asharak
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
|
 Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:33 |
 
|
To be honest I think it always was in danger of death - a system where you can't avoid someone who plays a different game (i.e. to destroy not score) is always going to put people off. I've not encountered one yet, but I've specced plenty & if I encountered a few games like this I suspect I might quit [B] too.
That said, I enjoy bashy games. I'll take on tougher teams, I'll play Synn with some Woodies or whatever. The difference being in these games they might be destroying my team, but in an effort to win. Sometimes there might be a 'surf rather than a statistically better blitz' or whatever, but hey surfing is always funny. Someone who outright ignores the ball is not funny, it is rare but I've seen people not even trying to pick it up. That, to me, isn't bloodbowl. I wouldn't play against a team like that in real life or [R] and I'd rather not play it anywhere.
Ah well, I guess it all comes down to numbers.... a few folks like that isn't too important. Lots & noone has much fun, participation drops & matches get more uneven. But what can you do? :S |
_________________
Give a man a fire and he will be warm for the rest of the day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:40 |
|
| asharak wrote: | | That said, I enjoy bashy games. I'll take on tougher teams, I'll play Synn with some Woodies or whatever. |
Truths....
I gave him nine boots and he walked out fine. We call that "armor of the balls".... where a coach who willingly plays a tough match will suffer less damage than a coach who only plays tough matches when forced.
__Synn |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:43 |
|
Sigh.
All this pacifist talk about the 'evils of the foul coach'
Same old crap. As correctly stated by asharak above (between his crying about foul monsters), those coaches that are prone to destruction can be beaten with superior tactics. I actually played some lizards recently in the box (squishy skinks ftw) and the coach was excellent at shutting down my ground + pound tactics. But it amazes me how a game built on american football and DEATH can be percieved to be played in the wrong way by some of the coaches here.
Other than that, I love the box. But I am fully aware that some coaches would consider me part of the problem in 'b'. Thats tragic, I don't care how my opponent plays, I just try to win + kill. |
_________________
 |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:50 |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:51 |
|
| Synn wrote: | | Which do you think is more important for a competitive coach.... having a top BR.... or winning a major qualifier? |
Why does it have to be a comparison of which is better? Isn't there a place on fumbbl for more than one competitive format? |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Synn
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 19:57 |
|
Not to someone with a limited time schedule. A number of coaches who left B went right back to R. This is a zero-sum game.
Proof of this can be seen if a quickmatch function was ever added to ranked.
__Synn |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 21:12 |
|
I don't see B vs R as a zero sum game, that seems a narrow view to me. I think that having multiple competitive options available can increase total interest on the site. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 21:33 |
|
i blame silleh, for gloating from his spot on top of the heap, thus humiliating all who seek to challenge him |
_________________
 |
|
Chewie
Joined: Dec 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 21:35 |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 22:13 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | I don't see B vs R as a zero sum game, that seems a narrow view to me. I think that having multiple competitive options available can increase total interest on the site. |
For a lot of people it is. They can only play a certain number of games in a week.
[B] appeared to be at it's height when the Minors and Tour were in off season.
[B] is better than open [R]. But open [R] is the price you have to pay to have a team that is competitive in [R] tournaments. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 22:19 |
|
| westerner wrote: | | I don't see B vs R as a zero sum game, that seems a narrow view to me. I think that having multiple competitive options available can increase total interest on the site. |
I think you are wrong. |
|
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 22:48 |
|
Koadah, that might be true for some coaches. There's probably some coaches who could play in both, depending on their mood, and/or whose game time can stretch depending on how much fun they're having. |
_________________
\x/es
Last edited by westerner on %b %25, %2009 - %22:%Feb; edited 1 time in total |
|
Melissa
Joined: Apr 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 22:49 |
|
Absolutly right. I can play 1-2 games/week. My choses are Oficial tournaments and Box.
P.S. I have some teams from old times for R Tournaments in other way, i thing, i would play only Box.
| koadah wrote: | | westerner wrote: | | I don't see B vs R as a zero sum game, that seems a narrow view to me. I think that having multiple competitive options available can increase total interest on the site. |
For a lot of people it is. They can only play a certain number of games in a week.
[B] appeared to be at it's height when the Minors and Tour were in off season.
[B] is better than open [R]. But open [R] is the price you have to pay to have a team that is competitive in [R] tournaments. |
|
|
|
stormbolt
Joined: Dec 26, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 23:07 |
|
| Quote: |
Other than that, I love the box. But I am fully aware that some coaches would consider me part of the problem in 'b'. Thats tragic, I don't care how my opponent plays, I just try to win + kill.
|
Indeed, but since you actually TRY to win, this makes you less of a problem. There are loads of coaches that see no point whatsoever in winning, and only care about the ball if it leads to more cas. See this guy for example: http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=537993
The way the box is formed, it becomes their playground, and anyone playing to actually win will be XXXXX:ed.
This could however be easily solved by a rule where, IF [number of fouls] > [number of TD's] at the end of the game THEN the teams best player (or the coach) is outright hunted down and KILLED!
Who would miss em? |
|
|
Plorg
Joined: May 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 25, 2009 - 23:32 |
|
| stormbolt wrote: | This could however be easily solved by a rule where, IF [number of fouls] > [number of TD's] at the end of the game THEN the teams best player (or the coach) is outright hunted down and KILLED!
Who would miss em? |
Alternative proposal:
IF [number of fouls] < [number of forum posts complaining about fouling] THEN the coach is confined to playing in a happy care bear league with plush unicorns and RAINBOWS!
Who would miss em? |
|
|
|
|
Chaos Draft League R...
Search
