Poll |
Should Big Guys have General Access in Stunty? |
Yes, Big Guys should have General Access. |
|
45% |
[ 55 ] |
No, Big Guys should not have General Access. |
|
54% |
[ 66 ] |
|
Total Votes : 121 |
|
BunnyPuncher
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 23, 2004 - 19:57 |
|
Apparently creating and testing new stunty teams is on par with brain surgery! (Or at least Neuroscience!)
/Hijack on
Hunter: If I ever catch you in chat, remind me to ask you what "social neuroscience" and "affective neuroscience" is all about, as I'm running into it when looking at dialogical theories (social constructivist) of the self, and wondering if it is being bastardized by pomos much like has been done with physics (chaos theory, relativity etc.) and secondly, if there is anything to this freudian neuropsychology I keep running into!
(it's annoying when your own specialization (re time constraints) prevents you from chasing down interesting tidbits of info from other fields)
Cheers! / Hijack off |
_________________
|
|
celas
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 23, 2004 - 20:20 |
|
I agree with both hunter and BMM. At the same time, I disagree with those of you who request that Evo should discuss this directly with only Peikko. Peikko obviously has final say on all changes in stunty leeg, but I think it is smart to poll the community to determine if the idea you have will be accepted by most of the people who will be playing in the Leeg. Put yourself in Peikko's shoes...want type of ideas are the best to implement? The ones that that have been well thought out with input from a number of knowledgeable sources and those ideas that have been playtested to show they are fun/competitive/etc. Peikko has the right to refuse any idea even after that point, but I think we can agree that the more thought and research are put into an idea, the better chance it has of being accepted. Thus, we should be doing not only what hunter is proposing, but also what Evo is continuing to do....encourage thought. Let's focus more on the "evolving" parts of these ideas rather than some sort of militant revolution that many associate with Anarchy.
Having said all that, Peikko still has the final say. Period. I just hope he continues to listen and consider things (which from what I read he normally does).
As far as my two cents about what this thread is attempting to address: I would prefer that Big Guys do not have General Access in Stunty. My version of mayhem is making rolls that have a chance at failure and having the unexpected happen despite having a well-thought out plan. The reason you see some Big Guys on the leader boards for most CAS in Fumbbl is because they are the most reliable in the game. Yes, even with Really Stupid, Bonehead, and WA, you can still count on a BG with Block/Tackle/Multliblock/(some with RSC/CLAW) getting 3-7 CAS per game and rarely getting blocked. Sure they will fail some of the nega-rolls and eventually come up with a Double or Triple Skull. But they are still the most reliable part (aside from a snotling dodging when no DTs are present) of the league. You want more mayhem? Take away G access from BGs, then you will see 1/9 failures on blocks, more dodging away BGs, an occassional stunty lasting more than 10 games (please don't respond to this with "I have one that has survived 78 games;" it is the exception, not the rule). |
_________________ Northern Wastes League |
|
EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 25, 2004 - 06:29 |
|
re: Misquoting Peikko.
But I clearly got the impression from
Peikko wrote: | Personally Im finding this poll result backing up big guys having general access big time. |
that you thought this poll indicated that people believed that Big Guys should have General Access. Please correct me, what exactly did you mean when you posted the above comment?
Re: Getting disturbed by repeated name-calling and a pattern of distorting my views.
I'm weird. I don't like it when people repeatedly distort my views, repeatedly engage in name-calling, and attack me for trying to be helpful. This is even more disturbing when you express you concerns to that person in PMs and in chat, yet the behaviour continues.
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
A Short History Of Progress |
_________________ Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
Kommando
Joined: Dec 08, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 25, 2004 - 14:58 |
|
just spamming in related threads
Ok, i started a group in order to playtest how stunty plays without G-access for big guys. join if you want to see g-access fall as it deserves! join if you want to proudly defend g-access!
join here: http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=group&op=view&group=2005 |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 25, 2004 - 18:53 |
|
Too many spams Kommando, too many. |
|
|
nazerdemus
Joined: Nov 02, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 25, 2004 - 19:05 |
|
sk8bcn wrote: | Too many spams Kommando, too many. |
I think we should have a competition for the most spammy spam |
|
|
Corneto25
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 26, 2004 - 02:47 |
|
cant we just assume the official rules and get over with this discussion? its obvious that BG losing general access is better for the game, the real problem is all pixel killing coaches who play stunty to steam off that dont want their future killing machines wrecked.
if we assume a diferent direction than the official rules and the dudes who make them (besides we like them or not) we will only lose in the end, cuz i hope this wont be the last rules revision, then we will be discussing if stunty should be in the old rules, old new rules, or new rules, ... No matter how u put it and invent roosters, stunty is a league based on a official game... should be made to follow official rules too...
its not a question who is right here, if it helps, just view it this way: - follow the rules or - fudge'em
=) we're off to spammalot ! |
|
|
Tesifonte
Joined: Sep 06, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 26, 2004 - 03:03 |
|
Its Quixote or Quijote (it depends if you're yank) |
_________________
TaChIkOmA! \o/ |
|
Arlecchino
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 06, 2004 - 01:13 |
|
So when big guy lose G in stunty as many coach want to? |
|
|
johan
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Dec 18, 2004 - 21:36 |
|
Never, under the current regime...
/johan |
_________________ ”It's very sad
To see the ancient and distinguished game that used to be
A model of decorum and tranquillity
Become like any other sport, a battleground...”
—Benny Andersson & Björn Ulvaeus, Chess |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
  Posted:
Dec 19, 2004 - 02:52 |
|
well I personnaly start to think that it is not that bad. |
|
|
|
| |