, well written. Yes, a time bank could be ok, even ArrestedDevelopment suggested it in a chat I had with him. That would be more flexible than 4 minutes per turn.

should be adapted in case of Tournament match which require extra time. but yes is an option even if I still think not really adapted to BB (the final turn are the most complicated , where the initial turns are easier so you will find yourself in lack of time in the last turn of the last drive...
Yu can say: shame on you that losen time.
Also the time budget need to be blocked if s-o has a problem : how to prove I have a "REAL" problem and i say "BRB sorry... need 5 mins break" from someone who is telling you this just to "eat" some time? So the time budget is critical in my opinion. I would stay with the client as it is with the idea to grant 1 or mas 2 timeout to everybody on top of the real issue which require me to stop playing if something unexpected arrive (like the cat... in the sac...)


Last edited by RDaneel on %b %12, %2023 - %17:%May; edited 1 time in total
wintergreen13



Joined: Apr 10, 2011

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 17:35 Reply with quote Back to top

I've never timed anyone out because having a fun, shared experience with another human being is my ultimate goal. But we all play BB for different reasons and I won't judge folks for playing in the way that is most enjoyable to them.

However, if I were to ever time someone out it would have to be because they went over 4 minutes on every single turn (there was a very good coach who was infamous for this years ago and playing them was... frustrating). If my opponent takes 1 minute for the first 7 turns but 10 minutes on the t8 I'm fine with that because in my mind they've "banked" time from the previous short turns (similar to how BB2/3 deal with this issue).
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 17:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Spence wrote:


Daneel mentioned not being able to beat Magnus at chess if he had extra time. I'm a mediocre chess player but have a couple of wins over IMs in correspondence (when they essentially treated it as asynchronous blitz) and a draw with a GM in a simultaneous display. These results were achieved through spending much more time thinking about my turns than my opponents did and I'd be extremely unlikely to replicate them given even (competitive) conditions.


Okay but we are talking about extreme cases...he thinks half a second and you have maybe 2 hours...okay...time certainly is a factor that create a certain pressure, we are human being and we are sensible to pressure. But in Blood bowl we are not speaking of so who plays in 10 mins and another that MUST answer in 1 sec.
Also because if your opponent is thinking, so are you: if that one takes 4 minutes and 30 seconds to make the turn this allows you to think better about your turn.

And then you forget one key thing: dice. dice count for at least 35 percent in this game (so I'll roll a number). You make a whole strategy and then in this particular turn things don't go the way they should and you have to rethink it for a moment. It doesn't happen often it usually happens on a unlucky turn , just once. And maybe your opponent doesn't. So I find it fair that maybe everyone is allowed a "longer" turn in case things go wrong. We always make the comparison with chess often forgetting that in chess you don't roll the dice.

But of course if your opponent take 2 consecutive turn in 5 mins clear he deserves a warning and the third time very likely I am allowed not give him a chance (a part if there is a clear gap in value or he tell me that he is new, does not know the client etc... and he has all the rights to try playing in competitive as well )
spelledaren



Joined: Mar 06, 2004

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 18:11 Reply with quote Back to top

I seriously considered starting using the time out when I had a game last month where opponent had an average of 6 min turns, often not touching any piece until 2 min had passed.

But I just suffered through it, they were fairly new to the client and I had time. But I had a lot less fun and my concentration surely started to falter going into the second hour of the game.

Anyway. Just restating that anyone that times others out should be able to do so without feeling bad about it. Making it an automatic time out would actually make sense if we didn't have real life to deal with.

_________________
FUMBBL!
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 18:11 Reply with quote Back to top

RDaneel wrote:

You do not play at all any Tiers 3 team that's the point.

I used Goblins in the post because you talked about Goblins.
Yes I don't, due to reasons. They suck and/or don't mirror well the fluff and/or require to use Star Players (I don't like to hire Star Players from game to game, I prefer to build my own players).
Halflings suck, don't have a rostered Chef, and the Treemen should be able to remove the roots with a roll to make them more appealing to me, Ogres have Snotlings called Gnoblars (Gnoblars should have ST 2, not ST 1, they are Snotlings in disguise), Snotlings, I don't like their gameplay and hiring the Star Players.


RDaneel wrote:

You do not play also Tier2 team that are complex (like IN or Black Orcs) that's the point.

I tried both, I didn't like them. Black Orcs are too slow, they should have MA 5 (removing either Brawler or Grab or even both), also, to be played decently they need an AG 4 Goblin, which is harder to build without MVP nomination. Once you've built him you have to fire him due to Season Re-Draft. If a Black Orc is MNG the team loses a lot (a bit like losing a Saurus for Lizardmen, but with the difference that BO and Goblins are way slower than Lizardmen). Without MVP nomination it takes ages to skill up the players and with the new Casualty table there is a high chance they get crippled and you have to rebuild them over and over again.
Imperial Nobility, I tried it as well, I didn't like the illogical Thrower, the lack of S access on Blitzers, the AG 4+ Linemen with Fend (they would be better cheaper and without Fend, so they could be more disposable foulers).

It's not that they are complex, I can understand how to play them, but their gameplay doesn't suit me. I would need to farm them a bit to make them appealing, but with MVP nomination and general weakness of both teams is something I don't want to do. Too much time and frustration for the fun I could have from playing them.

RDaneel wrote:

it is not a matter of logic but of convenience. You do it because you know very well that your win rate would plummet in the Box division because the probability of winning with these teams is much lower (which is totally understandable)

Logic, convenience, lack of will to get frustrated. If I play bad teams I get more frustrated, frustration leads to whining, whining leads to report, report leads to ban. So, you will agree with me that I have good reasons not to play them. Without Season Re-Draft, with MVP nomination and with better roster design I would play them, though.
If I wanted to play only top tier 1 teams I would not play Elves in this edition. I like their dynamic gameplay, but they are weaker than in old ruleset.


RDaneel wrote:
That's the reason in my opinion why you don't want to participate in the Trophy.

I didn't participate to any Trophy, even in old ruleset and I explained why, the reasons are the same, on top of that, the Box Trophy is not a pure Box Trophy. You can play Tournament games, this creates logical inconsistency in the Trophy. It should be called Trophy.

RDaneel wrote:

But therein lies the real class of the champion, that of being able to play out of his comfort zone of his super-known Tiers1 and 2 teams and being forced to play a gang of failed screw-ups like the Goblins and maybe make it into the top 10 of the Trophy. It will cost you some of your precious CR but you will gain glory.

Playing like I love to play is fun and rewarding enough for me, no need to participate to the Trophy. Also, I want to play at the TV I like the teams I like and without starting over and over again the teams. I've already explained that in a detailed way.
My own Trophy is the Box.


RDaneel wrote:
Goblins are goblins. they are a mess and they have to be so . They're a Tiers3 team: if you give them two bribes by definition you're promoting them to Tiers2- Blood Bowl predicts that there are half-baked teams where things can go really wrong.

I disagree with the tier 3 philosophy. In my opinion Goblins should be poor, as players, but should have many dirty tricks to make up for their weakness. 0-2 bribes and a better Bomber (not an overpowered one, better than the rostered version, but weaker than Bomber Dribblesnot), for instance, would make them better without making them super good. Currently they suck too much for me to bother playing them in Competitive division.

RDaneel wrote:

Same for the Khorne, or the Vampires: they are very difficult bunk teams to play if nobody forces you to play them you don't use them PEr this the Trophy is really great because somehow you are kind of forced to use them ....

I'm not the kind of guy who likes to be forced to play something. Both Khorne and Vampire teams should be re-designed for me to bother playing them. As they are + BB2020 rules (Re-Draft, no MVP nomination) = I won't touch them with a barge pole.

RDaneel wrote:
With your history of homemade rules ( the famous 8 dice or giving two bribes to goblins) you want to "NORMALIZE" the game ... all team tiers2 at this point ... but what's the point? You are twisting the philosophy of this game

Well, who decides which is the right philosophy of this game? The clueless game designers who made multi rr, ruined the passing game, made overpowered Bomber, removed MVP nomination, added the Season Re-Draft, added useless random skills helping bash teams with cheap fodder players easy-to-cycle?
If that is the right philosophy then better to change it!

RDaneel wrote:

You should proof that is done intentionally To annoy the opponent : Typically, this can happen in this case: you move all the players (who then stay with the green tick) in two minutes and then wait another two minutes without doing anything. This is often a symptom that something crooked is going on (but before you scream scam maybe hear your opponent : maybe the cat flew his mouse- it happened to me Very Happy) .
But if one plays slow and on average takes 3'30''to make his turns by moving the last player at the 3'20'' go prove that it is an intentional delay . Good luck .

I just quoted the site rule, of course you can't be sure. If I could make my own site rule, I would just use the automatic timer. Since I can't check if you are deliberately slowing down the game or not, automatic time out. I played on Cyanide with automatic timer and it was super good.

RDaneel wrote:

And maybe worst. Again is not a synonym of competitive blood bowl play all the turn fast... fast playing is a subset of blood bowl gaming.
Is not an inherent feature of the game. If you don't "see" the double puschain that brings the prone troll closer to the ball carrier who can then projectilevomit after, you don't see it in two minutes as you do in four.

Maybe, but, for example, if you spend 4 minutes by throwing secondary blocks you should not get free time to play the important action.

RDaneel wrote:
Timeout is necessary in extreme cases it is not the norm. If it were it would be a time game, and it is a subset of blood bowl. Legitimate but it would be something else

Overtaking the time limit once is already an extreme case for me. I tend to lose patience if the game takes too much time. If I lose patience I tend to play worse, therefore, if I want to play competitively I must enforce the time out.


Last edited by MattDakka on %b %12, %2023 - %22:%May; edited 2 times in total
Macavity



Joined: Nov 23, 2004

Post   Posted: May 12, 2023 - 18:24 Reply with quote Back to top

RDaneel, please note: The reason Matt plays (not being snarky just trying to be helpful) is to attempt to improve his CR.

I don't think he would disagree (because of the way it clearly comes up no matter the topic) that if you wish to argue with him you must accept this premise.

I suspect that you (like me) may not primarily play for CR so you are actually having an argument of irreconcilable values. Of course that is fine, but unlikely to produce any final concurrence.

_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic