74 coaches online • Server time: 23:06
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post King Boombasticgoto Post Guard vs MB on undea...goto Post The Jalapeño Popp...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Is min/maxing a problem in Blackbox?
Yes
24%
 24%  [ 16 ]
No
38%
 38%  [ 25 ]
Who cares? Now where's my pie?
36%
 36%  [ 24 ]
Total Votes : 65


harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:11 Reply with quote Back to top

Wreckage wrote:
Quote:
Again, you are taking advantage of the site rules of refusing/skipping a match........so you put coaches through the torment of an almost guaranteed loss... horrid.


Ok, here goes.
Is the game not nice because only one side is only making proper use of their advantages? Then the game is horrid as a result of the one coach who failed to make proper use of the rules and to build a competitive team that could be used for a fun match.


I'll stop you there. The point is that the other coach is either unable or morally won't take advantage of the rules for the benefit of the environment as a whole.

If everybody played like BGhandras or Smallman (discussing play styles only) in Box, then the division would not exist.

Simply, I think there are not many coaches who should legitimately have a win percentage over 65%. Only the best of the best should have a win percentage over that, and some really should.

If you are over this......then look at yourself, and are you really that good.

Kryten I think is a great example. One of the best coaches on the site and at 64%.
thoralf



Joined: Mar 06, 2008

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:12 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
Not at all.


Then re-read what you wrote, for you just said that playing matches that your opponent can't turn down is a form of deception.

I have no idea why this should become an "intervention" thread, but suit yourself.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:17 Reply with quote Back to top

bghandras wrote:
"Subjective rules make everything personal. They create hate and mistrust.


Subjective rule and social rules are totally different. Subjective are made by those in charge who may or may not have empathy with those that the rules effect.

Social rules are made by those that the rule does effect and do so for the good of everybody, not just the elite.

Social games (and guys this is a social game) need and deserve social rules made and honed by those that it'll effect who want the environment to do the best it can.

What is wrong with that? It's not communism, there's nothing communism about wanting the best for the site rather than a few coaches that wish to reap/leach off of it.
bghandras



Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:18 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
Simply, I think there are not many coaches who should legitimately have a win percentage over 65%.

So basically i could do whatever i want you will never appreciate it was fair. Good to know. I wonder what would you say if i would play 100 games WITH ROOKIE TEAMS in the blackbox at various times with various races against big variety of opponent, and would produce a win % above your arbitrary number.

Edit: I pick rookie teams so minmaxing and team development is not a factor.

_________________
Image
"This is turning into the best thing on FUMBBL" - Seventyone
"THIS LEAGUE IS AWESOME!!!!" - Kummo
"Last league i would leave." - SpecialOne


Last edited by bghandras on Sep 07, 2016 - 22:21; edited 2 times in total
bghandras



Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:20 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
What is wrong with that? It's not communism, there's nothing communism about wanting the best for the site rather than a few coaches that wish to reap/leach off of it.

I did not say it is communism. I said that what you want to achieve (similar win% for all) is in line with communism (big push towards equality), and the tools you want to employ was sidely used by communism. I did not say equation a implied correlation with communism.

_________________
Image
"This is turning into the best thing on FUMBBL" - Seventyone
"THIS LEAGUE IS AWESOME!!!!" - Kummo
"Last league i would leave." - SpecialOne
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:26 Reply with quote Back to top

thoralf wrote:
harvestmouse wrote:
Not at all.


Then re-read what you wrote, for you just said that playing matches that your opponent can't turn down is a form of deception.

I have no idea why this should become an "intervention" thread, but suit yourself.


Well you are quoting without looking at the overall point. Playing matches you cannot choose, is the most honest form of playing.

Playing matches you cannot turn down where you load the dice, is dishonest. That was the overall point.

Box in it's purest form is the most honest. Box as it stands, for me.....isn't not.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:29 Reply with quote Back to top

bghandras wrote:
harvestmouse wrote:
Simply, I think there are not many coaches who should legitimately have a win percentage over 65%.

So basically i could do whatever i want you will never appreciate it was fair. Good to know. I wonder what would you say if i would play 100 games WITH ROOKIE TEAMS in the blackbox at various times with various races against big variety of opponent, and would produce a win % above your arbitrary number.
.


Totally irrelevant to how you conduct yourself. You without doubt are a good coach.
Nextflux



Joined: Jan 22, 2008

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:30 Reply with quote Back to top

If someone always exploits something, it pushes others to do the same, and its a vicious circle.
At that point one can choose, should I stick to my principles, or just give the F*** about principles. My problem is that whatever I choose I loose.
If I stick to my principles I become the stupid guy who always struggles, If I copy the opponent I become the evil one myself.
So I usually choose the 3rd option, witch is to avoid the coach at all costs, so I dont get tempted to become corrupted myself.
(though one could argue that I chose option 1 there)
Right now I have zero coaches on my "blacklist" because they have all stopped playing. (Praised be Nuffle! and please Nuffle dont tell them to come back)

In that sense its a problem, Blackbox wants us to activate, but in that situation I would not activate, since I would know what game I would play. a boring one, likely lots of cas too (cuz the other team is filled with nasty stuff, and is minmaxed all the way -hey Im not a pixel hugger in case you wondered).

so..
A predictable very boring game, where I also would need to listen to that Idiot talking about BB that he really doesn't know much about, because all his teams are the same, and mostly the same race too.and its just pile on and foul, thats it.
that ok though as long as the team is not minmaxed to oblivion.

Since I would not activate against such coaches its a problem for blackbox, not only me, but for neutral players and for the "evil" player, = less games in play.
Can it be fixed, not sure, hope so, chance is maybe guessing it to be 1%. will the "evil ones" vanish, nope! there is always someone.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:33 Reply with quote Back to top

bghandras wrote:
harvestmouse wrote:
What is wrong with that? It's not communism, there's nothing communism about wanting the best for the site rather than a few coaches that wish to reap/leach off of it.

I did not say it is communism. I said that what you want to achieve (similar win% for all) is in line with communism (big push towards equality), and the tools you want to employ was sidely used by communism. I did not say equation a implied correlation with communism.


Where did I say I want to achieve that? That's TV++ concept, which I was totally against as an encumbering concept. If a coach that could win 95% of their games with even teams against the best coaches. More he power!!! I'd bow to such genius.

You and Wreckage and dodging the point. Win, but win fairly. Don't load the dice. And TV in box is allowing you load the dice to a point, that it's ridiculous and shouldn't be socially acceptable.

That my friend is not communism or personal.
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:34 Reply with quote Back to top

Hey Wreckage, I've lopped your post down to this since it's basically a summary, if that bothers you, say so and I'll quote and reply to the whole lot.

Wreckage wrote:

I'm all for good rules. Talking about improving the rules is great. Being respectful to each other. Yes. Trying to have a fun experience? Yes. Try your best instead of whining about your losses and you will be able to fully appreciate both and be able to be happy with it. Not being deceitful beyond the confines of the games. Yes, absolutely. Your wins and your losses, lift off the heavy burden of being not responsible because you build a sub-otimum team. Instead do the opposite and say aloud to yourself: Yes, I lost, I failed because I did not build a better team. It is my shortcoming. Not the others are at fault but I will still bear with it. I enjoy my team so I will keep playing with it but it is just my own business. And I will not disrespect others victories by complaining about the match-up.



There's something quite disingenuous about this when you apply it to the box though - it's very possible for a team to come across a much older opponent (eg. a 6 game old team vs a 300 game old team) through absolutely no fault of their own except for having the misfortune to have been the closest team in TV or the only possible match for a draw to be made at that time. You don't have to be "sub-optimally" made, you don't have to be a new coach and you certainly don't have to be a poor one.

You can be building a perfectly optimal team and still get absolutely horsed by the box draw. At any TV, that's life. I'm not particularly taking umbrage with anything else you wrote, but to pretend it's entirely on the coach "with the sub-optimal team" is in my opinion, completely wrong.

_________________
Image
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 22:46 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Hey Wreckage, I've lopped your post down to this since it's basically a summary, if that bothers you, say so and I'll quote and reply to the whole lot.

Wreckage wrote:

I'm all for good rules. Talking about improving the rules is great. Being respectful to each other. Yes. Trying to have a fun experience? Yes. Try your best instead of whining about your losses and you will be able to fully appreciate both and be able to be happy with it. Not being deceitful beyond the confines of the games. Yes, absolutely. Your wins and your losses, lift off the heavy burden of being not responsible because you build a sub-otimum team. Instead do the opposite and say aloud to yourself: Yes, I lost, I failed because I did not build a better team. It is my shortcoming. Not the others are at fault but I will still bear with it. I enjoy my team so I will keep playing with it but it is just my own business. And I will not disrespect others victories by complaining about the match-up.



There's something quite disingenuous about this when you apply it to the box though - it's very possible for a team to come across a much older opponent (eg. a 6 game old team vs a 300 game old team) through absolutely no fault of their own except for having the misfortune to have been the closest team in TV or the only possible match for a draw to be made at that time. You don't have to be "sub-optimally" made, you don't have to be a new coach and you certainly don't have to be a poor one.

You can be building a perfectly optimal team and still get absolutely horsed by the box draw. At any TV, that's life. I'm not particularly taking umbrage with anything else you wrote, but to pretend it's entirely on the coach "with the sub-optimal team" is in my opinion, completely wrong.


Against the beliefs of AD I submit this case in point:

Dakka against any +300 Cpomb team he has the misfortune of encountering after 23:00 BB Time.
arw



Joined: Jan 07, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 23:16 Reply with quote Back to top

When I started playing BB I played in a league in a shop and after a while I started to realize that legends were overpriced. SPP raised your team rating - not the skills, which consequently became extremely expensive the higher you went. Thus it was beneficial to even out the SPP throughout your team. Nowadays it may be the best option to have 1-2 legends. Meanwhile the teams were never ever anywhere near balanced and people have a lot of fun playing the underdogs. Perhaps tomorrow it is really strong to have 8 RR's. If that happened I am sure somebody would get it right, take the challenge and insist to play with zero RR's instead. Because he can. Or dies trying. So errr... whatever dude.

The real problems is the fouls being so weak. Really. It is poison for the BB eco system imho. Among a myriad of other things it would also solve your "1-2 legends" problem.


Last edited by arw on Sep 07, 2016 - 23:26; edited 2 times in total
Mr_Foulscumm



Joined: Mar 05, 2005

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 23:22 Reply with quote Back to top

Timetis wrote:
Throweck wrote:
Verminardo wrote:
The scheduler change has solved this problem. Rookie teams have protection for the first 15 games. I don't see many hardcore minmax teams in Box anymore. I find it interesting how much some people who never play Box think they have to say on the subject.


This is definitely a factor Vermi.

I play Box quite a bit now and in my over 550 box games I remember meeting 3, at most, minmaxed teams (no RR pact in my experience)

I do think there is a culture of jumping on the bandwagon for dissing box, which is a shame. Some coaches play 1 game in box, have a bad experience and that's it. I think it could be an acquired taste perhaps but I don't see a lot wrong with box at the minute. It's where I prefer to play if I don't have league or Tourney games.

What will our 145ers and newer coaches think? Very Happy


What throweck said.


Yeah. I've had the same experience. In fact, I can't actually remember when I faced a min/max team in Box since the scheduler was changed. Running above 500 games or so now. I'm having a blast! Smile

Maybe all the jerks got bored and only the cool kids are left in the division.

_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 23:24 Reply with quote Back to top

On a long enough timeline people who only have one racket get bored as the racket gets destroyed.
Wreckage



Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Post   Posted: Sep 07, 2016 - 23:27 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
You can be building a perfectly optimal team and still get absolutely horsed by the box draw. At any TV, that's life. I'm not particularly taking umbrage with anything else you wrote, but to pretend it's entirely on the coach "with the sub-optimal team" is in my opinion, completely wrong.


Well, if you feel that way, fair enough. I don't want to trample over your feelings, rather wanted to give a positive angle to look at things.
As for myself, I'd still say about a situation like this two things:
First off, I have considered the box my home for a long time. More than any other division. It is the environment I certainly enjoy more than any other.
Originally I was torn between ranked and box but after a while it was only the box that made my pulse racing, that gave me this kick, this true feeling of having entered an unpredictive game. A heavy burden, hard to overcome, however I will do.
I have been this coach and that coach there, i have played the fun team, the ultra competitive team the broken up chaos, the nimble pro elves, ogre and for better or worse I just looove chaos pact.

1. One thing that has been consistent throughout my roughly 1000-2000 games (dunno how many) was that I NEVER really managed to build a team up to a high TV. (like 2200 TV high).
I remember several times missing majors with my pact because I could just not make the TV cut. It's a terrible experience.
After a while you learn to cope with it because getting beat up in box is not all bad. You can cut your losses and start over and you are fine. You actually may end up with a really good team.
I have never done this player cycling thing some coaches swear on as a great meta. But I do not care if others do it. Players get hurt easy enough.
None of this is news but hey doesn't hurt to repeat stuff as it comes up again, right?
My point is being when you see me with a low TV team and a lot of games, perhaps you should steer away from the notion that it somehow my fault and I'm being disingenous on the matchup.
Likewise to imply that to anyone else without knowing the circumstances would be quite rude. Because when you are someone like me who genuinly enjoys team building over everything else you will respect the intense pain that comes with constantly losing valuable key players of whatever kind.

2. Furthermore if I stand on the other side and I play the rookie team I do know in fact that having a new team IS a shortcoming. It is also fair. Because I know as I play on my team will get better and be more competitive. That is how it should be. Playing should feel rewarding. Objective archieved.
It is in fact much fairer than how it was in LRB4 when the old team had the shortcomings compared to the new team, because you had that one player with 4 skills and three niggles that made spill your TR out of control.
You could cut him but then you had to play with sub 11. Either way starting over was so much easier.

No I think this is fairer.

And other than that the only question that is left: In a 4 team blackbox mashup were you are sure to get matched against somebody even if any constallation would be super unfair:

Would you rather be scheduled against the team that only has played 30 games and has 400 TV on you or do you want to play against the team that has played 300 games and has 40 tv less than you?
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by PNphpBB2 1.2 © 2003 PNphpBB Group
Credits