tgrozow
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 20:23 |
 
|
I had a thought about factions.
A team that becomes really strong will probably have a hard time finding matches, which can cause the team to go down in the faction tree. Another result of that is that we might see lesser STR teams up in faction 1, but what I expect to see is strong teams in faction 1, and then a lot of other strong teams in the really low factions because they can't get games.
I was thinking that maybe the faction division is a good place to use the challenge system that is described in the LRB tournaments. One team challenges another, The other team can either accept, forfeit, or get another team to take the challenge for her. I realized there are some problems with challenges because of Rating/STR differences, but maybe it can be tweaked so that a team can only challenge another team if the opponent's STR is higher or lower by no more than, say, 10 points.
As opposed to open, there is a target to get to in this division, kind of like in a tournament or league, so I think that the factions might be a good place to implement challenges. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Not a chance. It causes too much work to mediate between coaches who simply don't answer / see challenges and how to handle mismatched time schedules and whatnot.
Challenge systems do not work in a big scale, and in particular not globally.
-- Christer |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 20:47 |
|
Tgro has a point though. Due to the limited size of the factions and time zone constraints, it's very easy to see that strong teams can be shut out of games. Maybe not the 2 required minimum, but they could be hard pressed to find the 4-5 they need to move up. |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
Erwan
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 21:09 |
|
I agree that the challenge possibility would be to difficult to implement, and will probably not give the expected results. But the STR problem in factions will raise very fast (doing unexpected results like demote the stronger team in a group). I thought of 2 ways to avoid the pb :
1) The teams don't promote on Pts received from match but on Team STR + Pts. The formula (and the way pts are scored) need to be adjusted to fit the idea..
This solution would favorize strong teams to be promoted, resulting in a tree who would approx represent the teams str.
This solution will not solve all problems (difficulty for the strongest team to find an opp).
2) Like in "magic the gathering online", the players are randomly paired when they are online and ask for a game (with consideration on team strength, ...). i.e : When you want to play a faction game you click a link, the server then look for another team in your faction with approx same str waiting for a game too, and designate the game.
This solution would give opportunity for all players to play minimum there 2 games.
If we combine the 2 solutions we have then more probability for the server to pair teams (str are near), resulting in more opportunity for all to play  |
|
|
Clementus
Joined: Oct 01, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 21:32 |
|
Bah, ive got the lowest STR in my faction, or did, and i still play anyone, though alot of CD's seem to be after playing my gobbos.
Hopefully more people like me see it as a bit of fun, not just an attempt to show off and win more. |
_________________
Warlord Clementus (of the Black Hand Tribe)
Monkey of the Moot!
Flings Rule! |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 21:42 |
|
How about both?
I don't think there's any need for official challenge rules in factions. Just pretend like it's the playground again. If you double-dare someone to eat the worm, either they do it or the get ridiculed. Shame is a powerful motivator.
Note: this is not an open invitation to go around slinging slurs at people, just if you have a reasonable challenge for a game, try guilting them into it a bit. Remember, in all things, moderation. If they still say no, they've said no. Move on. Someone else will take you up on it. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
tgrozow
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 21, 2003 - 23:04 |
|
I tried to think a lot about how to create a working challenge system, but I could find holes in every idea I had so that coaches can ignore a challage in a way that will give them a way to say it was due to a problem they could not control if they want to avoid any penalty that might come with not responding to a challenge. I also tried to think of an online solution, but a user can always log out of the website and say that he lost his connection. There would be no way of confirming that, and therefore, no way to penelize a coach for avoiding a challenge in such a way
I like the random pairing idea that Erwan brought up, but even then a coach can logout of the website and use the 'i got disconnected' excuse to avoid a game.
I also thought about the idea of pairing in advance at the beginning of every round, but then the scheduling hell comes into play.
What BadMrMojo is saying can work with some people, but others don't really care about it and since you only have 19 potential opponents, as opposed to almost an unlimited number in open, it's easy to get "stuck" with a group of coaches who will not play your stronger team.
I guess there isn't a really good solution to this problem other than hoping to not get stuck in a faction where you are a lot stronger than all the rest of the teams. |
|
|
EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 02:10 |
|
You can't legislate Goodwill. It is vital for a successful thriving community. I ran a challenge league on FUMBBL a while ago. It worked reasonably well when the group was small and there was a sense of community but when things got a bit too big that's when problems started to occur.
Anonymity encourages people to not take responsibility for their actions. A large group like FUMBBL factions is bound to attract those who would abuse this system. Proposing all sorts of elaborate punitive systems to discourage this type of behaviour probably won't work as those without goodwill will find clever ways to abuse the system. A witchhunt for the abusers will probably alienate some of the coaches who have goodwill by creating a poisonous, toxic environment that some will find very unappealing.
My advice:
1) Avoid the witchunt mindset, you'll probably end up accusing more innocents then guilty (Muslim=terrorist for example)
2) Don't be afraid to ostracize those who blatantly violate the group norms (But be willing to accept them back if they show a willingness to reform)
3) Use simple unobtrusive rules. (Don't give up freedom for security, as you will get neither in the long run)
4) Reward positive behaviour that promotes community (Love the attitude BadMrMojo)
5) Set an example for your fellow humans (Yes that means you!)
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
Link |
_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 02:50 |
|
While I have no intention of retracting the idea, in my defense, the second paragraph was intended with more than a little bit of sarcasm.
I had hoped that my clarification in the third paragraph would have made it clear but just to clarify, I was referring to a quick poke at someone taking their record too seriously, rather than hounding someone who really has no interest in playing. So, when taken in context, I was actually advocating a similar theory, (ie: we don't need challenge rules, for example), only I personally believe that a mob of people will react much better to a minor negative reinforcement than a positive example. Call me a cynic.
Thanks as always for the insightful post, Evo. I did leave that open to misunderstanding. |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
AcheronStyx
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 05:15 |
|
Woe to all of us coaches that didn't play elves or skaven!! already the dodging has begun. hope to see us all in faction 5whatever soon  |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 06:51 |
|
I think we may be better off if we just doubled the size of the factions and doubled the relegations/delegations.
This would expand the numebr of teams you can play. After 2 games I've already exhausted the teams I can play in my faction. The only ones left who are here when i am are too low in STR and won't accept my challenge. |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
poodle-man
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 07:13 |
|
I think that idea has some merit. Mostly becaus eof the international pool that fumbbl draws from. Being an aussie makes it a little hard to find games when the majority of your opponents are northen hemisphere types. This aint a problem for me particularily, cause i have no life and play at random hours, but the limited pool to draw from could severly dampen some coaches ambitions. Perhaps these considerations will smooth themselves out a bit when the factions go monthly? |
_________________
The Tr th. |
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 08:13 |
|
I thought the best coaches were supposed to be in the top faction, not the strongest teams
The faction sizes are just fine, 20 coaches it's a small group who get to be in the top faction. Ofcourse it will be hard to find games with a strong basher team, but that's what you'll (well me too) just have to live with. So you propably won't get all the five games every week. Then again, basher teams last a lot longer than the softer teams, so you have "more" time to reach the top. And ofcourse you can always retire a few players to get your str down to the level that people will play you.
And you can get more games from the softer teams, if you don't build your team to kill them. For exemple, I decided not to buy an ogre. And I haven't taken a single MB on any of my dwarves. Maybe from now on, all my dwarves will get kick as the first skill and leap on doubles. That should get me more games 
Actually I haven't really had trouble finding games yet (must be I have a rep as being an unskilled coach). But we'll see what happens in the future. I love the faction idea though. I don't think a challange system would work. But if the after the settlement period, a season will last for 2 weeks, and max 10 games. People won't be able to pick their games as easily as in the open. To get all those 10 games played, you'll need to play whomever you can. |
|
|
Rennigeb
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 10:24 |
|
One method of neutralizing the act of avoiding high strength sides is to have faction sides not display their strength and to not allow other players to look at the team (that part is extreme and flawed though, maybe not allow viewing if the player is logged on).
Another thing I would like to see, especially once the faction season is one month long, and that is that the top 4 teams (faction Champions) get separated from faction 1 the next season and play a round robin to determine the Faction Grand Champion. At the end of the season the top four of faction 1 play against the 4 Champions (in reverse order, ie C1st vs F4th, C2nd vs F3rd, C3rd vs F2nd, C4th vs F1st... where C1st,C2nd etc represents the Champion placings and F1st etc the Faction placings) with the 4 winnings teams becoming the next season's Champions.
You may prefer more champions.... the only problem being the time restriction of one month of which to play all games. |
|
|
Moekel
Joined: Sep 04, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 22, 2003 - 10:48 |
|
i had the feeling that the only people online in my faction who share my timezone are CD and chaos teams..
ill try to play everyone i can but i can understand people who don't play dwarvs with gobbos... its suicide...
well c how it turns out in the long run..
either bashy teams will disapear or faction 1 will be all bashy teams beating each other up... |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
