SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
 Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 05:59 |
 
|
| westerner wrote: | | SillySod wrote: | | westerner wrote: | | Rather than weighting bashiness (BBR) to only 30% of winning (BR), I think the scheduler should weight both equally. |
Neither the "blood" or the "bowl" dominated stategies for winning are better than the other - they are just two different means to the same end. As such any system which punishes one more than the other can start to be a problem. |
Let me address the 2nd part of your point 1st. I agree with the concept of Blood=Bowl. therefore, I think the current weighting of Blood = 0.3 * Bowl should be adjusted to make them equally influential. |
But it wouldnt... it would make the blood more influential. Often the blood comes with winning (i.e. BR) whereas the the bowl never comes with maiming (i.e. BBR). |
_________________
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." |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 06:37 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | But it wouldnt... it would make the blood more influential. Often the blood comes with winning (i.e. BR) whereas the the bowl never comes with maiming (i.e. BBR). |
I'm not certain I get your point... are you saying that coaches who go for the win and succeed will usually generate some CAS as a byproduct, whereas coaches who go for CAS and succeed won't generate wins to the same degree? |
_________________
\x/es |
|
bennyprofane
Joined: Sep 10, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 07:23 |
|
Two things based on separate issues that have come up.
TS for DP SHOULD be exponential ---- 1dp = A, 2dp =2.5A, 3DP=4A, 4DP=5.5A, 5DP =7A.
That is, total dp TS = number of dp plus 1/2 of (dp-1)
I think there are exponential TS skill-sets already (isn't blodge calculated exponentially, so TS is disproportionately high for teams with lots of it?)
Then,
To modify xcver's suggestion (blacklist updates weekly); A 3-person blacklist would be good if you could update it a maximum of once a day; this would stop the fear of people checking online coaches and blacklisting them to avoid immediate tough match-ups. It would stop people blacklisting petulantly the minute they lost a game. It would also allow them to unlist people they'd 'forgiven' pretty quickly. |
|
|
nexusvalhees
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 07:59 |
|
Just Say no to Black Box Blacklists if you cant deal with the ways others want to play the game the box is probably not for you. R is still there. |
_________________
At the end of the day it's not about who won or lost its about who's got the most Blood on their Boot
Remember folks if you don't go out of your way to kill good players AGING IS YOUR FAULT!! |
|
bennyprofane
Joined: Sep 10, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 08:16 |
|
I don't think it's necessarily about 'the way others want to play the game' though; a 3-person blacklist wouldn't stop you from EVER encountering destroyer-teams, even if you only used your 3 slots to avoid the destroyers. It seems much more likely to me that people would use it to avoid coaches with whom they'd had some bad personal experience - slow play, abuse etc - than to use it to microscopically influence the range of opposing tactics that they'd face.
If you have good reasoned experience that leads you to suspect a particular opponent would start taking 4-minute turns the moment they went behind in cas or in TDs, I think you've got good reasoned justification to employ a mechanism that makes you unlikely to play that person in future. Saying that wanting to avoid that scenario is a lack of 'balls, nuts, huevos' strikes me as very stupid. Is it really a show of balls to waste an hour and a half of your life playing a game you don't enjoy against an opponent you have no common ground with? Small and only occasionally updatable blacklists strike me as very useful for averting long-term resentment between players and disenchantment with fumbbl as a whole, and almost completely negligible as a tool for cherrypicking or pixel-coddling. |
|
|
Cloggy
Joined: Sep 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 08:17 |
|
| bennyprofane wrote: | Two things based on separate issues that have come up.
TS for DP SHOULD be exponential ---- 1dp = A, 2dp =2.5A, 3DP=4A, 4DP=5.5A, 5DP =7A.
That is, total dp TS = number of dp plus 1/2 of (dp-1)
I think there are exponential TS skill-sets already (isn't blodge calculated exponentially, so TS is disproportionately high for teams with lots of it?) |
Oh no no no....
TS is supposed to be a measureof how likely a team is to WIN the game. In that sense 1 or 2 dp are actually better than 6 dp, since teams that go for a 6dp team usually lack the proper skills to score.
I disagree very much with TS becoming a measure of how likely a team is to hurt yours while losing. |
_________________
Proud owner of three completed Ranked grids, sadly lacking in having a life. |
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 08:29 |
|
crap happens...
And I do hate playing obviously another game than the one face to me. But it s all the purpose of blackbox.
so no way for a blacklist.
you can still concede games you don t want to play if you re ready for the FF drop... it s part of the game to.
Try to see it as a RPG. You re traveling around the wolrd and playing every single team you encouter. That s the tradition. That s what your fans are waiting for. You decide not to respect the tradition, you show sign of cowardise. Then your FF drop.... and you can lose player too  It s a question of pride...
Edit - watch the language --j |
_________________
Ash |
|
nexusvalhees
Joined: Oct 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 08:37 |
|
| bennyprofane wrote: | I don't think it's necessarily about 'the way others want to play the game' though; a 3-person blacklist wouldn't stop you from EVER encountering destroyer-teams, even if you only used your 3 slots to avoid the destroyers. It seems much more likely to me that people would use it to avoid coaches with whom they'd had some bad personal experience - slow play, abuse etc - than to use it to microscopically influence the range of opposing tactics that they'd face.
If you have good reasoned experience that leads you to suspect a particular opponent would start taking 4-minute turns the moment they went behind in cas or in TDs, I think you've got good reasoned justification to employ a mechanism that makes you unlikely to play that person in future. Saying that wanting to avoid that scenario is a lack of 'balls, nuts, huevos' strikes me as very stupid. Is it really a show of balls to waste an hour and a half of your life playing a game you don't enjoy against an opponent you have no common ground with? Small and only occasionally updatable blacklists strike me as very useful for averting long-term resentment between players and disenchantment with fumbbl as a whole, and almost completely negligible as a tool for cherrypicking or pixel-coddling. |
The whole reason this is being brought up is to avoid playing team killers though so yes it is just about avoiding a style of play If you can't deal with the occasional game where you might play someone whose views of the game are different than yours the black box probably isn't the place for you. Why not stay in R and play the games you know you'll enjoy. |
_________________
At the end of the day it's not about who won or lost its about who's got the most Blood on their Boot
Remember folks if you don't go out of your way to kill good players AGING IS YOUR FAULT!! |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 08:48 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | Another wonderful internet technique (mostly misused by others rather than yourself)... call your statement and "opinion" and we suddenly have no right to say its wrong. Well I have an "opinion" that all jews should be shot and fed to lions (or maybe muslims) because it would be hilarious (due to the Earth being flat)... remember that that is just an opinon so you cant slate it  |
What did I say about silly comparisons ...?
There was never a Blood Bowl argument that required genocide references to make it clearer. ^^ |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 09:37 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | Quote: | | However, most situations which prompt such personal dislike will be site rules issues. Whether we are talking about personal abuse or playing to lose, most of the things which get coaches really angry with one another break site rules. They should be handled through that system. We don't want a coach thinking, 'That was a horrible experience, but I can't be bothered to file a complaint with the site staff. I'll put him on my blacklist so I'll never have to play him again - shame someone else will'. |
Remember when you were fresh out of your first "debate" with Pirog (it was Pirog wasnt it?). |
How many times do I have to make this clear? Have you considered reading posts before you reply to them?
I stress again: most situations which prompt personal dislike will be site rules issues. The few that are not do not justify the implementation of a new system whose main use (as discussion here makes clear) will be to avoid bashy teams, thus distorting the very purpose of the division. (Not to mention that the system might discourage reporting of actual rules breaches.)
Yes, there might be people who I, personally, would not like to be randomly drawn against. However, I already have several possible options in such a situation: don't compete in divisions/competitions with random draws; hide the chat window after saying 'gl & hf' and just play the game; don't put a team in the box when that person is on-line; or concede/drop and take the punishment that goes with that without whining. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 04, 2008 - 10:00 |
|
alright guys, i warned it once already...if i saw one more bit of profanity in this thread, i was locking it...
feel free to start another thread if you want to continue discussing this, but this one is finished
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
