OverDose
Joined: Apr 07, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:39 |
 
|
Would be easy to implement and would definitely make looking for a game easier, wouldn't it?
n = fiveish would be ideal me thinks! |
|
|
Eghost
Joined: Oct 19, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:41 |
|
why would that make it easier? less teams to choose from.... |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:42 |
|
More than 10 is pretty silly, yes. |
_________________
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." |
|
Alibaba
Joined: Aug 18, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:46 |
|
More than 5 is pretty SillySod, yes. |
|
|
momfreeek
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:49 |
|
| Eghost wrote: | | why would that make it easier? less teams to choose from.... |
I often put ~5 teams on and I get at least 3 offers every time which means at least 2 people turned down. More teams would mean more refusals.
Maybe dorfs and khemri shouldn't add to the limit  |
_________________
[url=http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/2121/buddylistbar4ft4.png] [/url]
Last edited by momfreeek on %b %16, %2008 - %20:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:50 |
|
Why? If I have 20 teams that I wouldn't mind playing with, what's the issue with putting them all on Gamefinder?
Is it because it's harder for certain people to pick out a nice CR opponent or what? |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:51 |
|
I don't understand how a limit will make it easier to find a game. More teams means more opportunity to find an even match-up.
Perhaps having gamefinder auto-remove teams where the coach is offline would be a plus. Having too many teams on gamefinder where the coach is gone does make finding a game more difficult. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
Skolopender
Joined: Jun 17, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:52 |
|
| Pirog wrote: | Why? If I have 20 teams that I wouldn't mind playing with, what's the issue with putting them all on Gamefinder?
Is it because it's harder for certain people to pick out a nice CR opponent or what? |
Me thinks you hit the nail...
Pickers get so confused by to many teams  |
_________________
Lobbying for a Troll team. If Bonehead Ogres can have one, why not one for Trolls? Power to the Trolls! |
|
Skolopender
Joined: Jun 17, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 20:57 |
|
| Arktoris wrote: | | Perhaps having gamefinder auto-remove teams where the coach is offline would be a plus. Having too many teams on gamefinder where the coach is gone does make finding a game more difficult. |
Would be awsome! |
_________________
Lobbying for a Troll team. If Bonehead Ogres can have one, why not one for Trolls? Power to the Trolls! |
|
Ilovpompom
Joined: Nov 25, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 21:09 |
|
The picker is the guy with 10 teams, not the opponent.
Usually high CR coach, picker professionnal, waiting for a team with 5 niggles, av7 and skills like diving catch and dauntless on the big guy... Easy to recognize, 12 teams for the same guy, but he found no matches after 25mn... How many time did I ask a guy like that for 10 possibles matchup and he refused all of them? Hard to count.
And this guy polluting gamefinder and making everybody loosing time asking for pretty fair matchup when he's waiting for an easy one. But no need to implement anything for him, just ignore him.
Problem is that it's quite common, people don't play matches here, unless they are new or they think they can win easily. I always ask 10 times more than I get yes, and usually I finish with a 150ish CR coach without even looking for that, because they are the only ones who still know how to say yes to a team which isn't underpowered. |
|
|
Skolopender
Joined: Jun 17, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 21:11 |
|
Ï have a lot of teams I throw on when I don't have a team I favor or prepare for tourneys.
So people chose one of many and I accept more or less the first thing that comes at me. |
_________________
Lobbying for a Troll team. If Bonehead Ogres can have one, why not one for Trolls? Power to the Trolls! |
|
rostern
Joined: Jun 12, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 - 21:25 |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 17, 2008 - 03:51 |
|
No the pickers have more than the minimum, but less than the majority that have some but not all of their games on gamefinder. And that is just excessive!
If i ever put my unranked teams up, I put them all up. Harder fishing ground after all. So am I the picker or the picked? Picked I would guess as I am offering more fruits than the next cherry. However I don't think you can judge whether they're a picker or not by how many teams are on gamefinder. I don't like the idea personally, but it maybe tidier at peak times. |
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 17, 2008 - 04:55 |
|
Ilovpompom>
It depends on how you see it. We both agree that a lot of people are very picky about what teams to accept. So for me putting 10+ teams on Gamefinder gives me better odds of finding a decent match up, while just having one or two might put me in the same bracket as some picky people or against teams that I just don' feel like playing and I end up having to wait for 15 minutes to get a game going.
So maybe judging people less by stereotypes would benifit Fumbbl more than restrictions on Gamefinder... |
|
|
momfreeek
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 17, 2008 - 05:08 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | No the pickers have more than the minimum, but less than the majority that have some but not all of their games on gamefinder. And that is just excessive! |
eh?
How did this turn into a thread about cherry picking? Its about spamming gamefinder with 20 teams when you can only play one match isn't it? |
_________________
[url=http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/2121/buddylistbar4ft4.png][/url] |
|
|
|
Has Cindy Piewhistle...
Search
