| Poll |
| Would you allow backward redeclaration of actions? |
| I like the UNDO option |
|
4% |
[ 8 ] |
| I like the petitioning |
|
3% |
[ 5 ] |
| I've got a better idea (and will post it below) |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| NO! |
|
87% |
[ 144 ] |
| Pie! |
|
4% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 165 |
|
gandresch
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 15:19 |
 
|
Hi,
like i said before, i am not for changing an action to another, but being able to correct a misclick during a move/blitz/pass/ho-action, when instead of making one step forward you move one to the side by mistake. And i don't see a point, why this shouldn't be allowed. It doesn't happen in tabletop, as you can't misclick there.
The thing about changing actions is more problematic, as you have more options than you should. Example: You miscounted for HO and then you could choose pass to not having to gfi. I don't see a real option to be able to change the action you have chosen.
But i still see a way to undo steps, that have been accidently done by a player who misclicked with the mouse and made a wrong move. Therefor i am still for an option to undo perhaps the last step, perhaps the last 3 steps of a player, when no dice have been rolled during these steps.
Greets,
gan |
|
|
T_Witch
Joined: Sep 01, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 15:41 |
|
take what we have and like it...they could always be more like table top and force us to 'start turn' as well as 'end turn' to symbolize the moving of the turn marker. Misclicks happen...you just have to deal with them. They even happen in TT when you couldn't even touch a figure, much less declare an action with them without suffering a turn over... or burning a reroll. Even later giving away a reroll. House rules are fine for your home TT league...but shouldn't exist here. Even though some of the leagues in league division here have odd rules...the game mechanics are still the same. |
|
|
Were_M_Eye
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 15:42 |
|
We all miss-clicked some time, but it is the same for all of us. Totaly fair.
Don't miss-click and problem solved.  |
|
|
Leijonet
Joined: Jul 01, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 15:53 |
|
| Fela wrote: | | Nobody agrees with me, so they must all be wrong. And stupid. And unsportsmanlike. And... |
Good lord man. Nobody agrees with you. Insulting people or saying "but this is how I do it in my TT-league" is not likely to change their minds. You think one way, fine. You are certainly entitled to do that. The vast majority of this community seems to disagree.
Maybe your opinion is the "right" one for your TT-league, but it obviously isn't "right" one here. How do I know this? Because nobody here agrees with you!
Now please, give it a rest. |
_________________
Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Leijonet -Winging justice since 6/9-08 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 16:11 |
|
The bottom line is, that if this were implemented games would take even longer. I persnoally like to get a game finished in under an hour. A lot of people take a long time over there turns already which is fine and understandable but I think I would loose the will to live if player icons started moving and then moving backwards again. |
_________________
 |
|
Fela
Joined: Dec 27, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 16:50 |
|
| Leijonet wrote: | | Fela wrote: | | Nobody agrees with me, so they must all be wrong. And stupid. And unsportsmanlike. And... |
Good lord man. Nobody agrees with you. Insulting people or saying "but this is how I do it in my TT-league" is not likely to change their minds. You think one way, fine. You are certainly entitled to do that. The vast majority of this community seems to disagree.
Maybe your opinion is the "right" one for your TT-league, but it obviously isn't "right" one here. How do I know this? Because nobody here agrees with you!
Now please, give it a rest. |
You may have noticed how i pointedly asked how it is done in official tournaments.
Besides, this has long since moved from me trying to convince anyone to change their votes. You may or may not have noticed that my judgement about people voting NO was purposely left temporary( by using 'so far' in the summary) and open (i conceded that there might be reasons i overlooked).
My theories have, however, not been proven wrong yet.
Arguments either ignored the fact that we're discussing an option which can be denied (i.e. supporting my 'stupid' theory, although admittedly the word is harshly provocative and a bit overexaggerated) or gave reasons that favored convenience before fairness.
Hell, I'm not even saying that I would NOT deny this more often than not or that I'm not AIMING at never having to use an option like that.
But to me it seems inherently wrong to be opposed to implementing an option that can be turned off, even more so since i also had a poll option where it could be modified, so the overwhelming tendency of the votes caught me by surprise. Therefore i wanted to clear this up. |
|
|
Fela
Joined: Dec 27, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 16:59 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | The bottom line is, that if this were implemented games would take even longer. I persnoally like to get a game finished in under an hour. A lot of people take a long time over there turns already which is fine and understandable but I think I would loose the will to live if player icons started moving and then moving backwards again. |
While the discussion is moot at this point, just for the sake of honoring your argument with an answer:
I'm completely with you regarding quick matches.
On the other hand my argument was that the situations we're discussing mainly came up from developing a habit with the purpose of speeding up play.
From personal experience i get a lot more frustrated playing people that do nothing for several minutes while mentally computing their turn, just to fail their first dodge. Similarly double or triple checking every single action declaration to make sure you made the right one has the potential of being a major time sink.
Plus, you could always tell your opponent how you feel about this option and either deny it outright from the beginning or past a certain point. |
|
|
Sixletters
Joined: Jul 20, 2010
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 17:05 |
|
you have not been proven wrong?
time constraints,
increased interactiion on the non moving player
increased demand on a guy whos making the client user friendly and for free just to guard noob mistakes
rather than calling them stupid counterargument them, if your making this a debate, debate dont just deny
edit: made before the second of your double posts |
|
|
Were_M_Eye
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 17:20 |
|
| Fela wrote: |
Plus, you could always tell your opponent how you feel about this option and either deny it outright from the beginning or past a certain point.
|
And when you fail and move the player in the wrong direction and the opponent refuse you the right to take it back, would you then call him a idoit and unfair?
Seems like this "take back" option would cause more grief then it takes away. |
|
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 19:42 |
|
| Gran wrote: | | The remedy? Play more FFB games and relearn the rules. Oh, and have fun! |
i see what you did there 
| Fela wrote: | | My theories have, however, not been proven wrong yet. |
probably because you sit there with one hand covering your eyes, and the other plugging your ears, yelling "LA LA LA LA LA" to yourself, so you can pretend like nobody is refuting your idiotic "points"....and i use that word *very* loosely...
| Fela wrote: | | Besides, this has long since moved from me trying to convince anyone to change their votes. |
probably because you've convinced yourself that people's opinions have nothing to do with being faithful to the rulebook, and only has to do with "being so desperate to win against less constantly rules-aware players that you need another obstacle for them to overcome".
just because you forget to declare your actions, doesn't mean we should rewrite the client to suit your shortcomings...
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
Sixletters
Joined: Jul 20, 2010
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 21:11 |
|
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 10, 2010 - 21:57 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | | Gran wrote: | | The remedy? Play more FFB games and relearn the rules. Oh, and have fun! |
i see what you did there
| Fela wrote: | | My theories have, however, not been proven wrong yet. |
probably because you sit there with one hand covering your eyes, and the other plugging your ears, yelling "LA LA LA LA LA" to yourself, so you can pretend like nobody is refuting your idiotic "points"....and i use that word *very* loosely...
| Fela wrote: | | Besides, this has long since moved from me trying to convince anyone to change their votes. |
probably because you've convinced yourself that people's opinions have nothing to do with being faithful to the rulebook, and only has to do with "being so desperate to win against less constantly rules-aware players that you need another obstacle for them to overcome".
just because you forget to declare your actions, doesn't mean we should rewrite the client to suit your shortcomings...
--j |
your mom! |
|
|
spubbbba
Joined: Jul 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 11, 2010 - 00:38 |
|
Well in my TT league every time you kill a wardancer with an apoth fail using a TTM of Puggy from a human team on a Tuesday you get a cookie.
I want Kalimar and Christer to implement a "give cookie" option into the client where you get a cookie delivered for every wardancer perm RIP. I don't care how much time and effort it costs them both.
If you disagree with this then you're either a complete moron or some sort of anti-fun, fascist, liberal, commie, scum-bag!
Hitler would vote against the cookie button. |
_________________
British or British based and looking to join a League?
Then check out theWhite Isle Fringe |
|
Uncle_Smed
Joined: May 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 11, 2010 - 04:43 |
|
As a representative of Mr Hitler, spubbbba, I am pleased to announce that he is very much PRO cookies.
He too looks forward to having cookies delivered to his bunker for the destruction of those evil, wood-hoarding Elves who cause social and economic misery for the true and rightful coaches of Bloodbowl.
Mr Hitler, however, does not guarantee that he won't ragedie in flames when his favourite team (Humans, obviously) is not allowed to take back their declared Blitz action against Russia from mid-1941.
Mr Hitler has advised me that in his previous European TT league, he was able to renegotiate the rules of Bloodbowl peacefully with Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and even Belgium, Holland and France after lengthy discussions.
Mr Hitler does not see why, under the current fumbbl administration, it should not be possible to implement the "Give Cookie" option, and may or may not have several armoured divisions and half the Luftwaffe waiting outside Christer's door to help him with implementation.
Hitler, even he loves cookies and dead Wardancers. |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 11, 2010 - 15:09 |
|
I voted "NO"
Why? well, there is a poll and it's the option closer to my oppinion.
If it's going to be ignored, then I don't see the needfor the poll.
But I don't mind because chances are this feature is not going to be implemented.
Now, explaining my oppinion a bit more:
"In my TT league..." is flawed, because this is not TT.
In TT you have turn counters and ilegal procedure rules to make sure people keep track of turns and you have to declare actions to make sure people choose an action before moving a player and don't try to sneacky gain a probability edge.
In FFB turns are keept track automatically and you don't declare actions, what you do is choosing an action, but no need for typing "blitz" in chat.
So this is just a matter of misclicks.
Then on petitions, if undoing is fair, the fair play I like means default YES so no need for petitions. But if there is a grey area I'd like better an automated sistem to aboid bad blood and to make sure that we all play in even groud wich is fair enought.
So no to petition sistem.
And the client allready has an automated "undo" sistem, if you don't move a player you can deselet it and select him again with a new action... and that's probably the best that an automated sistem can get.
For example "undo as far as no rolls has been made" can lead to easy abuse. You take "move" and get into a DT tackle zone and then you notice the skill and instead of dodging you switch to "blitz". Same goes for Prehensile Tail, Tentackles, Pass Block and miscounted assists in a "blitz" (that you could turn into a "move")
Edit: I see flames and trolling... may be I regret posting in such a thread |
|
|
|
|
| |
Problem to organize ...
Search
