Koigokoro
Joined: Sep 29, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 15:35 |
 
|
I don't think forcing anyone to activate teams they don't want to play is a good way to go. (If a minimum is implemented though, every activating coach must have atleast that amount of teams so that retiring teams or not making them could be used to bypass the minimum)
Activating many teams could be promoted(without any advantages but the reality of better matchups and more games), but that's all that is wise in my opinion. |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 16:22 |
|
| SillySod wrote: | | Duke, I appreciate what you're saying but forcing coaches to enter multiple teams (while allowing them to select the teams) might be a necessary evil required to improve scheduling. |
I appreciate that SillySod, in fact my initial recommendation was to allow for 1 team to be 'rested' at any one time.
i just do not accept the views of those who say that Blackbox was created for a coach to be forced to play a random team, against a random team. If that were the case then all coaches would have to start with 21 teams, one of each race.
It's my view that a coach should be free to select his teams, accepting that the more teams he selects, the better match up he will receive. |
|
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 18:55 |
|
Outside the current debate going on ... I'd like to have a second checkbox next to the selection ones where one can set a "favourite" for the next matchup. I.e. just like the activate link gave a slight extra weighting to a team. I know I'd use that once in a while, and as the code for doing that is in already it hopefully wouldn't be much extra work.
Regarding the debate: Don't think there's a problem with the new system - except that, somebody could use it to rig fixtures. Get a group of 6 people together that want a "easy" game, or worse pimp their teams, look for a time where there's little box activity, only select those teams and tada you are much more likely to get a "favourable" game.
There's still a chance that it may go wrong and all ... but I think there's enough evidence in fumbbl's history that if people find a loophole some will use it. Especially of concern if blackbox does get more competitive elements (tourneys/medals/awards/whatever). |
Last edited by Mnemon on %b %20, %2009 - %23:%Jun; edited 1 time in total |
|
shusaku
Joined: Jul 28, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 19:33 |
|
why do i play blackbox?
in blackbox it doesnt matter if your team is good or bad --> it lets you focus on winning the game and not worrying about your players much. You can get quick games with a race you want to train. Even if that race is khemri or dwarves. I started blackbox with a woodelf team than i added a khemri team. Currently I dont like to play any bashers myself so I retired my khemri team in order not to have to play it. I would not have had to retire the team now. So I really aprecciate the change. I know that with my high tr woodies there is a high chance of not getting a game but ok then I will play ranked. If I need to activate three teams I would have to make three we teams and I think I would not do that. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 20:40 |
|
It seems implausible that 6 fumbbl coaches could agree on anything  . I would propose that we should solve the actual problems the box is having before we solve the possible problems
As for DukeTyrion: FIne I get it. The unwashed masses have spoken, and [B] is going to be Ranked Lite. Shows a poor command of several social realities, but it sounds great. I won't speak on it again.
| Mnemon wrote: |
Regarding the debate: Don't think there's a problem with the new system - except that, somebody could use it to rig fixtures. Get a group of 6 people together that want a "easy" game, or worse pimp their teams, look for a time where there's little box activity, only select those teams and tada you are much more likely to get a "favourable" game.
|
|
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
funnyfingers
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 20:43 |
|
| Quote: |
It seems implausible that 6 fumbbl coaches could agree on anything
|
I don't agree with you on that. |
|
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2009 - 23:54 |
|
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | | It seems implausible that 6 fumbbl coaches could agree on anything . |
There was a group in faction ... years ago, but I remember, that did pretty much what I outlined - just within the faction framework. It is not that implausible. Given the length _some_ people went to build their CR (no, this is not to meant that all people with high CR do that). Some out there really thrive on "achievements" in online games.
Will it be an issue - no idea. But I'd rather have it out there - someone might have a smart idea that prevents it from ever becoming one. |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 21, 2009 - 03:11 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | SillySod wrote: | | Duke, I appreciate what you're saying but forcing coaches to enter multiple teams (while allowing them to select the teams) might be a necessary evil required to improve scheduling. |
I appreciate that SillySod, in fact my initial recommendation was to allow for 1 team to be 'rested' at any one time.
i just do not accept the views of those who say that Blackbox was created for a coach to be forced to play a random team, against a random team. If that were the case then all coaches would have to start with 21 teams, one of each race.
It's my view that a coach should be free to select his teams, accepting that the more teams he selects, the better match up he will receive. |
Agreed. Not being able to select the team I wanted to play with was a big and negative suprise for me too.
The last part is the tricky part. The problem is that the quality of my matchups for myself is largely dependent on how many teams other people submitted to the draw. While my team selection has some bearing on this it just doesnt have a big enough impact that entering multiple teams is truly an advantagous thing for me to do.
If a sufficient number of people remain in or are attracted to blackbox by the ability to select a single team then that would more than alleviate this problem. The real question is how many people it actually makes a difference to  |
_________________
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." |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 22, 2009 - 09:40 |
|
| funnyfingers wrote: | | Quote: |
It seems implausible that 6 fumbbl coaches could agree on anything
|
I don't agree with you on that. |
Is this message about porn? |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
On1
Joined: Jul 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 22, 2009 - 10:11 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | CircularLogic wrote: | | The problem is not, that people bringing only 1 team get worse matchups for themselves, but reduce the matchup quality of all coaches in the round. I guess it`s like the 'tragedy of the commons'.... |
Me bringing one team improves the quality of the match ups as that is one more team than you would have had otherwise.
Playing TR200 elves is totally different game to playing TR100 dwarves. On any given night a person just might no fancy a certain kind of match. How many of those people who are happy activating all their teams are really going to drop down to activating only one?
The more teams you activate the better you chances of a good matchup or getting matched at all. That should be a good enough incentive.
You could go further. Have a Championship and only award points if the user activated a team from each of the rock/paper/scissors categories.
More teams, more diverisity, competitive incentive, no one forced to activate teams they don't want to.
I don't think that freezing coaches out is for the long term good of the division. |
I agree 100% |
|
|
|
|
[L] OBBA Smack Talk ...
Search
