Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 04:50 |
 
|
No you are not. The skills are the same in unranked. Gaining spps works the same way in unranked. Yes there are some non LRB teams around but you don't have to play them. And as _each_ and _every_ game in unranked is a one off game there is no reason to avoid teams that got to the TR/TS they are at (if it is close to yours) by having played non LRB teams.
It still is a LRB team your playing against. Even if some of the spps came from smashing up some fairies. That didn't give them any new undocumented abilities or anything.
On top of that - as pointed out already in the thread the whole ranking system of ranked division is not even part of the LRB either. Or Team Strength.
-Mnemon |
|
|
Squiggy
Joined: Apr 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 05:36 |
|
I've heard various points brought up in various ways, and here is my opinion, which is only mine, and you don't have to listen to it! 
Some of the complaints have been that Ranked is the division that is supposed to emulate the LRB as closely as possible. This means no experimental rules or teams. Strength Rating, which is not an official part of BloodBowl (but I think makes a good rule of thumb for assessing teams) should not dictate what games you play under those constraints.
now, from what I've gathered, there are unofficial teams in the unranked division. Some people have said that you don't have to play against those teams if you don't want to. But if they are unofficial, and as yet either radically unbalanced or even not quite balanced but almost, any team you played against could have played against those teams, and either been really badly hurt, gained a lot of easy spp's, or even played a fairly balanced game. My point here is that your team has been "corrupted," for lack of a better word, from the LRB approximation.
Having said that, I'm sure there are people that want their teams to be ranked, but don't want to have to deal with the +/-40TS, and would like to play in a LRB compliant division like ranked.
If there was a middle ground, somewhere between ranked and unranked, where you were still rated but could choose any games you wanted regardles of TS, there probably wouldn't be this issue. But I don't know if I see that happening.
Now, I find it difficult to get roughly even matches for my gobbos. They're currently at (160/106), so no matter what I do, I'm giving away handicaps, whether at even strength, or even with them +40. Heck, I gave away 2 handicaps to a skaven team that was 17TS more than me, and between having 5 players missing the game, 1 being arrested, and 5 missing the first drive, I started the game with only 5 players on the pitch.
Now, I dont think I've mismanaged my team. Granted, I have a lot of cash in the bank, but I prefer having the reserves in case 1 or, heaven forbid, both trolls die, then I can replace at least one for the next game. They've also done relatively well injury-wise, at least up until the last few games, where they sustained heavy casualties. (2 with -AV, 3 with -MA, and a few with niggles including a troll) It takes time to replace them when you usually have a dead gobbo or two in a game.
Now, I don't actively look for games against dwarves with them, but I wouldn't say no. (at least, not very often) I've played against orcs, and necromantic, and norse. I'm usually up for anything. But it's hard to find games where I have a decent chance of winning. Ok, yes, I know, goblins aren't supposed to have a decent chance of winning, but it's still nice to, at least once in a blue moon!  |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 05:53 |
|
| Squiggy wrote: | | ...now, from what I've gathered, there are unofficial teams in the unranked division. Some people have said that you don't have to play against those teams if you don't want to. But if they are unofficial, and as yet either radically unbalanced or even not quite balanced but almost, any team you played against could have played against those teams, and either been really badly hurt, gained a lot of easy spp's, or even played a fairly balanced game. My point here is that your team has been "corrupted," for lack of a better word, from the LRB approximation.... |
The point that Mnemon and I (and everyone else saying, "Just play LRB teams if you care") are trying to make is that it doesn't matter if your opponent got to TR 200 by playing 3 games against Gnomes or 10 games against "real teams." You get your own team to the point where you want it and your opponent, with his or her LRB-compliant skills, rules, etc... got theirs to an equivalent level doing so how they like. For your match, you both have LRB teams playing on equal footing.
I guess that's just too hard to see. If you really care that much about teams being "corrupted" and somehow this spoils your enjoyment of the game, then have fun checking people's match records to see if they played "corrupting" games.
Just seems daft to me. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Azurus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 06:00 |
|
| Squiggy wrote: | Now, I find it difficult to get roughly even matches for my gobbos. They're currently at (160/106), so no matter what I do, I'm giving away handicaps, whether at even strength, or even with them +40. Heck, I gave away 2 handicaps to a skaven team that was 17TS more than me, and between having 5 players missing the game, 1 being arrested, and 5 missing the first drive, I started the game with only 5 players on the pitch.
Now, I dont think I've mismanaged my team. Granted, I have a lot of cash in the bank, but I prefer having the reserves in case 1 or, heaven forbid, both trolls die, then I can replace at least one for the next game. They've also done relatively well injury-wise, at least up until the last few games, where they sustained heavy casualties. (2 with -AV, 3 with -MA, and a few with niggles including a troll) It takes time to replace them when you usually have a dead gobbo or two in a game. |
I think you are mismanaging your team. If you replaced 4 of those injured gobbos with rookies, then you'd drop 16 points of TR (+some for their SPPs), and probably gain some STR from the value provided by uninjured players. I can't see how keeping 170k in the bank to replace trolls is a good idea, it isn't worth a handicap or two every game, trolls are the most resilient players in the entire game, after all. They don't die often. Note that I'm not trying to make a personal attack, just offering some advice on what I would do with that team.
The point in general is a good one though, it does make things slightly harder for stunties (in terms of restricting the number of opponents who fall into a reasonable approximation of 'equal'), who have always had a TR/SR difference bigger than other teams. But then, nobody should expect to get a great many even games with an R stunty team.
As for the topic as a whole, I agree withe BMM sentiments about the number of teams available to play. Surely +/-40 is a big enough margin? The only reasons I can see to go beyong that anyway are a)for fun (in which case what does it matter what division you're in, and if it's only for fun, just play the game and don't upload it) or b) to take advantage of newbies or coaches who have mismanaged their teams. If you're going to pick on rookies, it would be better to pick on rookies that are higher you than you in SR, not weaker, since you'll most likely beat them regardless and gain more ranking points for it. As for mismanaged teams, why bother? If they're that badly messed up, the games hardly likely to be any good anyway.
+/-40 is enough margin for me (if I ever get round to playing regularly again) |
|
|
Squiggy
Joined: Apr 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 07:05 |
|
| Azurus wrote: |
I think you are mismanaging your team. If you replaced 4 of those injured gobbos with rookies, then you'd drop 16 points of TR (+some for their SPPs), and probably gain some STR from the value provided by uninjured players. I can't see how keeping 170k in the bank to replace trolls is a good idea, it isn't worth a handicap or two every game, trolls are the most resilient players in the entire game, after all. They don't die often. Note that I'm not trying to make a personal attack, just offering some advice on what I would do with that team.
|
Ok, maybe you're right. I've dropped 2 of the gobbos for rookies (which I had meant to do anyways), but I've had such bad luck with my tabletop gobbo team with trolls and ogres dying (fortunately, my grandfathered ogre with pass is still alive) that I feel a need to keep close to 100k in the bank.
I'm always glad for advice, and I know it wasn't a personal attack.
Unfortunately, I get too attatched to my players. They're like my little children that I've watched grow up, and it's hard to let go and do the right thing, and retire them. Ok, granted, they're more like little children that I encourage to go play in traffic, but my little children nonetheless! 
And I guess I didn't really say what I meant to earlier. I, personally, don't have a problem with it, but I was just showing the insights that I had perceived from reading other people's messages. That's where the whole "corruption" of the teams thing came from. To me, it's not about whom you've played in the past, but where your team is now, and how it's going to effect my team and playing ability. Or something along those lines. Or maybe I'm just grasping a straws here... |
|
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 13:05 |
|
Personally I think you should keep your injured gobbos around. You need some linefodder you don't mind not wasting your apo on.
-Mnemon |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 16:01 |
|
<off topic>
| Squiggy wrote: | | ...I'm always glad for advice, and I know it wasn't a personal attack. |
Now if only more people would see it this way. *pats Squiggy on the back*
| Squiggy wrote: | Unfortunately, I get too attatched to my players. They're like my little children that I've watched grow up, and it's hard to let go and do the right thing, and retire them. Ok, granted, they're more like little children that I encourage to go play in traffic, but my little children nonetheless!
... |
The Force is strong in this one... 
I've never seen it put into words so well but I know just what you mean.
</off topic> |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Azurus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 16:58 |
|
The problem I see with squiggy's team is that, while he can get the gap between it's TR and TS to less than 40, it isn't going to close up much more than that, and is likely to regularly move back into the range where he has to play teams with much lower TR than his just to get a legal game. I expect the same goes for a large number of other stunty teams too.
Maybe the limit needs to be extended slightly for the stunty teams? |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 30, 2004 - 17:06 |
|
There was talk before about each handicap adding 5 to the effective TS for that particular matchup but apparently that's only for ranking purposes. It's a shame, but people are too lazy to figure out the specific difference anyway, I think, so it probably doesn't matter. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Gibbering_Gambits
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 01, 2004 - 07:54 |
|
| Tribble_the_Unclean wrote: | | But why are we forced to play in the ranked division if we want to play a somewhat LRB-compliant game? |
Explain to me why you feel you can't play a LRB compliant game in the (U) division?
Are my and other's previous posts just being ignored? you can play what ever style you want and all the tools are on this site for rank or not. If you only want to play LRB teams in (U) then only play those teams. It's pretty simple, and if you think that people in (U) dont play copmetatively, I believe you havent played many games in (U). |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
