mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
 Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:08 |
 
|
| PaddyMick wrote: | | mrt1212 wrote: | | PaddyMick wrote: | Good idea but doesn't it go against the ethos of the box, which is a match up against a random team and opponent? It allows pickers in box which is bad. You could refuse to play against anyone with a bash team, for example.
It would lead to less match ups, but maybe more people playing box, but a lot of those might be pickers, so fewer match ups. |
You get 2 people to use this with. If you have a problem with more than 2 people, it's obvious you're the issue, not a multitude of people.
That's how I'd balance it. But I'm just full of ideas |
Yeah that could work but would you be able to change the coaches you use it against at will? So look who's online and change accordingly? 'cos that would kinda suck. Or change once a week maybe.
Also like the idea above about k and years and stuff. |
Once a month. Honestly, of all the so-called problem coaches how often are individuals repeatedly playing them in a month long period?
Is there a way to get a histogram of coaches we've played against? |
|
|
backelie
Joined: Jul 20, 2010
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:23 |
|
| happygrue wrote: | The biggest problem with such an idea is that it could be used instead against the relatively few coaches who play a lot and rank near the top of the box. If you could ignore 10-20 coaches, you can carve out the major competition from the box or some of the nastiest teams (though not both).
|
So cap it at 3 to at most 5.
| Quote: |
We have no idea which people would actually do... but in either case the overall number of matches is going to go down somewhat |
Unless the number of blocked coaches is too high the potential drop in matches (based on fewer potential matchups) could easily be compensated by people being more willing to activate. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:30 |
|
First they came for the socialists.... |
_________________
 |
|
clemUSA
Joined: Jan 27, 2009
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:30 |
|
In addition to restrict the number of coaches one can put in that list (and how often that list can be changed) I would add one more restriction:
* only affect teams over 15 games |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:37 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | First they came for the socialists.... |
Ironically, "they" were socialists as well  |
|
|
KenThis
Joined: Jun 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 12, 2014 - 22:43 |
|
I just want to see the thread hit 50 pages! |
|
|
Kamahl
Joined: Oct 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2014 - 06:42 |
|
In order to see number of matches in box go up, you need to have one of this two things:
-Some fantastic incentive for caches to play in box, reward for a team or whatever
-Improve experience for players, giving them more games they would describe as enjoyable.
Box is losing on number of coaches and games played. Change it or abolish it, leaving it as it is only leads in one direction...now, it is an interesting mathematical problem, if number of matches drop by 20% every 3 months how long until mandatory limit of 4 coaches activating is impossible to meet.
Having coaches 1st reaction to this proposition be - oh wait someone won't be able to get games, it's unfair! is cute, but it's not about satisfying every player's needs for enjoyment - it's about satisfying majority of players and creating enviroment in which number of games grows. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2014 - 06:52 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | | First they came for the socialists.... |
Ironically, "they" were socialists as well |
yar, but a different kind.  |
_________________
|
|
Shakall
Joined: Feb 15, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 10:40 |
|
Personally I would prefer if politics was left out of FUMBBL, since it makes FUMBBL a better comunity imho. But when that is not the case please try to stay to historical facts. I firmly belive that historical revisionism is hazardous to a society, what ever your political stand point might be. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 11:06 |
|
|
Grod
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 13:26 |
|
Well now surely we have to help this topic to 50 pages? Who will be the lucky first poster on page 50? |
_________________
I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
ulmo33
Joined: Dec 17, 2012
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 14:36 |
|
The 50th page is'nt really far... |
|
|
Throweck
Joined: Feb 23, 2013
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 15:02 |
|
|
Throweck
Joined: Feb 23, 2013
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 15:03 |
|
|
SzieberthAdam
Joined: Aug 31, 2008
|
| Posted:
Apr 17, 2014 - 15:08 |
|
I like human page counters. |
_________________
   |
|
|
|
BB2020 - Kick team m...
Search
