Woodpecker
Joined: Apr 08, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 22:47 |
 
|
So get together people who speak non-english languages, and post a multilanguage copy. That's as close as you're going to get. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 23:41 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | sk8bcn wrote: |
A poll DOESN'T represent the community. Hey guys you should understand that a 100 of votes is far from the whole community, a poll is biased cause it only take in account:
1-hardcore gamers
2-that are confortable in english
|
Where exactly would you find a better representation? |
currently you can't (maybe whould requier encoding) and that's exactely the prolems of polls being representative. They can't be. They are just an indicator of what thinks the part of the community that I would name "community browsers".
Even guys very active (Csonti, JackDaniels) never post (so never read I guess also). How many votes BEFORE reading the whole post? (I do that way)
A poll saying 50 votes are for proposition 1 30 for proposition 2 DOESN'T mean that proposition 1 is prefered by community.
Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing for or against G acces here. I just point something out about stats. It might as well be non G acces that is prefered in overall |
|
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 01:10 |
|
It seemed like the Ranked coaches who came to Stunty leeg to have an occasional brainless CASfest fun match were at a majority last time. There were opinions like "stunty is not fun if the little guys don't go SQUISH all the time" and "If I won't get Block/Tackle to my BGs without doubles, then stunty is like ranked with worse linos". Both are still valid counter-arguments.
At the same time the true hardcore stunty players were voting for No BG gen access, as that would bring in a strategical element to the matches. It would be a league in which coaches need to take advantage of the various AG skills and need to plan their plays carefully, while there is always the really stupid/failed stunty dodge/always hungry chaos possibility. Fairies, pygmies and squigs are nice examples of this point-of-view thinking.
However, a really big amount of coaches said they would stop playing stunty if BG gen is removed because they don't come to Stunty leeg to think, ponder and plan ahead but to have fun and mayhem not possible using the LRB ruleset. Chaos flings is a prime example team of this point-of-view thinking.
To sum it all up:
A bit over a half (?) of coaches would like to see BG gen access removed. Just about all of them will play stunty even if BGs DO have G access.
A bit less than a half of coaches would like to keep the BG gen access. If BG gen is removed, an enormous amount of coaches would stop playing stunty (and play 100% ranked or 100% unranked tournaments) and finding stunty games would become much harder. |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 06:06 |
|
| Karhumies wrote: | To sum it all up:
A bit over a half (?) of coaches would like to see BG gen access removed. Just about all of them will play stunty even if BGs DO have G access.
A bit less than a half of coaches would like to keep the BG gen access. If BG gen is removed, an enormous amount of coaches would stop playing stunty (and play 100% ranked or 100% unranked tournaments) and finding stunty games would become much harder. |
/me buys Karhumies a drink. None of that cheap stuff, either...
Best post I've seen yet on the subject. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 08:38 |
|
| Karhumies wrote: | To sum it all up:
A bit over a half (?) of coaches would like to see BG gen access removed. Just about all of them will play stunty even if BGs DO have G access.
A bit less than a half of coaches would like to keep the BG gen access. If BG gen is removed, an enormous amount of coaches would stop playing stunty (and play 100% ranked or 100% unranked tournaments) and finding stunty games would become much harder. |
The big amount of coaches that would leave isn't sure and all hard core stunty players are against G acces isn't that clear also. |
|
|
Thierry
Joined: Dec 09, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 09:34 |
|
Removing G access to big guys, mua ha ha, if you have that in mind then , you should also remove all stunty teams with big guys and play with the remaining races as part of stunty teams have no BG but are still tough opponents.(squigs, strigo, gnomes, skryre slaves)
Maybe i'm wrong but most of the big guys have also negative skills as wild animal, bone head or take root which make them a bit less reliable.
Take away G skill access to them and no one will dare to built a team of snots or fairies.(imagine st1 snots & fairies battling vs 6 str4 players i.e squig hoppers)
Stunty spirit is as follows:
1) smash the foolish stunty hanging around the opponent half without protection with your big guys
2) Keep away from opponent's Big Guys with your stunties
3) Use your Big Guys to reduce opponent's team to ashes and protect your own stunties
So if you want to remove G skill access to big guys, i 'll suggest that you rather make a new category of teams: stunties without big guys.
But don't spoil the fun of playing present stunty games with such ideas or apply it to your own stunty team,play to test and tell us where is the fun playing vs a tr 200 squig team or strigoyan team with a snot team having three stupid trolls without general skills. |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 10:29 |
|
| Karhumies wrote: | To sum it all up:
A bit over a half (?) of coaches would like to see BG gen access removed. Just about all of them will play stunty even if BGs DO have G access.
A bit less than a half of coaches would like to keep the BG gen access. If BG gen is removed, an enormous amount of coaches would stop playing stunty (and play 100% ranked or 100% unranked tournaments) and finding stunty games would become much harder. |
Many coaches who think Gen access should be removed have already stopped playing Stunty.
I do not think with such a split of views there will ever be a change to the current stunty division.
My view would be to have seperate divisions where one division has Gen access and the other does not. There is a chance that Stunty would become slighty watered down, but I think more likely coaches who want one type of game would play in that type of division, no differently to Faction vs Ranked.
Of course, I cannot see another division ever springing up, but this is for sure one area of Fumbbl where the views are split into two very clear and differing camps of thought. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 15:21 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | Karhumies wrote: | To sum it all up:
A bit over a half (?) of coaches would like to see BG gen access removed. Just about all of them will play stunty even if BGs DO have G access.
A bit less than a half of coaches would like to keep the BG gen access. If BG gen is removed, an enormous amount of coaches would stop playing stunty (and play 100% ranked or 100% unranked tournaments) and finding stunty games would become much harder. |
Many coaches who think Gen access should be removed have already stopped playing Stunty.
I do not think with such a split of views there will ever be a change to the current stunty division.
My view would be to have seperate divisions where one division has Gen access and the other does not. There is a chance that Stunty would become slighty watered down, but I think more likely coaches who want one type of game would play in that type of division, no differently to Faction vs Ranked.
Of course, I cannot see another division ever springing up, but this is for sure one area of Fumbbl where the views are split into two very clear and differing camps of thought. |
yes it split the community in 2. Should there be 2 divisions? Don't know but will not happen though. A way maybe to solve such a problem would be to duplicate rosters (faeries, fearies non G, snots, snots non G...) So that at low TR you could play with or without G acces (no problem since no BG is skilled) and after you could decide wether you wanna play everyone or just non G acces teams. |
|
|
johan
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 15:34 |
|
Splitting to two divisions has a very significant problem.
There are two ways to balance Stunty. One is removing General access on Big Guys; the other, that Peikko has started a little on, is trying to tweak other things to balance the teams. And while no-one can doubt that it is the Big Guy teams that are the good teams in Stunty (Halflings excepted), some other tweaks would be necessary after removing General access - for instance, Snotlings would get too weak if they just lost General access on the trolls, while the non-Big Guy Strigoyan Lords and Mechavermins would be improved in relative terms.
The point is that if we split Stunty into two divsions, they'd probably need to have different rulesets as well, which would be confusing.
Come Vault rules, however (whenever that happens), I'd recommend tearing up Stunty and redesigning it from the ground up. I'd nominate Evo as Lead Designer for that. 
/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 |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 15:46 |
|
Remove general access on Big Guys?!?!?!?! Are you nuts?!?!?!? The ONLY way to handle a Stunty team is to Remove BIG GUYS THEMSELVES!!! That's right, you heard me!!! NO BIG GUYS!!!! Start the revolution!!!!! Power to the People! Fraternite, Egaletie, et l'autre que j'oubli! Protect your right to keep and arm Halflings!!!! |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 15:59 |
|
Whatever does or does not happen in stunty, it can never be as bad as knowing Macavity has infiltrated the thread ... |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 16:24 |
|
Libertie!!! Je me souviens maitenant!  |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Dreamsplitter
Joined: Dec 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 01, 2005 - 22:47 |
|
Liberté! Que j'ai oublié! Egalité! Maintenant!
I know nothing about french but you... you make my eyes water! |
|
|
Colin
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 02, 2005 - 10:58 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: |
Many coaches who think Gen access should be removed have already stopped playing Stunty. |
Or never started, as in my case. I watched a few games to enjoy daft plays and the inevitable failed TTMs - hungry Trolls are a hoot - but all I found was mindless slaughter. It put me right off. Nevertheless, I think 2 divisions is a bad idea - too many divisions of an already niche subset of the community will likely kill it.
I will pass on Stunty and await a Dungeonbowl division, once SkiJunkie finishes his DB client, for my quick-fix BB.
One thing I would like to see is the renaming of the BG access Halflings and Goblins - trying to distinguish them from the LRB-compliant versions is a nightmare. Pro Halflings and Pro Goblins, perhaps? |
_________________
Join The Cult of Tzeentch, mutate randomly! | Hug a newb! Join the Faculty of Academy Instructors! |
|
|
|
Secret League Americ...
Search
