| Poll |
| Do you want BR in the Formula? |
| Yes - And if it is removed, I will likely leave Blackbox |
|
4% |
[ 10 ] |
| Yes - But I would play Blackbox regardless |
|
23% |
[ 53 ] |
| No - But I would play Blackbox regardless |
|
39% |
[ 91 ] |
| No - And if it remains, I will likely leave Blackbox |
|
20% |
[ 48 ] |
| Unsure - I have not decided, or do not understand BR |
|
12% |
[ 28 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 230 |
|
Vol
Joined: Sep 19, 2008
|
 Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 02:58 |
 
|
This has been beat to death, I'm sure. I've weighed in with my blog, but I'll re-post the highlights here:
Playing better coaches doesn't make me a better coach. Getting beat handily just means I had a miserable time. Learning comes from coaches who are good teachers, not necessarily good players.
I want to play, so I play [B] so I don't have to put up with cherry-picking and win-at-all-costs so I can make the tourneys. I am playing races that I don't normally play and playing teams that other coaches would retire. My BR is going to suffer. I'm not a horrible coach, but I will have a horrible BR.
BR is most definitely meant for the casual coach. It is not meant for the serious coach. The serious coach needs to go to [R] so he can enter the tourneys. The rest of us just want to play even matches with no stress, and don't want to put up with cherry picking. |
|
|
Vol
Joined: Sep 19, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 05:02 |
|
Oh, and to add even more: Why fret over TS since it isn't accurate. TS isn't accurate for stunty. I don't think TS really takes into consideration what movement can give you. I think Skaven Gutter Runners are worth much more than 90K. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 05:32 |
|
you learn more when you lose than when you win...
if you can't take a point of learning away from a coach who is better than you, then it's not the other guy's fault..
it's yours...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 08:52 |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 08:55 |
|
| Vol wrote: | | Oh, and to add even more: Why fret over TS since it isn't accurate. TS isn't accurate for stunty. I don't think TS really takes into consideration what movement can give you. I think Skaven Gutter Runners are worth much more than 90K. |
TS has nothing to do with cost. |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 09:11 |
|
| pac wrote: | | CircularLogic wrote: | | Well it is not.. under the current system, there is nothing that prevents me from having one team that I just use to artificially trash me BR, so that my 'serious' team in [B] gets reasonable matchups. This could be either a khemri team that ignores the ball and just tries to trash teams I feel are lame or this could be a treeless flingteam that just standing up players trying to cause a TD and cas-dif as negative as possible … |
Again, are you really suggesting that a significant proportion of people are going to bother to go to such efforts? If not, it doesn't really impact upon the system as a whole.
Secondly, if someone is really being so blatant in not making no effort to win, the relevant site rules still apply!
(Edit: For those who never read them: "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.") |
I am suggesting, that given a right incentive, the system can be exploited. Is the incentive large enough (say a [B] major), then the exploit will become significant. And playing bad on purpose is NOT against the site rules. I am not making any ingame arrangement nor do I hand them SPP. There is no difference in ignoring the ball just to foul and ignoring the ball without fouling concerning the site rules.
@Plorg:
I never infered, that those races don`t play to win. I just said, that those races are perfect for ignoring the ball while either trashing the opponent or getting trashed themselves. |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 09:20 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | I am not making any ingame arrangement nor do I hand them SPP. |
Congrats on contradicting yourself within one post:
| Quote: | | a treeless flingteam that just standing up players trying to cause a TD and cas-dif as negative as possible … |
You can't shift stance like that - first saying specifically that you are including a situation where you are handing the opponent SPP, then one post later (after the fact that that breaches site rules is pointed out) saying you're not - and expect to be taken seriously in debate.
I'm sorry, but your posting standard is way down from normal.  |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 09:25 |
|
See.. I always assumed, that if I make such a team with the purpose of giving my buddy SPP, then it`s a crime. If I make a fluffy team that revolves around standing up and making as many -2d blocks as possible, then it`s within the rule. Though it`s the same thing really...
Then again, maybe I am contradicting.. but at least within 2 posts... and it`s still too early in the morning for my brain to actually work. |
|
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 12:35 |
|
| koadah wrote: | You have to have reached a certain level before you can learn much from a defeat.
Getting annihilated doesn't teach you anything.
Except maybe don't play that guy again. |
When I read the following (from the help file about [B]lackbox):
| Quote: | | It is a highly competitive division that is not for the faint of heart. |
To me, that meant that it wasn't going to be for players who are completely new to bloodbowl/fumbbl. For example, when I first joined fumbbl 5 1/2 years ago, I would never have entered this division. I would probably not have thought about entering it until about a year ago, when I started to improve as a player, and wanting to play better coaches to further improve. To get to play against better coaches at that time, I started playing in [L] (as well as [R], ofc), but I think [B] could offer a far better solution as the games will be fairer.
Edit: removed a [/i] from the last line which was there for no discernible reason. |
Last edited by Hogshine on %b %22, %2008 - %15:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
Turbosloth
Joined: May 20, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 12:47 |
|
I would think it should be in, but only as a deciding factor after other factors. I.e., if there is 1 team that is balanced to my team, i wanna play it. If there are 2+ teams that would all be balanced to my team, then i want to play the one who's coaches skill level most closely matches my own. But that should be decided AFTER it picks the balanced matches - that way i get more games against similar skilled coaches, which are more fun, but if i'm facing an ultra-skilled coach he dosen't get punished by the system for being good in the form of being given a much weaker team than mine |
|
|
Vol
Joined: Sep 19, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 13:13 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | Vol wrote: | | I think Skaven Gutter Runners are worth much more than 90K. |
TS has nothing to do with cost. |
Gutter Runners only cost 80K. A Gutter Runner with no SPPs is listed as 80K (90K). The 90K is what is being contributed to TS. I guess accurately it is contributing 9 points to TS.
A Gutter Runner is worth more than 9 points. |
|
|
PhrollikK
Joined: Nov 04, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 13:19 |
|
| Vol wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | | Vol wrote: | | I think Skaven Gutter Runners are worth much more than 90K. |
TS has nothing to do with cost. |
Gutter Runners only cost 80K. A Gutter Runner with no SPPs is listed as 80K (90K). The 90K is what is being contributed to TS. I guess accurately it is contributing 9 points to TS.
A Gutter Runner is worth more than 9 points. |
Then again Skaven Liners cost 50k and contribute 5.5TS. In comparison an orc liner costs 50k and contributes 5TS. Now it can be argued that Skaven are cheap but there is also a major overhead of players in said teams. The AV7 that they have coupled with AG3 does not make up for the bonus MA they enjoy. IMO the TS is too lenient on high AV and makes players with high MA (but low AV) too expensive TS wise.
So the point is, even though the GR's in themselves are excellent players they cannot perform without a team supporting them. They can struggle abit if the liners/throwers get KO'd/CAS's early. |
_________________
Visit my MiniCity
Mega Punk!
Malicious Rex, Daemon Adoptable |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 13:36 |
|
| Vol wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | | Vol wrote: | | I think Skaven Gutter Runners are worth much more than 90K. |
TS has nothing to do with cost. |
Gutter Runners only cost 80K. A Gutter Runner with no SPPs is listed as 80K (90K). The 90K is what is being contributed to TS. I guess accurately it is contributing 9 points to TS.
A Gutter Runner is worth more than 9 points. |
A Gutter is 9 points, without block, 12.5 with Block.
I am have never agreed with the linemen being 5.5ts
Orc Lineman 5 3 3 9 50k 5TS
Human Limeman 6 3 3 8 50k 5TS
Skaven Limeman 7 3 3 7 50k 5.5TS |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 17:02 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | .. under the current system, there is nothing that prevents me from having one team that I just use to artificially trash me BR, so that my 'serious' team in [B] gets reasonable matchups. This could be either a khemri team that ignores the ball ... or .... a treeless flingteam that just standing up players trying to cause a TD and cas-dif as negative as possible... |
| pac wrote: | | Again, are you really suggesting that a significant proportion of people are going to bother to go to such efforts? If not, it doesn't really impact upon the system as a whole. |
| CircularLogic wrote: |
I am suggesting, that given a right incentive, the system can be exploited. Is the incentive large enough (say a [B] major), then the exploit will become significant. And playing bad on purpose is NOT against the site rules. I am not making any ingame arrangement nor do I hand them SPP. |
| pac wrote: | | Congrats on contradicting yourself within one post. You can't shift stance like that - first saying specifically that you are including a situation where you are handing the opponent SPP, then one post later (after the fact that that breaches site rules is pointed out) saying you're not - and expect to be taken seriously in debate. |
Circ's not necessarily contradicting himself; tightening up one's argument is part of healthy debate. 
I believe his core point stands: there are ways to metagame BR by choosing teams that tend to lose more than their share of games (e.g., Khemri). And, there's an exploitable grey area between "bash to win" and "bash to lose by ignoring ball" Khemri tactics. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 21, 2008 - 17:08 |
|
Or 'trying to win' with no DP no Tree flings.... or all skeleton khemri... |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
