47 coaches online • Server time: 14:43
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Born to Win Forever?...goto Post SWL Season LXXIVgoto Post Team FUMBBL
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 02:33 Reply with quote Back to top

mrt1212 wrote:
You are ignorant of the current tourney meta and there is nothing that suggests otherwise and that this is merely a difference of opinions. Many of your (and other's) fears are either outdated or predicated on false ideas and notions or not even grounded in spurious evidence at all, rather subsisting on what you think feels right.


Ok, fair cop. You are probably right that I am a bit under-informed about the current tourney meta.

mrt1212 wrote:
Should I have said that sooner? Does that make you any less defensive of your wants? No? Does this lessen the importance you see in stating your desires and wants? Okay then.

It is especially frustrating to be one of the tourney admins who was solely responsible for Black Box Brawls, for over a year during this transitory time to BB2016, have multiple people disregard anything I've observed over that time. After having to manually accept every applicant every tourney and seeing the same coaches and teams pop up again and again and then to watch you and others go off on hypothetical tangents about how things are...


Sure, I can understand your frustration here.

mrt1212 wrote:
I understand your opinion, I just don't find it all that compelling when weighing the potential benefits against the potential drawbacks. I don't find it compelling when everything leads back to "it doesn't feel special enough to me anymore". I don't find it compelling that you perceive a sense of loss from losing a thing you barely utilized when it existed in your ideal form to utilize.


Ok. But, as I said though, if I had known that it was at risk, I may have made more time for them. Perhaps others would have as well? Where was the warning for this?

mrt1212 wrote:
Finally, in regard to your statement about FUMBBL being for everyone - I call this notion into question.

1. There are enough facets to FUMBBL that one can presumably find their spot. Open Play, Tournaments, Leagues and custom leagues, data mining/scripting, team logos, etc etc. It still is a hard sell to stick around. This doesn't mean that people will enjoy where they wind up either. If you only have time for Leagues and then you make a stink about how if everything was different you'd be able to enjoy Open Play and Tourneys, I'm going to give you the side eye and think "no, you're exactly where you should be with your framework of expectations and resources allowed to pursue them".


Your opinion - fair enough.

mrt1212 wrote:
2. Major tournaments are a facet that is open to everyone but only has the basest sense of fairness.

If you're of the opinion that it isn't fair that some goober can plow through 20 games to get a team closer to what they believe is tourney ready while you can't, I put it back on you to explain how it's fair to tell someone generating a good amount of traffic and games within B or R in preparation for a tourney to not reap the reward from that. I think it is far worse a precedent to set (and one of the reasons I think Seasons as SOP for Open Play is terrible - it effectively neuters a major impetus for playing among those who play the most - building their teams up to spec. It puts a yoke on the possibilities in a way that seems contra to Open Play and takes a lot of the stochastic mechanisms with team attrition and puts them behind a few off season rolls. It's the equivalent of "you're too good a PC, a wizard has poisoned you and you die" in DnD).


There is a difference between 'prepping' and 'farming'. I never said there was anything wrong with spending time preparing a team for a tournament. But, I don't share the opinion that blatant farming/cherrypicking is generating 'good' site traffic, or is beneficial for the playing environment as a whole.

mrt1212 wrote:
3. So why not TW restricted Minor tournaments - well they're nice if folks participate. But coaches don't really participate in these by and large because it conflicts with other tourneys, the concept of a hard TW cap operates contra to one of the most compelling aspects of FUMBBL - sharpening your knife of a team over and over and over again. Also, the obsessive goobers like myself will still have a baked in team age advantage where we've simply rolled more skills over a longer period of time and tried our damnedest to keep the best parts going.


Uncapped TV is what the majors are for, imo, and the concept of minors being capped TV was always one of the main things that differentiated the two. If all tourneys now are uncapped, then the line between majors and minors is blurring, which is a real shame and I think the site will be poorer for it.

mrt1212 wrote:
4. You get as much out of FUMBBL as you put in. BB is my main hobby much to my wife's chagrin. I've gotten a ton out of it as a game, a hobby, a social scene, and surprisingly as a the crucible of a Nuffle based philosophy. I hear ya, we can't all participate as much as we'd like and it sucks because there is so much we could participate in. But as I stated in point 2 - I find it much worse to tell coaches who do have the time and the dedication they can't use the things they put 30+ hours into.


Why does the existence of Box-only tourneys prevent Ranked coaches from using their teams? When did I ever say that?

mrt1212 wrote:
Instead of feeling dispossessed at a disadvantage consider that the opportunity cost of obsessing over BB is instead time spent with your family, your friends, maybe your job which provides for both. Do you want to imagine your life playing BB 40-80 hours per week? Do you really want to trade in whatever else is going on in your life to extract a marginal advantage over someone in a tourney game where the prize is ego satisfaction?


Again, I don't see what this has to do with the points I am making. I don't want to be one of the cheesy pimpers, spending 40 hour per week pimping a team. That's why I don't play in R. I'm saying that I value having some option in the tournament scene where I can get some respite from it.

mrt1212 wrote:
Instead of lamenting your disadvantage in BB, you should be happy about having some semblance of Game/Life balance, even if it pains you at times. Lord knows I'll never get back every 15 minute instance in my life of orchestrating and advertising Black Box Brawls that you didn't show up for.


Is this the real reason why Box tourneys are being taken away? Because you're fed up and don't want to organise them any more? Wink

I get your point that the participation rate in Box tourneys recently doesn't justify having so many. But, let me ask you this: if that is the case, would it not make sense to firstly try just reducing the number/frequency of them, and see what effect that has, before taking this rather drastic step of merging all the R and B tourneys together?

_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2

"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" Razz
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 03:28 Reply with quote Back to top

I would have loved a more incremental process but I'm a tinkerer by nature. As is, I'm still waiting on info on how to proceed with Brawls - so I feel you on the suddenness thing really hard. If anything, I think springing this just before the first Major of the year was...haphazard?

Is what it is though. I think overall it is the right call even if how it was handled is wanting. That's life though - wrong process, right outcome.
DrPoods



Joined: Nov 14, 2013

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 03:58 Reply with quote Back to top

17 pages...

_________________
"I gotta fever and the only prescription is MOAR COWBELL!!"
"That's right... shop smart: shop S-Mart... You got that?"
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 04:07 Reply with quote Back to top

Cloggy wrote:
It comes down to what Happygrue said earlier. Catalyst is clueless about Box and JellyBelly is clueless about Ranked.

Yes, you have to play all comers in the Box, but at least you don't need to take a constant stream of disadvantageous matchups or choose a suboptimal team build just because otherwise you will not get games.

Both systems are open to exploits and therefore in an online gaming environment will get exploited. Claiming "the other lot" have an unfair advantage for 15 pages is not only nonsense but also bad for the community as a whole.

So, can we PLEASE stop this whole B vs R nonsense for once and all?



And Cloggy is CLUELESS as to my POINT.
That being that a FULL MERGER if implemented correctly (or close to it) would fix NEARLY ALL of the negative of BOTH Divisions.
And I know it would do so because of how much I UNDERSTAND what goes on in each Division.

Can you stop seeing this as X VS Y nonsense? It is not about VS it is about bringing the site TOGETHER. Not keeping it divided.
Perhaps you can see how DIVIDING the player base into 2 Divisions leads to divisiveness.
Bazakastine



Joined: Mar 21, 2014

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 04:25 Reply with quote Back to top

Catalyst the problem is your point is only tangentially related to this thread and is sending the conversation off topic. Also your way of making your point drives away people who agree with you because its over the top.
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 04:48 Reply with quote Back to top

Bazakastine wrote:
Catalyst the problem is your point is only tangentially related to this thread and is sending the conversation off topic. Also your way of making your point drives away people who agree with you because its over the top.



Who cares? Off-topic?

My point has been the topic we SHOULD have been talking about since the beginning... when the BOX was 1st created. And it remains the topic now. I suppose we should just stick our heads in the sand.

My point in this thread would have saved us from every single BOX vs RANKED thread that has ever existed IF it had been listened to from the start.

My point in this thread ENDS nearly all of the biggest ills people gripe about in the 2 largest divisions on this site (worldwide BTW).
And I have demonstrated that the concerns that keep the coaches divided are largely imaginary/paranoid delusions.

My point is also that full RANKED/BOX MERGER is ultimately where this site is going. Unfortunately this merger will not take place until we lose enough coaches that it won't make a lick of difference anywhere (except maybe Europe).

My point is the Canary in the coal mine.
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 06:09 Reply with quote Back to top

Ranked/League merger into [O]pen is better. Then rename Box to Ranked.
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 07:42 Reply with quote Back to top

Balle2000 wrote:
Ranked/League merger into [O]pen is better. Then rename Box to Ranked.



Ridiculous.
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 09:28 Reply with quote Back to top

Catalyst lololol - "I think we should talk about X so therefore I am not off topic even though the topic is Y"


I'm pretty sure no one is listening to you now
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 09:29 Reply with quote Back to top

Genuine question to admins:
Is there a reason we can't have 1x major which is blackbox only?

And probably one which is ranked only, for balance. So then the remaining 3 per year would be Combined.

I've not heard any reason why not, I can't see any downside

Reasons in favour: it would be more interesting, more flavour and fluff, would better accommodate different types of coaches, would reduce this angst, and would hopefully put this grotesque thread out of it's misery. Our misery.


Side note, I've pretty much stopped playing ranked because I don't like feeling like I'm cherrypicking my opponent.
However my biggest team is 1990tv Ranked dark elves so I entered them to WO. First round opponent? 2210tv Blackbox chaos with loads of tackle, lolol.
I've requested the above idea before tho, before the draw, in case the matchup makes me look biased or bitter.
I don't mind combined tournaments, I just think ALL of them being combined is a loss of diversity


Last edited by Sp00keh on Jan 19, 2018 - 09:48; edited 3 times in total
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 09:44 Reply with quote Back to top

Catalyst32 wrote:
Balle2000 wrote:
Ranked/League merger into [O]pen is better. Then rename Box to Ranked.

Ridiculous.

Much better this way. No need to have a divide between league and ranked teams. They can all choose who to play anyway (unless scheduled in a league). And time to stop passing out CR for picking.


Last edited by Balle2000 on Jan 19, 2018 - 13:26; edited 1 time in total
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 12:33 Reply with quote Back to top

Sp00keh wrote:
Genuine question to admins:
Is there a reason we can't have 1x major which is blackbox only?


How about this then?:

Allow us two Box-only majors and one TV-capped 'Blackbox Minor' (i.e. the 16-team, light-/middle-/heavyweight ones) per quarter (i.e. 4 for the year), and I will personally administer them and take the burden off of mrt1212's shoulders (if that's what he wants).

Then we can see what the turnout is like and how much demand there is for a reduced number of Box-only tournaments.

Anyone want to question my passion now? Wink

_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2

"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" Razz
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 13:38 Reply with quote Back to top

I can see why you'd want Box only Majors, but not Minors. Even the most casual coaches could rustle up 1250, 1500 and 1750 teams. Minors may as well all be mixed IMO.

There has been a lot of squabbling about Ranked vs Box. who are the biggest pickers, pimpers & farmers?
I think it misses the real point. That is that a lot of people just don't want to play vs the super massive teams.

I'd say dump one of the Majors and have a big Fumbbl Cup style tournament capped at say 2000 or 1900 or 1800.

IMO that would feel more accessible to more people than the current Majors.
Not counting the Fumbbl Cup there as some people will just throw in anything.

_________________
Image
Secret League - SLUMBBL Shield - 11th October. 70+ extra rosters
Arktoris



Joined: Feb 16, 2004

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 16:05 Reply with quote Back to top

Balle2000 wrote:
Ranked/League merger into [O]pen is better. Then rename Box to Ranked.


the Box has a 7 year history of being a failed concept that constantly requires charity and rescuing to sustain it.

How is simply naming it "Ranked" going to solve that?

Furthermore, Ranked has a 15 year history of being the most successful division on fumbbl. What would be the advantage to "fix" something not broken by merging it with league?

Or are you just being a troll?

_________________
Hail to Frik! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Raiders of the Lost Tomb
ben_awesome



Joined: May 11, 2016

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2018 - 16:28 Reply with quote Back to top

Pretty sure when I activate in box, I get 'picked'. Its not like there aren't a lot of bad coaches playing box that randomly get drawn against coaches they have no hope of beating...
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic