Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 18:31 |
 
|
I admit that I might have missed the point of blackbox entirely.
I was thinking, that the purpose of this division is to get casual, fair games easily, without whining or worrying about cherry-picking - even if you play against khemri or *gasp* dwarfs once in a while.
To me, it's quite exciting to play games against teams of an unknown race and roster. On top of that, back then, I used to enjoy the eternal struggle in faction between my pro elfs and legions of orc teams, and I'm a big fan of dwarf/orc derbies as well. Neither do I need nor expect a balanced mix of races to play against, and I'd rather play 10 times against dorf/khemri/orcs than once against amazons. 
Well, considering some of the spiteful flaming and deliberate misinterpretations in this thread, I guess that I have been completely mistaken with regard to the purpose of this division, therefore I'd like to apologize for stirring up this discussion in the first place.
Incidentally, I was activating fragile pro elves almost 90% of the time, therefore there is absolutely no need for further malevolent imputations regarding my motives why I participated in the division. |
|
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 18:40 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | I was thinking, that the purpose of this division is to get casual, fair games easily, without whining or worrying about cherry-picking - even if you play against khemri or *gasp* dwarfs once in a while.
To me, it's quite exciting to play games against teams of an unknown race and roster. On top of that, back then, I used to enjoy the eternal struggle in faction between my pro elfs and legions of orc teams, and I'm a big fan of dwarf/orc derbies as well. Neither do I need nor expect a balanced mix of races to play against, and I'd rather play 10 times against dorf/khemri/orcs than once against amazons. |
Now that we've got that sorted out, perhaps in future you can keep your reasonable, elitist, level-headed, elf-hating, unarguable, flamebait opinions to yourself rather than starting [B] threads with them, hmm? |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 18:41 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | I admit that I might have missed the point of blackbox entirely.
I was thinking, that the purpose of this division is to get casual, fair games easily, without whining or worrying about cherry-picking - even if you play against khemri or *gasp* dwarfs once in a while.
To me, it's quite exciting to play games against teams of an unknown race and roster. On top of that, back then, I used to enjoy the eternal struggle in faction between my pro elfs and legions of orc teams, and I'm a big fan of dwarf/orc derbies as well. Neither do I need nor expect a balanced mix of races to play against, and I'd rather play 10 times against dorf/khemri/orcs than once against amazons.
Well, considering some of the spiteful flaming and deliberate misinterpretations in this thread, I guess that I have been completely mistaken with regard to the purpose of this division, therefore I'd like to apologize for stirring up this discussion in the first place.
Incidentally, I was activating fragile pro elves almost 90% of the time, therefore there is absolutely no need for further malevolent imputations regarding my motives why I participated in the division. |
Note that I never used Frankenstein in my posts. I was not accusing you as a DivB player. I was addressing your initial post where you seemed to imply that the racial composition of DivB is ok as it is and will adjust over time. And that durable races are more performing.
I was just trying to dig onto those statements to see why it is so. I was not calling "you" a pixel hugger  |
_________________
 |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 18:43 |
|
... |
Last edited by Frankenstein on %b %19, %2009 - %21:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
pac
Joined: Oct 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 19:49 |
|
That is indeed my question. |
|
|
TheCetusProject
Joined: May 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 19, 2009 - 20:30 |
|
No thread about Bashing In Blackbox would be complete without a reminder that TS is used for scheduling and it overestimates the abilities of badly battered teams. Consider yourselves reminded. |
|
|
Meech
Joined: Sep 15, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 01:31 |
|
| TheCetusProject wrote: | | No thread about Bashing In Blackbox would be complete without a reminder that TS is used for scheduling and it overestimates the abilities of badly battered teams. Consider yourselves reminded. |
consider your MOM reminded! |
_________________
Putting the FU in fumbbl since 9/2005 |
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 01:37 |
|
For those of you just joining us, allow me to sum up:
1) it was put forward that the makeup in [B] is fine, because that is the general make up of the population of teams (in a rather inflammatory way)
2) all hell broke lose as everyone called everyone else names like cheerleaders fighting over the prom king (but he's soooo dreamy)
3) the proposal of forcing coaches to pick from different groups was brought up, it being the most closely approaching sensible of all the proposals about [B] postulated lately.
4) no consensus was acheived.
While this topic has come up a lot, and predates the formation of [B] by several years, it's relevence to [B] is significant for obvious reasons. And there is no reason why [B] has to have the same dogged comitment to "openess" that Ranked (for example) clings to. Rather than going back and forth for the next 4 years about this, what I propose is a referendum. have the various parties put together a detailed proposal of how they want [B] to organize itself, and submit it to an admin by PM*. The admin will weed out the ones that are unworkable, and post the rest with a poll attached, open for a week or so. If any idea is good enough to gain a bare majority (that's 50% +1 folks) then that's what we go with. If not, we stay in the 'open' system we have now.
From then on in, we will have a strong picture of what [B] is, and we can refer any complaints to the relevant thread.
*the only fly in the ointment is we may run in to the problem that stunty did when they introduced new teams, where dozens of people who've never played stunty screwed up the results. if we could figure out a way to weight the results by number of [B] games played, that would be ideal.
Anyway, this is my modest proposal, I suspect it won't be accepted because it's my feeling that no one actually wants positive change, all they want is the sit and grouse like old ladies at bridge.
*this wouldn't be a question of bowl bot and how matches are picked. This is another and equally relevant question, but outside the scope of what I'm proposing. |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
Lomack
Joined: Jun 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 02:18 |
|
my dwarves are always fun to play against.
I think! |
|
|
Draxus
Joined: Nov 14, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 06:58 |
|
No! Lets not make people play races that they don't want to play... lets however get some programmed code... to chose skills ups that the coach doesn't want. For example nerves of steel on dwarf doubles... |
|
|
spelledaren
Joined: Mar 06, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 08:10 |
|
Thank you Snappy for that sum-up. |
_________________
FUMBBL! |
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 16:56 |
|
I don't think it's fair to frame it as being "Forced" to play races, as they will be pretty broad categories. Having one team in [B] is hardly a hardship.
Another idea I struck on is poll the numbers, create a group of "unpopular" teams, and make it so every coach needs to field at least one of these choices. If it really is variety that is being pursued, not "waaahhh, my elves got smashed again by the mean ol Black Box", then that's the best way to do it. |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 18:46 |
|
| Snappy_Dresser wrote: | I don't think it's fair to frame it as being "Forced" to play races, as they will be pretty broad categories. Having one team in [B] is hardly a hardship.
Another idea I struck on is poll the numbers, create a group of "unpopular" teams, and make it so every coach needs to field at least one of these choices. If it really is variety that is being pursued, not "waaahhh, my elves got smashed again by the mean ol Black Box", then that's the best way to do it. |
That's a pretty neat idea, actually. |
_________________
|
|
Shrap
Joined: Sep 18, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 20, 2009 - 20:41 |
|
| Meech wrote: | | TheCetusProject wrote: | | No thread about Bashing In Blackbox would be complete without a reminder that TS is used for scheduling and it overestimates the abilities of badly battered teams. Consider yourselves reminded. |
consider your MOM reminded! |
this needs quatations! |
|
|
fenric
Joined: Jan 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 21, 2009 - 02:16 |
|
| JanMattys wrote: |
I am not a fan of a rule where you have to submit different teams to blackbox if you don't want to. |
Why do we have this rule, anyway? Why can't we just activate one team? I don't want to retire my goblins, but I'd really like to get some games with some flings. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
