FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

shadow46x2

Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 12:50

DukeTyrion wrote:

I think you have missed the point.

There is a [U] division for people that do not wish to have time restraints.

I have been in [R] games where the op has taken more than 4 minutes for many if not most of his turns ... with the extra 10 minutes (which is designed for emergencies) he had no reason or need to do otherwise.

The game before was fine (albeit at times annoying with slow players) the game as is now is better, but what is the point of the 4 minute rule (in ranked only) if the 10 minutes extra can be used anywhere?

If there is a rule, it should be applied correctly, if someone needs a single emergency time out, it should be available to them. If people do not wish to be forced into a time limit game, they should play unranked.

hmmm.....

topic says "remove extra 10min from majors?".....

correct me if i'm wrong but there's no majors in any division other than ranked?....

soooooo...how am i missing a point, and ignoring the relevance of U(which is a joke to begin with, i hope we can agree on)?

--j

_________________

origami wrote:

There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet.

DukeTyrion

Joined: Feb 18, 2004

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 12:54

The point I was agreeing on, was as a slight aside from the Majors, which IMO should follow exactly the same rules as Ranked.

And your rant talking about new players and 'A game designed around a group of friends' was not exactly fully on topic either.

shadow46x2

Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 12:57

DukeTyrion wrote:

The point I was agreeing on, was as a slight aside from the Majors, which IMO should follow exactly the same rules as Ranked.

And your rant talking about new players and 'A game designed around a group of friends' was not exactly fully on topic either.

apparently since my way of thinking is vastly different than the majority(no big shocker, especially at 7am and no sleep), my point about bb being a game designed around friends, so on and so forth, means that the same applies here, and if you are so anal retentive that you get completely bent out of shape because a few minutes of your day are burnt by slow play(or because YOU CHOSE TO SPECTATE A GAME THAT YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WATCH BY ANY MEANS), then maybe you should re-evaluate a few things in your life, no?

--j

_________________

origami wrote:

There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet.

Freppa

Joined: Oct 14, 2005

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:20

i'd say remove it, a good coach should be able to handle a bit of multitasking (common "disasters" like the boss phoning) heck, i'm usually on the phone AND playing poker at the same time. not that i am a good coach Smile

malitrius

Joined: Sep 07, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:26

shadow46x2 wrote:

DukeTyrion wrote:

The point I was agreeing on, was as a slight aside from the Majors, which IMO should follow exactly the same rules as Ranked.

And your rant talking about new players and 'A game designed around a group of friends' was not exactly fully on topic either.

apparently since my way of thinking is vastly different than the majority(no big shocker, especially at 7am and no sleep), my point about bb being a game designed around friends, so on and so forth, means that the same applies here, and if you are so anal retentive that you get completely bent out of shape because a few minutes of your day are burnt by slow play(or because YOU CHOSE TO SPECTATE A GAME THAT YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WATCH BY ANY MEANS), then maybe you should re-evaluate a few things in your life, no?

--j

There is no point in arguing with shadow46x2, he seems to be arguing for the sake of arguing. Your ideas and thoughts feels like the sort from a typical forum spammer, then someone that actually has something to say.
Keep to the topic. Its about the extra 10 minutes, not about how we choose to live our life.

Borgen

Joined: Sep 06, 2005

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:28

shadow46x2 wrote:

DukeTyrion wrote:

The point I was agreeing on, was as a slight aside from the Majors, which IMO should follow exactly the same rules as Ranked.

And your rant talking about new players and 'A game designed around a group of friends' was not exactly fully on topic either.

apparently since my way of thinking is vastly different than the majority(no big shocker, especially at 7am and no sleep), my point about bb being a game designed around friends, so on and so forth, means that the same applies here, and if you are so anal retentive that you get completely bent out of shape because a few minutes of your day are burnt by slow play(or because YOU CHOSE TO SPECTATE A GAME THAT YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WATCH BY ANY MEANS), then maybe you should re-evaluate a few things in your life, no?

--j

You act as though there is a right and a wrong answer. There isnt. Its a matter of opinion. In my opinion, I'd be happier if my opponent kept his turns to under 4 minutes in ranked tournament play and would enjoy watching speccing more tournament games if they were quicker.

I solicited opinions on the 10 minute extra time in ranked tournamnets. You've chosen to enlightened us with your opinion on the lifestyle and emotional well-being of the majority of fumbblers whom you choose to spend your time with. While you are entertaining in small doses, I think its time for you to move along, rage against injustice somewhere else, re-evaluate your life, whatever.

thanks

shadow46x2

Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:30

malitrius wrote:

There is no point in arguing with shadow46x2, he seems to be arguing for the sake of arguing. Your ideas and thoughts feels like the sort from a typical forum spammer, then someone that actually has something to say.
Keep to the topic. Its about the extra 10 minutes, not about how we choose to live our life.

ok duly noted....

here's one of the points made in the original post...

borgen wrote:

Majors are supposed to be spectator events, and when players are taking even more than 4 minutes, its a big drag to everyone involved.

my response...

shadow46x2 wrote:

and as for tournies....i find it absolutely hysterical that you people actually think that tournaments are for the spectator's benefits, and not the benefit of the people playing in them.....

shadow46x2 wrote:

and if you are so anal retentive that you get completely bent out of shape because a few minutes of your day are burnt by slow play(or because YOU CHOSE TO SPECTATE A GAME THAT YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WATCH BY ANY MEANS), then maybe you should re-evaluate a few things in your life, no?

yeah..

you're right...

i'm totally off-topic...

whatever was i thinking...

--j

_________________

origami wrote:

There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet.

Optihut

Joined: Dec 16, 2004

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:34

Borgen wrote:

You act as though there is a right and a wrong answer. There isnt. Its a matter of opinion.

You're wrong, there is a right answer: Obviously shadow has the right answer and everyone who doesn't agree with him is stupid and needs to reevaluate his life!

shadow46x2

Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:37

yeah...i'm double posting i know...i miss the post count...and i'm tired Sad

Borgen wrote:

You act as though there is a right and a wrong answer. There isnt. Its a matter of opinion. In my opinion, I'd be happier if my opponent kept his turns to under 4 minutes in ranked tournament play and would enjoy watching speccing more tournament games if they were quicker.

I solicited opinions on the 10 minute extra time in ranked tournamnets. You've chosen to enlightened us with your opinion on the lifestyle and emotional well-being of the majority of fumbblers whom you choose to spend your time with. While you are entertaining in small doses, I think its time for you to move along, rage against injustice somewhere else, re-evaluate your life, whatever.

thanks

see, this is the thing that bothers me....

this whole argument came up the last time the discussion over time limits came up, when they were first implemented, and it was a "solution" to a problem that wasn't even a problem in the first place...

and now you bring it up again, because(notice: next comment is 100% speculation and nowhere near a statement of fact) i would wager, you specced a slow game in a major, and you were bored by it...

if that's the case, fair enough, i see your opinion, and i'll raise you a "what does it matter what you think in a game that you weren't involved in, major tourney match or not?"...

in my eyes, it's another instance of instead of taking steps for yourself to choose what you are exposed to, you lobby to change the rules so that everyone must bend to your desires....

(there, hopefully i've stated that in a less-than-aggressive(i'm sleep deprived, so bear with me) way, so that a valid opinion isn't ignored because i use big loud words Razz

)

--j

_________________

origami wrote:

There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet.

peke

Joined: Jun 04, 2004

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 13:44

Actually I don't see how majors wouldn't be designed for the hardcorest of the hardcorest. A casual player will never get those tr300+ teams you need to even play in the qualifiers. These guys spend hours and hours of cherrypi... err, "carefully and tactically choosing teams that give them lowest chance of losing players with maximized spp-gain" with their teams to get into the majors. So now, when the majors start they suddenly don't have time to play 90min in one go? And should be given some leeway they never needed in the first place? Bullshit.

Yes, I agree that a major shouldn't be decided just because someone's boss rang. But I also think majors shouldn't be decided because one player passed out on his keyboard after his opponent took six hours to play two turns. Majors ARE major spectator events. You can't just ignore the 150 specs simply by saying "You don't need to watch". It diminishes whole tournaments too. "This tourney is of no prestige. Go outside and play instead." Maybe shadow, you just shouldn't spec them.

In other news, the 10 min extra time is bogus even in normal ranked games. Ranked is a competitive division, it's whole structure is designed that way. If you can't reserve 90 mins (and that requires very slow play), don't play. Don't play in ranked if you can't accept the competitiveness. Don't play in majors if your wife is pregnant or your cat likes to play with matches. There is the unranked without timelimit. And there is the [L]eague where you can have your own non-competitive-non-time-enforced-non-specced tournaments.

The (single-use) pause button would be the best solution, I agree.

_________________
People who are organized are just too lazy to look for things.

JanMattys

Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 14:06

peke wrote:

interesting stuff...

*bullshit* ...Ranked is a competitive division, it's whole structure is designed that way... *bullshit*

...more interesting stuff

One of Paulhicks' last Ranked games ended 0-0 because the dude decided to foul in T16 with the eye on him before scoring. He got sent off and game ended.
The game was reported to admins (not by me, but I specced the game) and Angie said it is legal and does not contradict the rule that states:

Code:

Arranged games (ie. playing to lose) will not be tolerated. The same applies for coaches allowing each other to score extra touchdowns and all other SPP generating events.

This is total bullshit. Paulhicks traded a 100% win for a 50% win with a choice that didn't have an impact on the game (already had 2 casualties for FF roll) and didn't improve his own team for future games (no spps, no money gained). On the other hand, he granted a tie to an opponent that had NO chance to get away with a draw.

Now, one of the two following things apply:
either a) This behaviour does NOT belong to ranked
or b) rules for ranked have to be changed or at least rephrased.

I had a talk with other coaches (Shadow, Purplegoo) and we seemed to agree on the fact that forcing a competitive behaviour in R can be walking down a dangerous slope. I agree.

BUT, PLEASE, stop feeding us non-hardcore gamers with "Ranked is Competitive" arguements. We had to eat enough of them during the original 4-mins rule dicussions, and they are simply FALSE.

We could work together for a better solution, but STOP treating us all like idiots.

Thanks.

Disclaimer: This is in no way directed at peke alone. I just used his words because they were there and because the same point of view seems to be shared by many.

Disclaimer2: I love Paul. I have nothing against Paul and his way of playing the game. I am pointing out inconsistency in the rules, not pointing finger at one of the funniest coaches around.

_________________

koadah

Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 14:19

Surely Majors are supposed to be competitive.

If one coach can make good moves within the four mins and the other cannot, surely allowing more time is giving an unfair advantage.
Cheating.

The current time limit implementation is poor.

And yeah, I admit it.
I get interrupted a lot.
I slip over the four mins without noticing. Will try harder.

_________________

[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May!

moxjet

Joined: Dec 27, 2003

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 14:51

I voted No.
Why ? Because I rarely used 4 minute for a turn, I even more rarely exceed the 4 minute for turn.
And what about your opponents?
I never been upset by my opponents taking too much time for playing, even before the 4 min rule was introduced.
Rarely happen that my opponent use more then 4 minute for turn.
Rarely I have seen a game taking more then 4 minute for turn, unless real life events happen.
So if you knew a slow coach you have the chance of not playing him as usually you do when a dorf ask you to play.
In a major you can not choose, well ... if you play a game with a slow coach once in a while that probably does not kill you Wink

mox

_________________
"I love it that buskopanz plays with just one GR, which is usually one of the lowest in spps of the team" Garaygos

The_Decon

Joined: Jan 07, 2007

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 14:55

Remove it period, it just gives people an excuse to make a 1 hr game last 2.

Shrap

Joined: Sep 18, 2006

Posted: Jun 25, 2007 - 14:57

On a lighter note I just had a coach torture me in a game where he waited until his regular time was running out then started to play after that.
Only time I've seen teh extra time used to any great extent(besides slow players running over a few secs here and there) in all the games I've played.
YAY extra time!