18 coaches online • Server time: 07:53
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post UW Goblins - Disturb...goto Post SWL Fantasy League S...goto Post Is kicking first wit...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
mdd31



Joined: Oct 23, 2014

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 02:06 Reply with quote Back to top

Is it possible that the required minimum number of teams for a Blackbox draw could be lowered from 4 to 3? Yes this would leave 1 team out but if there are 3 then at least there is a decent chance 2 of them might be in the same TV range.

It is so hard to find a BB game and it seems like every time there are 3 coaches in the draw so nothing happens. Getting that 4th coach is tough especially for players in the NA time zone.
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 08:31 Reply with quote Back to top

see this thread, same idea, more comprehensively explained and discusssed.. but yea i agree

https://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=29127
mdd31



Joined: Oct 23, 2014

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 18:46 Reply with quote Back to top

Good thread but it is still talking about 4 person draws. I am purposing a 3 person draw and if the 3 teams do not match up then of course there would be no game but at least give the teams a chance to match up. Just had my 6th attempted draw this week and it was 3 coaches so no team had a chance to match up. All 6 of those match ups had just 3 coaches, its like getting a 4th coach is impossible or something.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 19:21 Reply with quote Back to top

+1, it's better to give 2 coaches a match than give 3 coaches no match.

_________________
Please vote the Diving Catch and Break Tackle/Diving Tackle bug reports, thanks!
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 19:26 Reply with quote Back to top

It was still 4 coaches required for a draw yea.
This is to prevent collusion
Augustine



Joined: Jul 17, 2017

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 20:52 Reply with quote Back to top

3 team activations, no. I dont think this will create more matches overall, often same 3 coaches activate repeatedly for a few rounds (imo) until a 4th joins then all 4 get a game , if 2 pair off straight away because of 3 activations required rule , 1 will be left unmatched awaiting 2 more for a chance at a game and potentially have a longer wait then previously.

Or more likely give up altogether as they know a match is unlikely for a while. Leaving only one match played out. = Less matches in the box during quiet periods.


I would rather during the quiet periods activations spread out more - ie every 30mins or hour.(But that has potential negative effects as well.)
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 21:20 Reply with quote Back to top

One of the problems with the NA period is that there are known single-team activators (at high tv) in a very small pool. This complicates matters in that you frequently have (out of the other potential matches) only low tv teams to pair them with, or coaches who avoid draws while said coaches are online.

A 3 coach draw would probably leave a certain coach without a game for months on end.

_________________
Image
licker



Joined: Jul 10, 2009

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 23:20 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
One of the problems with the NA period is that there are known single-team activators (at high tv) in a very small pool. This complicates matters in that you frequently have (out of the other potential matches) only low tv teams to pair them with, or coaches who avoid draws while said coaches are online.

A 3 coach draw would probably leave a certain coach without a game for months on end.


So?

He's already not getting the games when there is no draw anyway.

The whole notion that you need to prevent collusion is based off of paranoia anyway, there is really no value to having that restriction, all it does is make NA a total wasteland for B activations.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Oct 03, 2017 - 23:33 Reply with quote Back to top

A system that prevents 2 coaches from playing more than 1 match in a row in Black Box would partially counter collusion.
The Black Box collusion paranoia is quite funny, considering that coaches can arrange matches in Ranked, if they really want to play collusion matches.

_________________
Please vote the Diving Catch and Break Tackle/Diving Tackle bug reports, thanks!
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 00:40 Reply with quote Back to top

Collusion is especially absurd in Box when the practical outcome of collusion already happens: I've had several back to back games against the same coaches with the same teams. In fact I had 4 in a row with a particularly unlucky Norse coach. If you can't distinguish collusion from normalcy in a normal situation then why worry about collusion at all?
BillBrasky



Joined: Feb 15, 2005

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 01:06 Reply with quote Back to top

My norse just got banged!
pythrr



Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 01:58 Reply with quote Back to top

BillBrasky wrote:
My norse just got banged!


bang all norses!

more seriously tho, if NA coaches stopped mono-activating, it would help matters quite a lot.

_________________
Image
Image
smallman



Joined: Sep 24, 2007

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 02:50 Reply with quote Back to top

15min activations are killing box. It will revitalize big time if was 30 mins peak and 1 hour in off peak
BubbaDave



Joined: May 19, 2008

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 03:28 Reply with quote Back to top

Speaking only for myself, if I realize I just missed an activation I might wait 14 minutes for the next draw, but if I know it's going to be 29 or 59 minutes I'll say the heck with it and go read a book or something.
garyt1



Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Post   Posted: Oct 04, 2017 - 08:04 Reply with quote Back to top

We need to get more of those NA tt players or Cyanide playing on FUMBBL somehow. Less activations wont help anyone and I can see the reason for 4 minimum. Augustine also points out that you may not get so many more draws even if 3 activators were allowed as minimum. Also TV gaps would be bigger with 3 minimum.
I think playing twice in a row isnt too bad either, if can be less interesting. Well, except I played WMDs with my Undead on the weekend and escaped with a win ,so would rather not have played them again next match when I lost and he killed my ag4 ghoul Very Happy

_________________
A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by PNphpBB2 1.2 © 2003 PNphpBB Group
Credits