PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
Now sadly I have too many commitments in my life: Work, wife etc.
The nature of my life means sometimes I have a lot of free time and sometimes none at all.
hence i do not feel I can join a tournament as it's unlikely I would be able to fulfill the schedule.
Now the answer to this should be to play in open, but I find open a bit dispiriting. While many coaches do offer genuinely balanced fun games this seems to mainly happen when offered games from teams with similar strengths and weaknesses.
NOTICE: This next bit is in no way meant to refer to anyone reading this thread as I'm sure you are all decent players that will play anyone at all with a similar tr/str (depending on which you believe to be more valid)
But time and time agaion I'm noticing the same patterns. Dodge/Ag teams won't play teams with decent amounts of tackle. Teams without much tackle won't play teams with a lot of dodge. Slow teams won't play fast ones. etc. etc. etc.
Now while this is perfectly understandable it makes a nonsense of the idea that we are somehow playing BloodBowl and that team ratings let alone personal ratings mean anything at all. As i understand it each teams is balanced against the entire of the rest of the game, not just against the teams they fancy playing.
I completely understand that in an open league no team should ever be forced to play any other, that would kind of destroy the point but maybe there are others ways of 'encouraging' a range of opponents.
Idea 1: A way of sending blind challenges. Just announcing to somewhere in the site that your open team will play a game against any team withing X-range (where X is determined by the user) so I could make a team available and say to this utility 'match me with any team within 10 points of my tr and/or str' and someone else that has done the same would then be matched up with me. As neither of us would know what we were facing when we asked for the match. Of course this would then come down largely to luck.
Idea 2: A 'medal' of some kind when a team has played either A: every other team there is (tricky to achieve but would be a massive and brave achievement for the teams that did it) or B: divide the teams into 'types' and award the medal to teams that havnt played more than double of the type they play most copmpared to the type they play least (hence encouraging teams to keep playing a variety of opponents as they develop)
I'm sure there are massive problems with all those ideas and that I will be roundly criticised for finding any fault with the excellent free service that is provided by fumbbl (which i appreciate and value) and please don't accuse me of taking this all too seriously as I genuinly play for fun and fun alone, but I guess I just want the variety of a real BB experience without the commitment required to achieve it.
I also want world peace, equality and clean water/no hunger for all and that isn't going to happen either.  |
|
|
Jugular
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 04:17 |
 
|
I like Idea 2 If there could be a medal system with quite prominent medals on the roster pages I think that might encourage alot of players to try out those teams they seem to avoid. I don't think many people deliberately avoid ever playing a certain race they just procrastinate. I'll often find myself saying "Oh I'll play a dwarf team next time round, for now I'll just play these DE's and see how i fare" without thinking in terms of the last few games i played with that team. With a medal system people would be more prepared to search out those games against races they haven't played yet. Now that handicaps have been introduced it may allow teams to find games against slightly unmatched sides with the hope that a handicap goes their way. Maybe when the FUMBBL cup comes round next only teams that have managed a certain number of 'circuits' of the races should be allowed to join. Or maybe certain incentives oculd be given to those that do manage a certain number of circuits. I.e. a cash boost or a FF boost. Neither of these would be all that problematic I wouldn't have thought. |
|
|
Matt_wyeth
Joined: Nov 29, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 04:49 |
|
I would strongly support a medal system. |
|
|
Bloodcat
Joined: Dec 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 05:07 |
|
Ill play any team with a similar TR/STR. Being a pansy because you are gonna get hurt and lose teams? WAAH! I lost 3 teams in a ROW one day. It happens. Down a beer, coffee, or hell, watch yer favorite "stress relieving wink wink" video and move on. Part of the fun is playing a wide variety of teams and learning how to beat them, or at least give em hell without taking too many casualties. And being a smart General Manager and knowing when to spend money and when to save it for a rainy day when your star player mummy decides to die to a Goblin.
Many people don't do this, and its not only hurting Fumbbl, its hurting Blood Bowl in general.
Let's face it. GW, mostly the US division, are litigation happy jerks. They could shut this glorious thing down. I know a few people whose fan art which other divisions of GW around the world love and adore, yet they are being threatened legally.
Fumbbl and Java Bowl mostly exist as far as I understand because Jervis likes having us to do more playtesting than GW in house would EVER be able to do. And well, GW in house aren't exactly well known for their quality playtesting, balanced player sides, and airtight rules. We are pretty much here making Blood Bowl one of the best effing hobby games out there. If we aren't playing all teams against all teams, how can we get it so one day all teams are balanced against all other teams?
Well, as things are going right now, we clearly are not doing this. And its making the game boring when the only teams I can ever get to play my Dwarves are Chaos, Dwarf, Khemri, and Orc; with the odd Human and Chaos Dwarf opponent for flavor. |
Last edited by Bloodcat on %b %09, %2004 - %05:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
Tor_AlKir
Joined: Oct 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 05:25 |
|
I think people choose a team race that best suits the type of blood bowl they wish to play. There are plenty of pros and cons to being either type of team, be it bashy or air powered. Not to mention the fact that people play to win as well as having fun. With all the different teams and coaches out there there is bound to be several combinations of coaching styles and TR/TS. I think this basically boils down to is the fundemental arguement: 'Why won't lightly armored, agility teams step up and play my killing, pounding grinders?' and 'Why should I play a team that will only try to grind me to dust before trying to score?' Some agility teams arent geared to play bashers. Like wise some bashy teams cant handle 7 blodging sidesteppers in their backfield. Why choose to play a team thats gonna either scorch you or turn your bones into powder? If your coach rating is 125-140, what use does it do to challenge a player like Malthor? Doesnt matter what team u bring its ain't gonna happen. If you cant find an opponent that has a similar coaching style or likewise TR/TS chances are its an off time and you should give it a bit. |
|
|
thmbscrws
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 05:41 |
|
You will never reach any kind of agreement between the cherry pickers and the non cherry pickers and any kind of blind challange system wouldn't help becuase the people who cherry pick games wouldn't put there teams up for a blind challange so it would basically be exactly the same as it is now. The idea of teams getting medals though is a really good one imo. I can't see why anyone would be offended by it and it wouldn't create any revolutionary change in how things are played but it would help and add some more fun stats to the game. You could could have medals for all kinds of things besides oponents played like a medal for reaching a certain number of games, cas, touchdowns, or whatever. |
_________________
"If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him." - Mikhail Bakunin |
|
Prez
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 06:36 |
|
Hmmm I have to agree there are some teams here notably Elves that purely only play other elves. How poofy can you get, not at all how the spirit of Blood Bowl was intended. I have also pondered on this dilema of how to get a more balanced playing arena, my suggestion is this.
Would it be possible to categorise teams into Non-Bashy, Hybrid and Bashy,  the teams can play who they want but have to play a team from another category after so many games, for instance a Non-Bashy team plays its quota of games with in its own category and then must play a team from another category before they can resume playing within their category again. But possibly needs a clause that they must play teams from all category's with a certain limit. thus preventing Elves etc just looking for a suitable opponent in the hybrid section and then high tailing it back to Dodge City and never seeing an Orc or Dwarf's mailed fist.
As to how teams would be sectioned or categorised is open to discussion, especially the hybrid teams like Humans, what do people think its only an idea, hmmm hell is it even feasible within the FUMBBL world.
But I would love to see a way of making slug moving Orcs take on nippy lil elves, there has to be a way!
Mr P. |
|
|
Diamond5119
Joined: Oct 31, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 06:50 |
|
Honestly, I think I like both ideas. Very cleaver in a sense that you were able to pinpoint a situation and instead of just complaining about it, you proposed solutions that seem to be backed by some thought, which is good. I like the first idea better because I feel it is closer to the basic idea of bloodbowl.
As for the medal part, it is what i would consider a cool feature, but I don t think that the "selective" players, those who are afraid that their little team might loose, would care too much.
Diamond |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 10:02 |
|
I don't think any of those would work. After all, Open division is Open division so ppl can play whom ever they want. For mandatory opponents, you have to play tourneys. So I guess we would need more "well" organized toureys, seems a lot of tourneys die off, because ppl stop playing in those.
One place where the random oppo selection could be used, is factions (ok, I might be biased here, I've got a dwarf team in faction)
I do understand why some elf teams like to look for a softer match. What are the odds for example an elf team surviving 50+ random matches, compared to for example a dwarf team, at a high tr. Well, I don't know how long tourneys the teams were designed to play anyway. |
|
|
NNNChef
Joined: Dec 09, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 10:34 |
|
You cuold make it as Warcraft in Bttlenet. Only blind challenges should be ranked. Players allways want to be ranked thus we would have many blind challenge games. And people who still play games in the open dvivsion, where they can choose opponents just can play games without being ranked. I thnik this would be a good solution. I also like the medal kind. |
|
|
Csonti
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 11:22 |
|
Strongly support any idea that would make teams' life who only play vs nonviolent, well picked opponents a bit harder. 
I could link some very funny opponent lists but I don't want to be personal. My favourite is a skaven team who doesn't even dare to play vs his kin, only elves... muhaha |
|
|
McSwan
Joined: Dec 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 11:38 |
|
Blind challenges is the way of the future. Almost an inevitablity. |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 12:07 |
|
the problem with blind chanllages being optional, I'd say that then the team ratios would propably be 70% bashies and 30% for the rest. And the non bashy teams would fade out... I think gobbos are the way to go here  |
|
|
Barash
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 12:28 |
|
Some coaches are very selective on the teams / coaches they play: it's the nature of an Open league.
I think that blind challenges might only be played by bashing teams and a few brave "I don't care if my av 7 WE's die" coaches. It's not a accident that the FUMBBL Open is dominated by bashing teams.
Maybe a selection system for the blind challenges might work? So you can select on:
* races you don't want to play
* coaches you don't want to play
* TR/STR difference you would allow to play
* skills (combinations) you don't want to play against
* coaching ranking difference you want to play against
* coach number of fouls per game you don't want to play against
* average coach luck in games you don't want to play against
* coach number of concedes % per game you want to play
etc etc.
Will we ever again play a game of Bloodbowl in the future?  |
_________________
Barash |
|
Fudge
Joined: Sep 29, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 09, 2004 - 12:29 |
|
One thought would be to get rid of the coach rating, since it really doesn´t give a fair picture since there is cherry picking.
With it gone some of the more competetive coaches that, as you say woulden´t risk loosing with a team loose a big carrot to why not risking to loose.
I don´t know if it makes any sence but i belive that th only matches that should be ranked are some approved Tornaments ( where you know that all start with new teams and face each other and no freaky stuff ).
On the suggestions i have to say i like the second one, but i don´t think it´s strong enough to get every body to just play anything, i think coah rating is the most important thing in this issue.
But this is just my oppinion, i would gladly see the medal thing implemented but i´m sorry to say i don´t think it will make much of a differance. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
