MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 18:20 |
 
|
Hybrid matchmaking is terrible, being paired with teams which picked their opponents is unfair.
I could tolerate merging Ranked with Box, but after that, matches should be arranged only with Box scheduler.
No hybrid matchmaking allowed. |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
Matt dont be such an elitist. We've been here so often before.
you can have a flag that until you make a game outside of Box scheduler will only allow you to pair with the same.
Who loses then? Want to choose? choose, want to always play people that have never chosen? fine, want to do both depending, fine. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 19:07 |
|
I elaborate:
if you allow to play Box vs Ranked teams, my potential opponents would be decreased, because I suspect many people would flag to play vs Box and Ranked teams, while the "purist" Box-vs-Box-only-teams coaches would be fewer than current potential opponents in normal Box.
That could make find a game harder/with a bigger TV gap if you are a purist Box vs Box team only.
This is my reasoning, not really elitism, to be honest, just logic.
That said, we are a bit digressing from main topic now.
I just suggested to apply the Season rule (or another "ageing", how it's obtained it's not important, as long as it gets the job done).
Merging divisions is not what I meant to discuss. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %08, %2020 - %19:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
Just self interest and a willingness to force others to play a form of BB you readily admit they want to escape from.
You are coercively controlling a whole generation of BB players.
But oddly i am trying to save you, not drown you.
If seasons come, R will not be touched, it never has been. A perpetual open division where people can select who they play has always, and will always, be a FUMBBL feature. People love it, people want it.
If seasons came where do you think the BBT trophy people will go? how many B coaches, compared to R coaches, would move to a perpetual team managing seasonal environment, with natural curbs on some of the B divisions worst case scenarios?
I am trying to save you Matt. It is B that would die. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 19:22 |
|
I think many innovations in humanity were driven by self interest, self interest driven by logic is not necessarily negative, in my opinion.
Self interest may overlap with a general improvement of other people's conditions.
As I said, I didn't ask to affect Ranked with my Season rule suggestion.
If Seasons last exactly like a Trophy Run, i.e. 25 games, why people interested in the Trophy should be scared by the Box?
Also, I think people could find interesting a division where there is more balance, due to keeping TV growth in check.
I really find it a positive aspect, not a negative one, and not because I hate team development, I like it, but in the right amount.
When super development breaks the game, I don't like it anymore. |
|
|
Muff2n
Joined: May 20, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 20:12 |
|
It's certainly self interested for a person to want box to behave more in a way that would suit them. But it wouldn't make it necessarily a bad idea. For example, what if 99% of coaches supported it? But to answer the theoretical question, I guess I'd be attracted to seasons if it did reduce high TV pairing chances and helped completely demolished teams recover from multiple loners. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 20:50 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
When super development breaks the game, I don't like it anymore. |
The problem here is - lots of people like that super high tv game.
Personally I find it incredibly dull, as teams lose all character as stat freaks and doubles become so prevelent, and the number of races that can truly compete diminishes.
However, some people enjoy it.
also as I have said before, we really need to wait to see what the deal is with this rumoured new box set.
When the leak occured it was estimated for release in autumn 2020, filling the slot that necromunda took last year.
FYI necromunda was re-released 1 year before Blood Bowl was re-released 2015 and 2016 repsectively, starting to think this might be a cycle. |
_________________
 |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 08, 2020 - 21:06 |
|
| Garion wrote: |
Personally I find it incredibly dull, as teams lose all character as stat freaks and doubles become so prevelent, and the number of races that can truly compete diminishes.
|
I think the same. Some development, to customize and tailor your players adds flavour, replayability value to the game and it's positive (this is one of the reasons I don't like NAF tournaments). Too much development, though, is detrimental to the game balance and racial variety at high TV, the ruleset just is not designed for high TV.
I like to play all kinds of teams, this is why variety (in terms of different races I can play and I can face and the different tactical challenges of the match-ups) is important for me.
High TV drastically decreases it.
No offence meant to any coach who loves high TV, I can understand their point of view, although I don't share it.
That said, I'm not asking to force people to play with max 1100 TV teams, I really think that TV 1800, or even 2000, if 1800 is too low, would still better than having no TV cap at all.
TV 1800 or 2000 teams are quite developed. |
|
|
|
|
| |
BB2020 - Kick team m...
Search
