odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 10:12 |
 
|
| Sziro wrote: | | Back in the days, I really liked stunty, and had my fair share of games in the division. The main reasons were the carnage, light hearted games, and fast games, fast game finding. |
It used to be the same for me years ago. I played only stunty, after I got tired of R. Well, now there's B too, but that stunty mayhem was fun.
| Sziro wrote: |
Probably it all went astray at the no G for bigguys reforms. It introduced cherry picking to the game. (Grandfathered/lucky teams who had bigguy block couldn t get games any more)... |
I agree that the loss of G access drove away some stunty coaches (like me), and the silent masses never really started to play stunty.
| Sziro wrote: | -- The flawed TR system should be replaced by something more suitable. (So more games could be found. Recovery matches made easier.) Also this new referance could calculate real value of block+tackle on a bigguy fr example (wich is far better than a +st).
|
I think TS is even more broken than TR is stunty.
| Sziro wrote: | -- No ageing? (It could attract the initial boost, a big coach pool to start the division.
|
Nah, we need aging, atleast if BGs dont get G access, other wise a couple BGs will roll multiple doubles and live for ever.
| Sziro wrote: | | -- Freebooters should be much more cheep. Like quarter of a full buy. (for more strategy, recovery, team tactics, team longevity) |
I like this idea
| Sziro wrote: | | - Redesign roosters |
yeah, that will prolly have to be done.
| Sziro wrote: | | -- Allow rr for bigguys? (So a block is not that almighty gamewinning boost) |
I'd say no, the big guys are/were supposed to make or break the game. BGs failing miserably and costing you a game was part of the fun. And with a reroll a block tackle BG is even more unlikely to fail a block and be fouled to death.
| Sziro wrote: | | -- Disallow block and tackle for bigguys, even on double |
Could be one option, if G access is not granted
| Sziro wrote: | | - Optional blackbox? With increased prizes, like +5000 for each game played in a blackbox participation. |
I'd love this, even without extra cash for it
| Sziro wrote: | | - Force retire all grandfathered teams. Clean start. |
With the amount of old grandfathered teams I have? YES, I totally agree. I would have wanted them to die on the pitch vs other grandfathered teams, but it was not to be.
But yes, If someone wants to hear any of my opinions on stunty (which is not likely), I'll be happy to tell people my opinion. I suppose 668 games in stunty are worth something... But I think it's about 660 game when there was G access. |
|
|
Sziro
Joined: May 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 12:11 |
|
Pirog, I think it should not be the goal to balance stunty to lrb teams.
On TR/TS, everyone knows TS is not accurate in stunty. I was talking about TR not good enough. There should be a single measure, specific to stunty. It should calculate correctly the issues like skill on bigguy or fodder, miss next game should not be taken into account, block and tackle and hurting skills should worth much more etc. It would be a helluva time and effort to develop it, implementing on the other hand would not be that hard.
Yea, no ageing is probably a bad idea, although it could sway the mindless masses 
Yea, rooster fail
But really, this is a quite important topic. I m really suggesting, that all roosters should be rewrited from clean sheet. I know stunty is not balanced, it could not really be achieved. But tweaking and modding will not bring stability, nor a sense of fairness that a league most certainly needs. Like GW Warhammer, the rules are tweaked one army at a time, and it is seriously fucked up beyond repair An occasional universal rules tweaking only worsens the situation.
These are serious issues. If you take/give G access to bigguys it will not magically sort itself out, you must feel it. Even if perfect balance can not be achieved, we should try to do the best.
There are methods of designing something. I m sure a lot of you folks work in the engineering / management / mathematical ground, or have a fairly good grasp of it. If we would dedicate the time and effort we could redesign the game. Pro style. Like set goals. Set guidelines, league rule, parameters. ??? Profit!
The force retire of grandfathered teams. They are dead anyway, sadly.
I think if at the initial reforms they would have been retired in a fell night (or made one last glorious ko tournament) that might have saved stunty. Then obviously the coaches would be mad, but at least started some new teams at the same time.
An open league is like a fire. You need an initial heat, spark or it would not start.
Speaking of spark. I think it would be one of the most important goals. Like a really good pr. Like a client included or ultimate icon, pics collection. Etc.
The "blackbox idea" was, you can play matches outside, and inside the box. If you play inside, you get extra cash.
I know half of my ideas seem silly, but I dare you to write your half wit ideas too. Maybe we can find something cool, or it would pop an other idea.
Sziro |
|
|
Kalamona
Joined: Apr 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 12:49 |
|
- enforced retirement
one of my teams (hopsital) was created in september 2005. lost about 900 players since. the oldest player in the team was bought in jun 2009. so he is the oldest player of the team. but sziro you are saying i should retire them, because a label on top says they were created before august 2007, so it is a grandfathered team? |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 12:54 |
|
Let's just change the other one of the push back results on the client to a skull, that should get things going  |
|
|
Espionage
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 13:42 |
|
I'm not convinced the roster need to be re-written from scratch. At the moment I feel Eshin are too strong, Cheaters, Squigs, Strigs and Slaves are about where they should be, gnomes and fairies are so close it doesn't matter, and the rest need tweaking (or more in some cases) If big guys are altered, that will change the balance, and needs to be play tested by a group of coaches.
The right to create strig star player Igor was a prize in a tournament iirc, perhaps a tournament where the winner get to design a star wouldn't be a bad idea?
I think getting the rosters balanced with each other is the 1st step. Making it even simpler for coaches to get the icons is step 2. Organising meaningful tournaments is step 3. Once ve made he changes the hard part will be getting people to try it.
People say they used to play stunty for carnage, fun, quick games, and easy to get games. Bringing back g access for big guys will do the first three (carnage is obvious, when 32 players take the field and 8 walk off, thats fun, and teams with only 4 players each at the end has got to be quicker), it's making the games easy to get that will be harder.
I don't like the idea of retireing all teams, that seems like knocking a building down so you can fix the plumbing. It also seems like we are punishing the few who have kept (or started) playing stunty. |
|
|
Araznaroth
Joined: Oct 08, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 13:43 |
|
| Kalamona wrote: | - enforced retirement
one of my teams (hopsital) was created in september 2005. lost about 900 players since. the oldest player in the team was bought in jun 2009. so he is the oldest player of the team. but sziro you are saying i should retire them, because a label on top says they were created before august 2007, so it is a grandfathered team? |
Noooo! It cant be retired! Its an institution!! (One where stunty's go and die!) |
|
|
Motskari
Joined: Dec 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 13:46 |
|
Maybe add every team something like 4 2 2 6 dodge, stunty freebooters for 10k? |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 13:50 |
|
About retiring old grandfathered teams, I dont think it would be absolutely impossible for C-man to make soem database runs which
1) retire all players from all stunty teams
2) removes all apos/wizards currently bought
3) sets rr and ff to 0
4) sets team treasury to 1M
5) sets team status to new
This way old teams could be redone with new rules but still keep their old history. |
|
|
blader4411
Joined: Oct 18, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 13:57 |
|
All these ideas are interesting, and could help greatly. I also think that Hebus could be good for Stunty Admin, as he seems the most active stunty player at the moment. |
|
|
Sziro
Joined: May 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 14:06 |
|
Kalamona you have a good point, and it is not black and white, or sure suggestion.
But imagine strig lords would have lost G access, how many games could have you got with a rsc, mb, block, tackle? Most stunty teams are not that fortunate, professional, have an overly loving coach to play 900 games. And surely would not be able to rebuy both bigguys. Hence my theory, that this killed stunty as we know it. And if all of us would have started a clean sheet at the exact time when the first reform went, it *might* not happened this way.
By the way does someone remember exactly what were the arguments in favor of removing the G access? Not to start witch hunting, but it would further our discussion, i think.
Sziro |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 14:42 |
|
| Sziro wrote: | By the way does someone remember exactly what were the arguments in favor of removing the G access? Not to start witch hunting, but it would further our discussion, i think.
|
Change was done to transfer stunty leeg from "big guy slaughter fest" into "tactical playing" due popular demand from coaches who said they would love to play tactical games in stunty leeg. |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 14:53 |
|
| peikko wrote: | | Sziro wrote: | By the way does someone remember exactly what were the arguments in favor of removing the G access? Not to start witch hunting, but it would further our discussion, i think.
|
Change was done to transfer stunty leeg from "big guy slaughter fest" into "tactical playing" due popular demand from coaches who said they would love to play tactical games in stunty leeg. |
The famous silent masses. I'm sure they are still around here somewhere
They just never showed up. If I want to play tactical and to win, I'll play in B div. S was for fun and mayhem.
I'm sure there are plenty of threads on the forums about the discussion of the last stunty revamp. |
|
|
zombificus
Joined: Oct 09, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 15:08 |
|
I think I might be a silent mass.
Does that make me famous?
I don't think taking G away from big guys made things more tactical though, they maybe just changed the tactics, and made players last a bit longer.
I didn't play enough [s] before general access was removed to really make an informed opinion though.
Well, I've spoken, I'm no longer a silent mass, now I'm just a mass.
Maybe that's what happened to them, they spoke |
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 15:56 |
|
I'm with shadow on entirely removing TS from stunty league teams. The only effect it has is to confuse new arrivals to stunty league who haven't understood just how inaccurate it is. The idea that "everyone knows it" isn't true, I've had matches declined due to TS differences. |
|
|
Sinnyil
Joined: Jul 13, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 13, 2010 - 16:09 |
|
I play a lot of stunty these days. Granted, I'm pretty new to fumbbl, so G access on big guys is something I never got to see. A couple thoughts from the newish guy:
-Would it be possible to give big guys tackle access without block? I think that would be interesting.
-Why the heck does the poisoned wind bombadier (or whatever) on skyre not have passing access? 
-No aging in stunty sounds like a good idea on paper, but would it be possible to just have no aging on non-big guys?
-Not showing TS on stunty teams is a no-brainer I think. TS is almost completely useless (Shadow's Horrors example is the pinnacle of this)
-Roster revamps are also greatly needed, but that's been covered pretty well.
And a question: Why can't S teams be transferred to L? That's more of a curiosity to me, was wondering if someone could enlighten me to that |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
