| Poll |
| Hourly box activations? |
| Permantly change box to hourly activations |
|
2% |
[ 3 ] |
| Permantly change box to 30mins peak, hourly offpeak |
|
3% |
[ 4 ] |
| Trial change box to hourly activations |
|
3% |
[ 4 ] |
| Trial change box to 30mins peak, hourly offpeak |
|
24% |
[ 25 ] |
| Change nothing |
|
64% |
[ 66 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 102 |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:05 |
 
|
Medon: the objection to that idea is some coaches might forget they activated and be already offline or doing something else, if too much time has passed.
Therefore the time window should not be too great, like 5-10 minutes, then all teams are deactivated if no game has been found. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %11, %2017 - %20:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
Kondor
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:07 |
|
| Christer wrote: |
I disagree. Inability to get games scheduled would be a sign of a scheduler that is broken. The problem lies deeper than the scheduler.
Basically, the inability to get games is an effect of not enough people activating. Not enough people activating is an effect of people not wanting to play in the environment.
|
This makes sense. I don't know that changing the box would increase the number of games played on Fumbbl. If the basher teams were restricted, would more people come play Fumbbl, or would people who enjoy bashing be less likely to play at all?
Reducing the bash factor may draw people from Ranked and League to the box but I don't know that more people would play on Fumbbl.
For me, the draw for the box is simply being able to pop in, activate my team and get a game without having to negotiate a match-up. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:11 |
|
Getting a game quickly is fine, but it's more appealing if the game is fair, without a massive TV gap and vs a reasonable variety of races/types of teams (finesse/bash/hybrid).
Playing over and over again vs a race gets boring after a while, even when winning, and the teams who can afford to keep high TV are bashers, that often are played by monoactivating coaches.
On top of that we don't have yet seasons (BB2016 seasons I mean) and not all the inducements. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %11, %2017 - %20:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:12 |
|
"Why is the time fixed at 15min? It might be more useful to keep the number of teams in the draw fixed. I.e. there will be a draw as soon as 6 teams are participating. This could take 5mins or 1hr depending on activity"
Because people would activate then go off to the store and buy milk, see and old friend, chat about high-school football, and forget they have a Black Box game scheduled which is tying up someone else's team, thereafter tying up admin to unschedule games.
I like the idea.. but without an Auto-UNscheduler, it would be a headache. WITH an Auto-UNscheduler, no one would go through with a match thay didn't like. |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
Jopotzuki
Joined: Oct 07, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:33 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Jopotzuki wrote: | | Why not make only 1 competitive division where you activate a team and then the machine pairs you with a team of similiar TV/win %/whatever. There are many online games that work like this, for example: Blood bowl 2, Starcraff and Warcraft. In addition you could have leagues like we have now. Or why not make Box work like this? Why does the pairings need to be done at x time? Why can't the machine pair two teams when they are looking for a match?? |
Blood Bowl 2 actually changed to work the way Fumbbl works. But their interval is 5 minutes, not 15.
They use pooling to get better matches. Smaller TV gaps.
Starcraft & Warcraft have huge user bases compared to blood bowl. |
It doesn't make any difference how many people are in the user base. When two equal teams are found they are paired together. I don't see why this woudn't work in Fumbbl. The only thing is that the game could start almost instantly but on the other hand you might end up waiting for a very long time.
What if you would show the TV of teams looking for a match? Then you could choose a team of similiar value and the scheduler would immediately make a pair. You would not see the teams, coaches or choose opponents like in R. Only see the TV to make pairing faster for the scheduler.
But would this benefit the coach entering the scheduler later? I don't think so because you only see TV and let the scheduler do it's tricks. |
_________________
| Kam wrote: | | My Flings also disappear when they're blocked... I knew that was a bug! |
| ThierryM wrote: | | CR... The synonym of E-Penis right ? |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:43 |
|
Blackboard really isn't that bashy. Especially with PO gone. Yes, the NA timezone is aligned around X teams who are only activated by Y coaches. But they are statistical outliers.
At this point you have to accept people pick ranked over box because of reasons outwith of bloodbowl. Whether you can swallow that or not depends on a lot if things.
Eg. How many coaches do you play with avg CR over 155 for a start. |
_________________
 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 20:44 |
|
| Jopotzuki wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | Jopotzuki wrote: | | Why not make only 1 competitive division where you activate a team and then the machine pairs you with a team of similiar TV/win %/whatever. There are many online games that work like this, for example: Blood bowl 2, Starcraff and Warcraft. In addition you could have leagues like we have now. Or why not make Box work like this? Why does the pairings need to be done at x time? Why can't the machine pair two teams when they are looking for a match?? |
Blood Bowl 2 actually changed to work the way Fumbbl works. But their interval is 5 minutes, not 15.
They use pooling to get better matches. Smaller TV gaps.
Starcraft & Warcraft have huge user bases compared to blood bowl. |
It doesn't make any difference how many people are in the user base. When two equal teams are found they are paired together. I don't see why this woudn't work in Fumbbl. The only thing is that the game could start almost instantly but on the other hand you might end up waiting for a very long time.
What if you would show the TV of teams looking for a match? Then you could choose a team of similiar value and the scheduler would immediately make a pair. You would not see the teams, coaches or choose opponents like in R. Only see the TV to make pairing faster for the scheduler.
But would this benefit the coach entering the scheduler later? I don't think so because you only see TV and let the scheduler do it's tricks. |
The size of the userbase matters because with a small userbase you could have a long wait before you find two even teams.
I don't think people will want pickers to see the TVs of teams in the scheduler. People to make sure they have the biggest TV. They'll wait to activate until they see a cherry. Just as they wait now to avoid Smallman.  |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 21:23 |
|
Ah yes, I actually forgot there for a second how little of value actually comes out of these threads. PM me once we have a breakthrough |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 11, 2017 - 22:31 |
|
| Christer wrote: | | Then use either some variation of the official seasonal rules on the blackbox division (still using the same scheduler), or simply have an end-season thing where all teams are yet again moved over to R. |
That is almost as awful as Smallman's suggestion 
You are talking about some kind of short sprints league.
I do wonder why people haven't returned seeing as Piling On was removed, but we should also bear in mind that total games on the site are in a slow but steady decline. The Blood Bowl tabletop game rerelease hasn't increased numbers here. Perhaps it has limited decline.
Anyway specifically for the Box I think enforcing that people have to activate at least 2 teams of different type might help. But it is hard to be sure without testing. People who favour one playstyle (whatever it is they like) can be put off. |
_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.” |
|
smallman
Joined: Sep 24, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 00:13 |
|
| Christer wrote: |
I've seen a bunch of various suggestions for how to "fix" the division, and I'm honestly of two minds. Either I tell you guys to harden up and accept the division for what it is, or I try to come up with an *actual* fix that addresses the core problem: Bashy minmaxers.
. |
Sigh. I think you are wrong. I doubt many people are trying to avoid the 2x a day I activate my 1470 non DP renegades. When PO was removed I was activating most of my teams again.
One problem is maxmax bashers, and the scheduler letting them play with a 1mil TV advantage. I only activate my renegades as they are my only team that still has a chance with a 1mil TV gap. I also dream of having 2x 6st tentacles.
Waiting for box to slowly die is silly. Surely most of the suggestions are a simple programming change. Where is the harm in a trial? Especially atleast change offpeak when no games get played anyway. |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 00:17 |
|
I agree with many of the previous posts that the problem is the nature of the environment and not the 15-minute activation time. I've been thinking about this for a while and, in my opinion, there are problems with both the R and B divisions:
R is trying to be some strange hybrid division between serious/competitive and casual, where you can pick whichever games you want, but still gain a (largely meaningless) ranking by doing it, as well as winning tourneys if you spend enough time pimping up a team.
B is plagued by minmaxers/monoactivators, who can basically prey on others without any real disincentive to do so.
In my opinion, the site really needs a from-scratch re-think of how the main divisions are structured (although I understand that doing that would be risky).
For example, something I've thought about is what if we just had one 'competitive' division, where the games are scheduled (like Box), but the ranking system heavily favours those that play a variety of different races (or race categories). Let's say, there is a monthly rating cycle, where your overall rating is the average over 4-5 racial categories. Then, players get awarded monthly medals for the top 10 or so overall ratings. Also, you can throw in the monthly racial medals and make those 'official'. If that division is the only place on the site where you can get 'e-bling' or ratings or whatever, then competitive people will flock to it.
In general, I think people's behaviour can be heavily influenced by changing their rewards system, and more could be done on FUMBBL to make it more balanced.
Personally, I've been having a lot more fun in L than in either R or B recently, and it's interesting that L now seems to be solidly ahead of B in terms of games being played. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 00:36 |
|
| garyt1 wrote: |
Anyway specifically for the Box I think enforcing that people have to activate at least 2 teams of different type might help. But it is hard to be sure without testing. People who favour one playstyle (whatever it is they like) can be put off. |
I'd say 3 teams, just to keep the sort of split there is among basher/baller/tweener, but ultimately yeah, forcing people to multi-activate addresses multiple issues simultaneously.
The cost?
Yes, people who can't be bothered to play more than one team won't like it. I truly wonder exactly how many of them there are though, as when you look at most coach pages they have multiple teams in R and B and even L and S.
But any change, meaningful change, is going to require people to change the way they think about what B 'should be'. Of course it's ultimately up to Christer to decide what's worth his time to do. Still, any change which doesn't encourage multi-activation is a temporary fix seemingly. We all know where these things end up eventually. |
|
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 02:14 |
|
How about a new and completly revolutionary division?
"The GRID"
A FUMBBL award, "GRID Champion Q1 2018" is given every 3 months for the highest scoring coach in the division. Scoring resets end month, teams can stay.
You MUST have exactly 1 of EVERY team, no more or less. (24 teams)
There are 4 catagories of GRID team:
Bashers: Dwarf, Chaos, Choas Dwarf, Chaos Pact, Ork, Nurgle, Khemri
Ballers: Pro Elf, High Elf, Dark Elf, Wood Elf, Skaven
Betweeners: Human, Amazon, Slann, Vampire, Norse, Underworld, Lizardmen, Necro, Undead
Bonkers: Goblin, Halfling, Ogre
You MUST activate 1 of each of the 4 types of team for a draw, unless all those teams have played once.
Once you have played with all 24 teams, you may start the grid again, and attempt to improve your score.
2 points for a win, 1 point for a draw. Perfect score of 48 points if all 24 of your teams manage to win. At seasons end, the award goes to the coach who completed the perfect score in the least amount of games, starting with any single win. (The shortest sprint duration wins)
The pairing can use the same mechanic as Black Box, or not, who cares.
GRID Games can affect CR, or not, who cares.
GRID Teams can be moved out to Ranked or Box to compete in tourneys, or not, who cares.
GRID could eventually have it's own Major, or not, who cares.
I personally would play in this division night and day. I'd also donate hundreds of dollars to see it become a reality. I'd love fluffing the teams.. I'd love how perfectly orderly that section of my homepage would look, with exactly 24 teams.
Does this sound like a perfect recipe for a divorce, or what? |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 02:15 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: |
In general, I think people's behaviour can be heavily influenced by changing their rewards system, and more could be done on FUMBBL to make it more balanced. |
I wouldn't agree with "heavily". Not unless you're handing out hard cash.
Incentives are good and will work with some people. But others just want to play a game that they enjoy.
| JellyBelly wrote: |
Personally, I've been having a lot more fun in L than in either R or B recently, and it's interesting that L now seems to be solidly ahead of B in terms of games being played. |
Competition. [L]eague is better than it used to be. Cyanide is better than it used to be.
| licker wrote: |
The cost?
Yes, people who can't be bothered to play more than one team won't like it. I truly wonder exactly how many of them there are though, as when you look at most coach pages they have multiple teams in R and B and even L and S.
|
Well, if we're rehashing old ideas...
Run two draws as normal and two with forced diversity.
The forced diversity should be less of an issue now there are no CPOMBers. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 02:17 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
