SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
 Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 20:02 |
 
|
Hah!
If I'm honest I wasnt aware that Kyle was up there with the greats (awsome as he is). Cool stuff, cheers  |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
DaveH
Joined: Sep 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 20:48 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | As if it needs repeating.... the concession rules are a considerably more prominent and intended part of the CRP than clawPOMB.
The fumbbl concession rules are more or less there to prevent win trading. They arent there so that you can be a whiny dick  People seem to get very confused about that. |
"Concessions are to be made only when there is merit for them.
In this context, merit means that the conceding team needs a reasonable in-game reason for conceding. The team taking excessive casualties is one acceptable reason to concede. Other reasons include having a very distinct lack of players left to play with, or being clearly outplayed in terms of touchdowns.
Conceding when none of the above circumstances are fulfilled will require admin approval."
Seems pretty clear cut to me...you can only concede when you're getting thrashed anyway |
|
|
Panda_
Joined: Jul 14, 2004
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 20:59 |
|
| DaveH wrote: |
"Concessions are to be made only when there is merit for them.
In this context, merit means that the conceding team needs a reasonable in-game reason for conceding. The team taking excessive casualties is one acceptable reason to concede. Other reasons include having a very distinct lack of players left to play with, or being clearly outplayed in terms of touchdowns.
Conceding when none of the above circumstances are fulfilled will require admin approval."
Seems pretty clear cut to me...you can only concede when you're getting thrashed anyway |
+ 1 |
_________________
"Rien ne sert de partir a point, il vaut mieux courir." |
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:14 |
|
My "best" concession was against a necro team. I started on defense, and after his T1 both wolves were in my TZs. I SI'ed both, and he conceded immediately.
To this day I'm not certain whether that was "justified" or just funny. |
_________________
Author of Firehurler (Twinborn Trilogy Book #1), Aethersmith (Book #2), Sourcethief (Book #3) |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:27 |
|
I don't understand why you would concede due to being outscored by a 'large' margin. I don't really get why you'd ever concede really, but I can understand it to a degree if you are down players and scared some magical pixel is going to be edited.
I had a guy concede to me once because he had an emergency and had to stop playing. Not sure if he knew we could just stop the game and pick it up later, but before I could mention that to him he had already conceded. Technically that's not kosher, but on the other hand I can understand conceding in a circumstance like that if you don't think you'll be able to get back anytime soon and don't want to hang up the opponents team in the meantime.
Conceding in L or a tournament should simply be disallowed though. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:33 |
|
I like cheese.
oh, wait - what was this thread about again? |
_________________
 |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:34 |
|
| DaveH wrote: |
Seems pretty clear cut to me...you can only concede when you're getting thrashed anyway |
or if your cat is on fire |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:36 |
|
| licker wrote: |
Conceding in ... tournament should simply be disallowed though. |
it is. you get banned from tournys for doing that |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:36 |
|
It is really fine, has no-one played MTG? I agree with Sillysod, have the rule to stop cheaters but other than that let ppl concede without penalty, it's allowed in CRP and it is their time after all. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 21:58 |
|
Aye Jimmy - poor handling of concessions is one of the major failings of bloodbowl.
| DaveH wrote: | | Seems pretty clear cut to me... |
You would think so. However, that was not the interpretation of the admin that actually made the rule in the first place.
I'll let someone else drudge up the details but its a sad example of a bad rule being created "so we can justify banning cheaters" and then being mis-applied later on. I guess it was pretty inevitably given just how poorly the rule conveys its intent (i.e. it doesnt).
Frankly I've always been horrified that the wording doesnt even make sense from a tactical perspective. As a consequence many legitimate concessions get queried but alot of stupid ones go through on the nod (e.g. conceding then retiring your team, ridiculous). |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2012 - 22:07 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | licker wrote: |
Conceding in ... tournament should simply be disallowed though. |
it is. you get banned from tournys for doing that |
Yes... though I was actually thinking about just removing it as an option for tourney games. And L, but I guess there may some Ls where you are supposed to concede or something, maybe. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 14, 2012 - 00:27 |
|
some points:
Licker wrote: 'I don't understand why you would concede due to being outscored by a 'large' margin.'
The rule is 'being totally outplayed, like 4 or 5 TDs down'. Of all the concession rules, this is the most difficult. I would suggest not conceding on this part of the ruling, after all it isn't necessary to concede in this state.
'I had a guy concede to me once because he had an emergency and had to stop playing. Not sure if he knew we could just stop the game and pick it up later, but before I could mention that to him he had already conceded. Technically that's not kosher, but on the other hand I can understand conceding in a circumstance like that if you don't think you'll be able to get back anytime soon and don't want to hang up the opponents team in the meantime.'
Yes, this is true. Nobody really wants to hold up games being finished. 2 points though. 1. If we allowed this, everybody would use this excuse, and concessions would get out of control. 'The halflings I was beating 8-0 with my dwarfs and with 1 turn to go conceded because he had to go...' etc etc 2. All coaches have clicked yes, that they have read and understood the rules, so they should know that concessions aren't allowed for this reason.
Conceding in R or B tournaments is illegal, the tourney admins keep a list of people who do such things, and they are banned from official tourneys for this and other offences. All good L tourneys keep tabs on concessions and don't allow them to get out of control. Although I have never conceded myself, if there is merit, I think there should be that opt out option.
Sillysod wrote:
'Frankly I've always been horrified that the wording doesnt even make sense from a tactical perspective. As a consequence many legitimate concessions get queried but alot of stupid ones go through on the nod (e.g. conceding then retiring your team, ridiculous).'
I don't really understand your point here, it's a bit wishywashy. The ruling would have been as Christer wants the site to be run. His ruling and if an admin has doubt about that, Christer can clarify.
So from your perspective, if a team has taken 10 perma injuries and decides to concede and retire the team, this is ridiculous? I don't understand your opinion here.
There are 3 reasons you can concede. 1. Taking a large amount of casualties. 2. Fielding far less players than your opponent. 3. Being totally outplayed with little to gain from continuing.
All 3 of these I believe are quite clear and tactical reasons for conceding.
Re: JF and SS.
I can see your point, however I don't think either of you are in a position to judge how admins deal with concessions.
The rule is to stop cheaters, but it also prevents concessions getting out of hand. cyanide which doesn't have such rules has a real problem with concessions, and has gotten totally out of hand in the open game market.
You have to remember there are 2 schools of thought (from legitimate coaches) those who feel concessions are merited in certain situations and those who feel concessions shouldn't happen unless in the most extreme situations.
The ruling and the staff fall somewhere in the middle of this, and it is my belief that we maintain a policy that is acceptable from both schools of thought.
The be all and end all of all of this is, this isn't a table top environment. How many concessions do you see on the table top? How many concessions do you think were intended when the rules were put together?
Very few. However on an online envrionment, it's much easier to click concede and walk away. So to counter this and maintain parity, to prevent situations of team gaining or losing artificially extra rules are needed.
FUMBBL maintains a nice status quo in my opinion, that puts very few people's noses out of joint. |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 14, 2012 - 01:55 |
|
Harvestmouse - use quotes! (it was tricky to read  )
| harvestmouse wrote: | | SillySod wrote: | | Frankly I've always been horrified that the wording doesnt even make sense from a tactical perspective. As a consequence many legitimate concessions get queried but alot of stupid ones go through on the nod (e.g. conceding then retiring your team, ridiculous). |
I don't really understand your point here, it's a bit wishywashy. The ruling would have been as Christer wants the site to be run. His ruling and if an admin has doubt about that, Christer can clarify.
So from your perspective, if a team has taken 10 perma injuries and decides to concede and retire the team, this is ridiculous? I don't understand your opinion here. |
Correct. I firmly believe that a team which concedes then immediately retires is going against the spirit of any kind of environment where concessions are frowned upon.
Basicly I'm approaching the concept of a "tactical concession" (or worthy concession, if you will) as being any situation where conceding gives you a tangible advantage or at least a situation where such an advantage can be disputed. Basicly I believe that to have merit a concession has to actually be beneficial. Otherwise why are you conceding? Normally I wouldnt care about the merit of a concession but lets assume that we do (since FUMBBL does).
If you intend to retire your team then it has no future beyond the current game. Therefore there is no reason to concede. You can gain no in-game advantage whatsoever. By conceding then retiring you are granting your opponent a freebie for no net bonus to yourself - thats exactly the kind of concession a competitive environment wants to prevent!
Plus, as you pointed out, the "being totally outplayed" clause is just peculiar.
Hopefully you can see where I'm coming from there. Now, lets crank it up another notch...
In contrast, you might encounter an already tricky game where two or three key players get whomped before you've even moved (lets say badly hurt). That probably puts you out of contention for the game and you are basicly garuanteed to take a whole ton of damage (due to the matchup). The smart way to play here would be to concede immediately (yes, on turn 1 if things really look that bad). However, the current rules require you to take a heap of bonus damage before conceding. Thats crazy. It might not happen often but there are situations where you are denied the opportunity to make a good play and instead have to pay some kind of bizaro injury tax before a concession is considered to be legitimate.
(this has happened to me before - I took on a tricky game with ogres agaisnt dwarfs (that most would have refused) and the dwarfs promptly removed two scrimmage ogres and my apothecary failed. You could argue that its still a winnable game (clue: it isnt ) but its equally valid to suggest that staying in the game is likely to put you into total team collapse, especially given the fragile economy of LRB4 ogre teams.) /bonus explanation
Hence, I really dislike the wording of the concession policy - it is a policy that has to be applied very literally when the literal meaning has only shaky grounding in common sense. An unfortunate relic written by someone who cant play BB  |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
Sambojin
Joined: Jul 06, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 14, 2012 - 03:02 |
|
I've seen what seemed to be a fair few rage-quit concessions on Fumbbl, most of them without reason. But then again, I use Fumbbl as my screensaver, so I've got a fair bit of a chance to see some weird stuff from time to time.
I've also conceded myself. Unfortunately not for the required reasons. I had to go down and do the banking and pay the bills (on pain of pain from the missus). I got the nice, little admin note telling me to damn well not concede unless you're screwed. I really wouldn't have been screwed if I hadn't conceded. Literally.
I had told my opponent why I was conceding. I also had a bunch of work coming up, therefore didn't think I'd get in any BB for a few days. But this isn't allowed unfortunately.
But on the plus side, the admins handle this sort of stuff well. I mean, it's just a nice little warning letter. It just mean's "Mate, don't do this sort of stuff all the time, because you're wasting people's time if you do." Which is fair enough. I think Fumbbl handles concessions (legitimate by the rules or due to RL things) pretty well. Compared to say, virtually any other large community of online games players and a debatable issue that can be leveraged or misused. Try any MMO or RTS and see how admins handle weird stuff. Fumbbl is far better by comparison. |
|
|
Sambojin
Joined: Jul 06, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 14, 2012 - 03:35 |
|
Actually, for those that never have conceded, here's how the admins handle it:
<Msg from Harvestmouse>
**********************************
Hi,
this match was conceded illegally <insert game url that sambojin conceded irresponsibly>
Please watch this in future and make sure you know the site rules,
HM
********************************
Not exactly that scary is it? Not a ban-hammer of doom. Just a polite little note. They probably get better if you do it again, but it's still not exactly scary.
To tell you the truth, I'd probably be quite happy to receive a msg like this at any time. Especially if it allowed me to somehow leverage a tactical option in BB or to ensure that I can continue sexual relations with the missus.
I probably need all the help and polite notes I can get in both areas. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Designer's Comm...
Search
