GoodWill
Joined: Feb 23, 2009
|
 Posted:
May 06, 2009 - 18:14 |
 
|
Hehe, go get them Biggie.
No seriously, I actually dont think that there are that many bash-oriented cherrypickers in academy too.
My remark was more about the highly experienced coaches hanging out in the academy channel without having a "+" in front of their name ... There to help?
In general I found, that hardly any new coach on Fumbbl/ in academy is actually a real noob
since most of the newer coaches I played against or just talked to have known BB from TT just like me.
Now if I were a real noob playing against somebody who has played just 3 games on Fumbbl but proves to be a real proficient coach thus beating the hell out of me in academy, I would be kind of pissed.
So basically I have to say that Mithrilpoint is right:
| Mithrilpoint wrote: |
I would like to re-think the concept of the academy division. Currently i think there are 4 kinds of coaches playing there:
1. FUMBBL regulars with a desire to teach bloodbowl-fu to new coaches
2. New coaches with a desire to learn Blodbowl-fu
3. Fumbbl regulars experimenting with new races, troll-less goblins, all linemen norse etc.
4. The types of http://fumbbl.com/~BLOODKILLERMACHO playing to do what those types do.
Broad generalization, i know, but please bear with me.
To put it bluntly, coaches 3 and 4 are not welcome in my idea of an academy division. [...] |
I agree with him on this one and have to add that the 5th type
(experienced TT coaches playing more than a couple games in academy "to get used to the site")
doesn't really belong there either. |
|
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 06, 2009 - 18:58 |
|
| GoodWill wrote: | I agree with him on this one and have to add that the 5th type
(experienced TT coaches playing more than a couple games in academy "to get used to the site")
doesn't really belong there either. |
I disagree here, using the client can be very strange to begin with and take some time to get used to, particularly (and I mean no offence here) if it's an older coach. In my (albeit limited) experience, these coaches only stay for a few games, and they can help teach other newer coaches, or at least give them games to help them get used to the client and the game. Once they feel comfortable with the client, they'll probably get bored of playing Academy games and want more of a challenge so move on to one of the more serious divisions (ie R, B or L). |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 00:44 |
|
| Hogshine wrote: | | GoodWill wrote: | I agree with him on this one and have to add that the 5th type
(experienced TT coaches playing more than a couple games in academy "to get used to the site")
doesn't really belong there either. |
I disagree here |
I also disagree.
'Experienced" TT coaches who are FUMBBL noobs... are still FUMBBL noobs in the grand scheme of things.
| GoodWill wrote: | | ...somebody who has played just 3 games on Fumbbl but proves to be a real proficient coach |
Who are these mythical proficient noobs of which you speak? |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 01:22 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | how much of value is it, to learn how to beat someone that is making his potentially first game of bloodbowl. That will teach you to use your ogres right? |
At this point it seems you are contradicting yourself....
| Mithrilpoint wrote: | 1. FUMBBL regulars with a desire to teach bloodbowl-fu to new coaches
2. New coaches with a desire to learn Blodbowl-fu
3. Fumbbl regulars experimenting with new races, troll-less goblins, all linemen norse etc.
4. The types of http://fumbbl.com/~BLOODKILLERMACHO playing to do what those types do. |
Given the case that coach 3 is also simultaneously coach 1, then what is the problem?
Hypothetical case:
A noob shows up to play an [A] game.
Plorg also shows up as an [A] teacher.
If Plorg uses Ogres (of which Plorg has no experience), you then vilify Plorg for being a case 3?
On the other hand, if Plorg uses Khemri or Halflings instead (of which Plorg has lots and lots of experience),
you imply that this situation would be better for the noob involved than if Plorg used Ogres?
Seriously? |
|
|
Daudy
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 04:31 |
|
I'd also like to see the TR limit raised. Still keep it capped, but raise it a little
This is so team development becomes something new players can do. It'll also mean new players can have a taste of what playing with the ability of having team members who can have multiple skills (which would not be able to to be fit in under the 150 TR). That way, it could probably make it easier to learn about what combinations of skills do and how it plays out.
I'd also say that the existence of [A] is necessary. [A] is most definately different to [U] mosty becase of the type of players it attracts. [A] is dedicated to teaching and learning. Hence, new coaches SHOULD play either people of similar skill or someone who can teach them. If they were thrown into [U], you'd have a host of experienced players who are there for good casual competitive fun but not to teach. It could also lead to a bigger emergence of cherrypicking. These two things combined means that an influx of new coaches into [U] could ruin the fun for both the new coaches and the casual coaches looking for a competitive game. So, no to disbanding [A] |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 14:51 |
|
| Plorg wrote: |
Given the case that coach 3 is also simultaneously coach 1, then what is the problem?
Hypothetical case:
A noob shows up to play an [A] game.
Plorg also shows up as an [A] teacher.
If Plorg uses Ogres (of which Plorg has no experience), you then vilify Plorg for being a case 3?
On the other hand, if Plorg uses Khemri or Halflings instead (of which Plorg has lots and lots of experience),
you imply that this situation would be better for the noob involved than if Plorg used Ogres?
Seriously? |
I don't really see why one would go to the academy division to learn a new race if one is as well versed in the rules of BB as Plorg is. It is not rocket science to figure a new race out, is it easier to find games in R and one could fear that the focus would shift from teaching the new coach basic game mechanics and client diferences from board game to Plorgs own gain - learning to play ogres against an opposition totally unable to defend against them, struggling even to make a simple 2dblitz.
But - as stated by BMM (nice to see you still lurking around btw) i took it too far by stating that coaches like that were unwelcome. They are just not the primary objective of the division and as such doesn't contribute as much as if they were there solely to act as teachers. But there will always be grey areas and numerous hypothetical cases would be able to provide arguments for either statement. I was talking about the basic idea for the division.
But for the record, if Plorg decided to play Khemri then the new coach would see how a good coach play those races. And Plorg could even design small holes in his gameplan tailormade for playing vs. khemri for the new coach to exploit, to better suit him for playing vs. khemri in big bad Ranked division.
So - forget my feeble 4 types of coaches for a minute. My idea was that either you are there as a teacher or as a pupil - not both - as it shiftes focus. In my humble opinion.
M |
_________________
Stop the Whining! |
|
GoodWill
Joined: Feb 23, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 18:21 |
|
| Plorg wrote: |
| GoodWill wrote: | | ...somebody who has played just 3 games on Fumbbl but proves to be a real proficient coach |
Who are these mythical proficient noobs of which you speak? |
The new generation Plorg.
Strap yourself in guys, the "noobs" are coming. 
No, pretty much every new coach (< 20 games) I played in [A] or [R] was apparently trained well via TT before ...
No real newbie moves like most of the guys I have played so far.
I am not saying those "P-noobs" know it all and they will certainly go down vs you pros like a gutter-runner in an Orc-cage.
But the difference between a real noob and somebody who just has to fiddle a bit with the client and learn to foul the Fumbbl-way is vast!
Which is why I suggest to not see real noobies play against "P-noobs" all that much:
P-noobs still have to prove to themselves they actually did learn something in their local TT-league and will play rough vs the true rookie ... |
|
|
Royston
Joined: Dec 05, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 07, 2009 - 20:44 |
|
I've been nobbled by a P-Noob before. 3 games in he was absolutely murdering me with a bunch of CDs. His positioning was some of the best I've ever seen, then there was a disconnection and he had to explain to me (80 games in) how to reconnect (I'd never had to do it before).
Took me a while to figure it out and by then he'd disappeared, our game never finished and he never responded to my PMs. |
_________________
 |
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 11, 2009 - 22:26 |
|
keep the ideas coming guys all good stuff! |
|
|
Hoth
Joined: Mar 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 03, 2009 - 08:49 |
|
Well I maybe can't really contribute to this cherry pickers debate or on those 4 archtypes of coaches but I can say that I'm completly new to BB/fumbbl and [A]cademy is a great place to learn the basics. I just want to thank all the experienced coaches in #fumbblacademy who never tire to answer even the most stupid questions over and over and over again.
Without you I possibly would have given up BB after the first few games filled with confusion and -2D blocks and would miss this awesome game. I couldn't do this and so I'm even more thankfull. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Secret League Americ...
Search
