| Poll |
| What should be done about kill-first [B] teams that make killing their first priority, with scoring a distant second? |
| 1) Nothing - it's a valid strategy |
|
44% |
[ 116 ] |
| 2) Nothing yet - i'm not convinced it's a big deal |
|
21% |
[ 56 ] |
| 3) Contain it - Tweak the scheduling formula and/or incent coaches to win |
|
21% |
[ 55 ] |
| 4) Ban it - it's illegal |
|
12% |
[ 33 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 260 |
|
JoeKano
Joined: Aug 30, 2003
|
 Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 14:57 |
 
|
| DonTomaso wrote: |
And if you blacklist them because they play to kill, foul every turn, play naked, crossdress or are just quiet should not matter.
|
Whats wrong with playing naked, its....uninhibited blood bowl. If I choose to forego an athletic protection device that should be my Choice!!!
Well what an odd thing. Honestly i think ill stick to league play and not even bother with the Black Box stuff, its just the same kind of crud R is, a bunch of Euro whatsits and nasty minded yank kiddies from the look of it...... |
_________________
"Take the Strength, crush the opposing linemen, drive them broken before you and hear the lamentation of their Cheerleaders!!!"
 |
|
DonTomaso
Joined: Feb 20, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:20 |
|
| Grod wrote: | | DonTomaso wrote: | The problem should be fairly easy to solve. If the BlackBox checks the Blacklist, the problem will sort itself out. Or at least _you_ don't have to face the same opponent twice.
If you Blacklist a player, you should not be set up to play vs them. |
Surely some players might simply blacklist coaches they recognise as superior players to avoid playing them? |
If you had bothered to read a bit further, I talked about that too... sort of.
 |
_________________
====================================
Be careful, my common sense is tingling! |
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:22 |
|
What to do about the 'KILL-FIRST' squad....more YAWN.
Seriously guys. Get a grip. I really believe that a portion of the coaches here have truly lost the plot with the whole kill over win thing.
And before I get accused of being one of the 'bashers' Check this out I gave as good as I got, and came out the other end intact(ish)
It was really fun , and covered every aspect of this wonderfull game. Bring on the DP heavy Khemri! When you mince them at their own game AND win, the bragging rights are MASSIVE |
_________________
 |
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:29 |
|
| PeteW wrote: | | If you want to team build, go back to cherry picking in [R]. |
I have no problems team building in [B] but I am also fully aware that I am only ever one game from the dice going south or my brain going south (brain more likley) and my team getting mangled half to death or worse.
Ban the dice when that happens? discuss.... |
_________________
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:34 |
|
| hardin0 wrote: | | [B] was created to give this lame "coaches" a place where they can build whatever non-winning killing team they want, and not being dodged... so why worry? People who is really competitive and worried about winning should play ranked, and let the psychos play each other in B. |
I think it's totally the other way around... In B most coaches play to win, in ranked most people either play to team build, or to kill teams. If someone wants to try and destroy my team, let them try. The "not playing to win" teams are in my opinion a small minority, if not, I have been really lucky (which I am of course), since 96% of my games have been about winning. |
|
|
Optihut
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:39 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | | Grod wrote: | | Sounds like lots of halfling teams! What is wrong with coming up with fun ways of scoring? Not every one likes to foul, so now you want to ban any halfling coach who doesn't foul? |
You deliberately ignored my point and you deliberately dodged my question.
The thing is that playing INTENTIONALLY in a way that diverges from the basic premise of the game (i.e. to win), ('m not talking about taking a gamble in order to have future advantage in winning, like handoffing to a BoB, but blatantly choosing a sub-par way of playing because your goal is NOT the win - for example writing HELLO in halfling letters all over the pitch before turn 16) is against any competitive spirit you can think of.
And Fumbbl is by definition (i.e. it is written in the BASIC RULES of the site) a competitive league.
"FUMBBL is a competition league" (Point 2 of the Code of Conduct of this site) |
I still think that a lot of people interpreted the "playing to lose" line the wrong way. When beating up the other team, you are not playing to lose - winning may not be the #1 prioritiy on the list, but it is still somewhere on the agenda. In my opinion, playing to lose means that you go out of your way to lose, in order to boost up your opponents' team. That's very close to cheating and hence there is this clause in the rules.
A massive DP khemri team that is out to kill the other team is actually playing to win by conventional khemri strategy. I'm not a big fan of the bad design that are ogres and khemri, but if people want to play such a team, it is really up to them. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:39 |
|
| DonTomaso wrote: | The problem should be fairly easy to solve. If the BlackBox checks the Blacklist, the problem will sort itself out. Or at least _you_ don't have to face the same opponent twice.
(...)
Then again, someone might blacklist everybody with a CR above 150, but that, really, is their loss. |
Simply, limit the blacklist to 10 names so you can't metagame by blacklisting every good coach around and that's a good way to sort this one out. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:45 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: | | DonTomaso wrote: | The problem should be fairly easy to solve. If the BlackBox checks the Blacklist, the problem will sort itself out. Or at least _you_ don't have to face the same opponent twice.
(...)
Then again, someone might blacklist everybody with a CR above 150, but that, really, is their loss. |
Simply, limit the blacklist to 10 names so you can't metagame by blacklisting every good coach around and that's a good way to sort this one out. |
The whole notion of making a division like blackbox THEN rstricting the games within it smacks to me of.....[R]???
Awful idea in my opinion. Just awful. |
_________________
|
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:52 |
|
Actualy... you don t have to play every game in the box. You still can dodge game.
Thing is you have, for the first time, the obligation to dodge it using the rule : concession.
If your elfes are ready to concede against a team just because it s to mean for you, you will have your FF drop. And it s real pain for an elf team. And don t forget you can do it only at low TR without risking losing experienced player. Which is even more painful for elf...
So we have a rule to avoid kill-first-and-only team and it s a good one. |
_________________
Ash |
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:54 |
|
| Ash wrote: | Actualy... you don t have to play every game in the box. You still can dodge game.
Thing is you have, for the first time, the obligation to dodge it using the rule : concession.
If your elfes are ready to concede against a team just because it s to mean for you, you will have your FF drop. And it s real pain for an elf team. And don t forget you can do it only at low TR without risking losing experienced player. Which is even more painful for elf...
So we have a rule to avoid kill-first-and-only team and it s a good one. |
UH OH. tell me this post was a joke. Otherwise you may get some 'intresting' feedback! |
_________________
|
|
medaloffairness
Joined: Nov 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 15:55 |
|
There are always some guys who abuse (ok, it is still under discussion) the system of the [B] division and destruct the fun of playing BB of many others.
Therefore just baning them wouldn`t help because others will show up to do the same. Therefore I don`t suggest to ban it but to make it less attractive. So I follow option 3.
An idea from someone else came upon some days ago which, from my point of view, could decrease the numbers of Kill-first Teams and put an extra incentive for teams which are heading for winning a match.
`What would be, if a team is automatically retired if it doesn`t pass a specific win/tie/loss ratio. The exact ratio is a different discussion I think an I am not well enough in playing blood bowl to settle it, but I think this would decrease the number of the Kill-First Teams. For the other teams it would be a very challenging thing to stay in [B] for a long time, and an award could be granted to teams which surpassed 15, 20, 50, etc... games. This would be a cool challenge I think and almost (depending on the ratio to reach) would be an end game for your beloved team.
I agree that for some teams like gobbos, halflings and ogres this would be a tough journey. Maybe we could make an exception for those 3 races. And if the First-Kill coaches want to switch to a bunch of DB gobbos (because of the exeption)... I welcome them with my norse and Nuffle will be proud of all the red and green blood on the pitch.
I know that this idea is at its beginnnig... I didn`t flame, I didn`t blame.. so please just think of the idea and any improvements on it are much appreciated. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 16:05 |
|
| Calcium wrote: | | sk8bcn wrote: | | DonTomaso wrote: | The problem should be fairly easy to solve. If the BlackBox checks the Blacklist, the problem will sort itself out. Or at least _you_ don't have to face the same opponent twice.
(...)
Then again, someone might blacklist everybody with a CR above 150, but that, really, is their loss. |
Simply, limit the blacklist to 10 names so you can't metagame by blacklisting every good coach around and that's a good way to sort this one out. |
The whole notion of making a division like blackbox THEN rstricting the games within it smacks to me of.....[R]???
Awful idea in my opinion. Just awful. |
Well I see a difference. In Ranked, you pick your games, hence you avoid certain matchups.
If you allow a limited blacklist system in [B], you avoid coaches that you just rated as "definitely not my taste to play them".
My pro-elves for exemple, won't be dodging dorfs or khemris, BUT coach X that is really a moron. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 16:12 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: | The poll is biased.
"Nothing, it's a valid strategy" should read "Nothing, killing is a valid goal in itself"
A strategy is a way to achieve a goal.
Those who forget the ball from turn 1 to 16 are not using a different strategy. They are trying to achieve a different goal than everybody else. |
I tried hard to keep my personal opinions out of the poll phrasing (I voted #3).
#1 was phrased to broadly capture the core idea of its adherents, i.e., that playing kill-first is valid. It may not be how you would like to paint them, but you are at the other extreme of this debate. |
_________________
\x/es
Last edited by westerner on %b %12, %2008 - %16:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
Draxus
Joined: Nov 14, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 16:13 |
|
If you can cas 16 players (no apo'ed/regened) of the opponent then they can't set up to stop you from scoring that is a valid attempt, demonstrating your NOT playing to lose |
|
|
gansus
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 12, 2008 - 16:16 |
|
Big Clap for JanMattys: do what you want in order to win, but that should be the goal for every coach in every game! |
|
|
|
|
| |
New Gnones vs Old Gn...
Search
