FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

MattDakka

Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 21:02

Arktoris wrote:

As for the "unfair" matching of 1600 vs 2500, let's be honest. 99% of the time that's not due to the 1600 being young or down on its luck...it's because the coach is intentionally holding back their development so as to gain an unearned advantage with free inducements. It's abuse of that charity.

Not true. It happens quite often to teams not deliberately holding back their development, but just punished because they were activated at the same time of a monoactivating high TV team coach (I can provide examples if you want).
Moreover, not all races benefit from increasing their TV to dizzying heights, so, even assuming that a coach doesn't hold back his Norse or another team not greatly performing at high TV, he will be playing at a disadvantage when matched vs high TV strong teams like Chaos, Nurgle, Dwarfs, Orcs etc.

Arktoris wrote:

now that overdogs can spend cash without penalty, they can defend themselves better vs those "gaming the system".

Nope, those gaming the system either monoactivate high TV teams or just cycle strong tier 1 teams after few games. These are the 2 most common exploits.

Last edited by MattDakka on %b %26, %2018 - %21:%Jul; edited 2 times in total

ph0enyx13

Joined: Nov 14, 2015

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 21:02

mrt1212 wrote:

ph0enyx13 wrote:

High Elves should have a bonus for expensive mistakes so they can be richer than other teams

I like where this is going!

Makes sense for the fluff. Maybe Khemri too because they would be rich with gold from pyramids right?

Garion

Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 21:23

Arktoris wrote:

I will however agree, EM should be coupled to seasons. My suggestion is for Ranked and Box season to end one week before the next major. You want a better team for tourneys? Stop sitting on the sidelines and play and play a team others want to play against.

It'll boost game volume on the site.

Cant agree with this. EM has a few reasons for being. 1 it stops some teams accruing huge amounts of money. 2 makes the re-build a little trickier after heavy bashing, to keep teams in the TV sweet spot 1300 - 2300 ish, where the game designers want the games to be played. As their belief is balance is lost once TVs become too bloated.

I don't see why it needs to be tied to Seasons. Seasons just mean you fire your best player every now and then. I don't see any fun in that...

Also some people dont give a stuff about majors, and some people only play 1 game a month, they shouldn't have to go through a Season every time they log on.

Seasons has no place in the open divisions really.

I think I would rather the optional PO was brought back than that. (2016 edition Optional Piling On rule is - requires a team Re-roll to use)
This would increase attrition again.

However the real question remains.....

Is there actually a problem with teams growing to 3000 tv? does it cause any issues really. because if not then there is no point in thinking about seasons or Piling On.

_________________

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 21:45

MattDakka wrote:

mrt1212 wrote:

I am mono activating my fat elves to build the team up to ridiculous heights again.

I will try to build my CR up to ridiculous heights, instead (too bad there is no CR decay).
This requires actual coach's skill and not just spending time and farming players.

mrt1212 wrote:

Is a 1500 Khemri team with only 3 TGs really equal to two full strength teams at 1500 over the course of 2-3 games? Is an Undead team with only 1 Mummy for 2 or 3 games really a TV equal above 1400 to another team?

We should check the rosters, but my point is that the game with the 1500 Khemri with only 3 TGs vs two full strength teams at 1500 will be more balanced than a game with a 1500 Khemri team vs a 2000+ TV team.
I never said that same TV means complete balance, but that TV gaps games are not balanced.
It's better to reduce as much as possible the unbalance in match-ups in a competitive TV-matchmaking division.

mrt1212 wrote:

You subjectively imagine Box to be one thing and then build this supposed logical framework around that opinion to exclude what happens right in front of your face as an aberration.

Ah, then what is the competitive alternative to Box? Ranked? Come on...

mrt1212 wrote:

It'll never cease to make me chuckle that you earnestly believe what you believe is some universal truth and not just one person's opinion or preference. Tell me, is it lonely being the only person who knows objective facts in the world? Or is it fun not recognizing other people as people with their own desires, interests and opinions?

It'll never cease to amaze me that you don't grasp simple concepts like: "it's better to avoid massive TV gaps to ensure a reasonable degree of balance in TV-matchmaking division".
I understand people have different opinions, desires and feelings about the same matter, but when they play in a specific matchmaking division there should be opinions' convergence towards balance.
Otherwise, as I said in the past, we could throw to the wind the scheduler and just let totally random matches happen.
Do you think that would make more appealing playing in the Box to the people?
I think not, and I'm deliberately exaggerating this concept to make evident that more balanced games are more appealing than less balanced games.
Anyway, if TV gaps must happen in the Box, then ALL the inducements must be implemented first, otherwise the lack of full inducements it's an extra factor of unfairness.

So you disregard what Im playing in Box for and superimpose what youre playing for and still slide a gripe about what it should be with CR Decay? Your selective exclusion of evidence is hilarious given your posturing as the sole arbiter of objectivity.

Also, you think in such binary terms and are so apt to invoke false dichotomies that it is totally fruitless to have any meaningful conversation with you.

Box is a lot of things. Ranked is a lot of things. You can only imagine either as one thing diametrically opposed to the another which undercuts any value you could impart to any conversation about either. You see things purely in black and white missing a spectrum of color. Box allows games to happen that are a direct contradiction of your competitive ideal and you refuse to even acknowledge that.

Also try and stop yourself from Strawmans. I havent once invoked Ranked here and yet you keep circling back to it unprompted in some fallacious attempt to edify your preference.

Youve constructed an entirely self serving concept of fairness, purpose of venue and the way things should be and that you refuse to even entertain that youve done this is all that needs to be said on the matter. Your blind spots speak louder than your words.

You want Box to be the competitive division to stroke your own ego. Its transparent and childish and the only person youre fooling with your haphazard invocation of logic is yourself.

garyt1

Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 22:20

The main impact of EM as it is applied is to make things even tougher for teams that are not doing well and have expensive players.
Ogre team loses an Ogre... have to save up a couple of games because EM took some of my cash... Oh no another Ogre lost in the next game or 2..staring down the barrel again. But at least not losing them as quick as in the clawpomb days!
I've also been struggling with Humans and blitzers for a while. Lose two blitzers and you have a lot of cash to save up if you haven't been lucky with EM rolls.
If you aren't losing pricey players much then you probably still have money to spend on some inducements.
All that said I don't hate EM, just a mild dislike. It stops big bank accounts being saved up, if that is an issue.

_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.”

Tricktickler

Joined: Jul 10, 2004

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 22:26

MattDakka wrote:

Not the death of progression Blood Bowl, players could get some skills even with Seasons, there would just be fewer super skilled players around

Players get skills in non-progression too. In a typical non-progession tournament you start with 1100 TV to buy a team and then you add 4 skills. So you basically start at 1180 TV. Then you add another 4 skills during the tournament so at the end of the tournament the team will be at 1260 TV. So you basically play in a range from 1180-1260 TV.

Seasons are similar to this. If a season is 10 games long you start with 1100 TV to re-purchase the team (plus some bonuses if you made a lot of TDs and cas). Then during the 10 game long season the team will grow up to 1200 TV or something like that depending on how much SPPs you manage to get. And then after the season it will restart at 1100 again. So you will basically play in a range from 1100 to 1200 TV (plus bonuses from TDs and cas). So the end results of both systems are very similar since you are limited to play in a certain range.

Last edited by Tricktickler on %b %26, %2018 - %22:%Jul; edited 1 time in total

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 22:26

Garion wrote:

Arktoris wrote:

I will however agree, EM should be coupled to seasons. My suggestion is for Ranked and Box season to end one week before the next major. You want a better team for tourneys? Stop sitting on the sidelines and play and play a team others want to play against.

It'll boost game volume on the site.

Cant agree with this. EM has a few reasons for being. 1 it stops some teams accruing huge amounts of money. 2 makes the re-build a little trickier after heavy bashing, to keep teams in the TV sweet spot 1300 - 2300 ish, where the game designers want the games to be played. As their belief is balance is lost once TVs become too bloated.

I don't see why it needs to be tied to Seasons. Seasons just mean you fire your best player every now and then. I don't see any fun in that...

Also some people dont give a stuff about majors, and some people only play 1 game a month, they shouldn't have to go through a Season every time they log on.

Seasons has no place in the open divisions really.

I think I would rather the optional PO was brought back than that. (2016 edition Optional Piling On rule is - requires a team Re-roll to use)
This would increase attrition again.

However the real question remains.....

Is there actually a problem with teams growing to 3000 tv? does it cause any issues really. because if not then there is no point in thinking about seasons or Piling On.

The biggest issue 3k teams cause in Box is pre game fatalism or pessimism among those not expecting it. Great coaches confident in their own abilities see the cracks and weak spots on the beast and know how to deal accordingly.

Rather than treat it as a test of mettle, patience and forethought its a rigged game against you.

Fwiw a 3000 vs 2000 game is a lot more even than say a 1300 vs 2300 and treating the two as similar because of the identical TV gap is a disservice to wisdom and a contradiction to my experience.

koadah

Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 22:44

Tricktickler wrote:

MattDakka wrote:

Not the death of progression Blood Bowl, players could get some skills even with Seasons, there would just be fewer super skilled players around

Players get skills in non-progression too. In a typical non-progession tournament you start with 1100 TV to buy a team and then you add 4 skills. So you basically start at 1180 TV. Then you add another 4 skills during the tournament so at the end of the tournament the team will be at 1260 TV. So you basically play in a range from 1180-1260 TV.

Seasons are similar to this. If a season is 10 games long you start with 1100 TV to re-purchase the team (plus some bonuses if you made a lot of TDs and cas). Then during the 10 game long season the team will grow up to 1200 TV or something like that depending on how much SPPs you manage to get. And then after the season it will restart at 1100 again. So you will basically play in a range from 1100 to 1200 TV (plus bonuses from TDs and cas). So the end results of both systems are very similar since you are limited to play in a certain range.

Though the commish does not have to impose a 10 game season. For R & B a season could be 20-30 games. Though as the Box Trophy is 40 games it wouldn't make sense to end a season before that.

_________________

O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 4 more teams needed

Garion

Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 22:50

Tricktickler wrote:

MattDakka wrote:

Not the death of progression Blood Bowl, players could get some skills even with Seasons, there would just be fewer super skilled players around

Players get skills in non-progression too. In a typical non-progession tournament you start with 1100 TV to buy a team and then you add 4 skills. So you basically start at 1180 TV. Then you add another 4 skills during the tournament so at the end of the tournament the team will be at 1260 TV. So you basically play in a range from 1180-1260 TV.

Seasons are similar to this. If a season is 10 games long you start with 1100 TV to re-purchase the team (plus some bonuses if you made a lot of TDs and cas). Then during the 10 game long season the team will grow up to 1200 TV or something like that depending on how much SPPs you manage to get. And then after the season it will restart at 1100 again. So you will basically play in a range from 1100 to 1200 TV (plus bonuses from TDs and cas). So the end results of both systems are very similar since you are limited to play in a certain range.

Its not that limiting. It can keep you between 1000 - 2200 tv really. But it really depends how long your seasons are, as this really determines how much money you get to re-draft. It also depends how good you are, as the seasons rules punish people that are not very good. because you get more money for TD and Cas the money will invariably be going towards the more successful teams.

mrt1212 wrote:

The biggest issue 3k teams cause in Box is pre game fatalism or pessimism among those not expecting it. Great coaches confident in their own abilities see the cracks and weak spots on the beast and know how to deal accordingly.

You are correct here, I'm with you 100%. But it doesn't actually matter what we know. Because you need to cater for more than the hard core coaches that know how to deal with these situations. If these huge TVs scare people away from playing then that is a bad thing period.

_________________

Zirgantz

Joined: May 30, 2017

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 23:12

I'm just going to drop by to answer the question and steer clear of the debate it sparkled. As a player who came to discover & play on fumbbl's Blackbox from Cyanide's BB1&BB2, there is a lot of things I love about the way fumbbl handles Blood Bowl, but expensive mistakes aren't one.

If they started at 150k, it would feel less punishing after meeting violent teams, rather than having to trudge through several games with a hobbled team to get back to where you were, hence taking more and more damage in the process, before eventually realising that if your objective is just to play a game or two after work with a semi-competitive mindset (ie, short term goal of winning that/those games) then you're much better off throwing away that team you used to enjoy so much and starting a new one, because chances are you will be stuck in that rebuilding phase forever.

garyt1

Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 23:21

Exactly. Expensive Mistakes adds punishment to teams that take some beatings. A significant effect. While the limitation to successful teams of no longer being able to save giant treasuries is not a great benefit. Probably it makes people more pixel huggery as not only may they lose skilled players, they may not even be able to afford the rookie replacements.

_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.”

koadah

Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 23:21

razmus wrote:

It does appear that EM brackets are currently adjustable by ruleset. It'd be nice, in the case of the Secret Leagues, if the brackets were set even higher than has already been proposed -- maybe 200k before EM kicks in? 100k tiers after that is probably fine, but 150k tiers wouldn't make me sad. There are several 'big guy' players in Secret Leagues in the 160-200k purchase range, and it's a little disheartening to get a bad earnings roll just to lose 10-30k when you're trying to replace your centerpiece player.

Garion is about again. Mr. Green

There could be a riot though. Wink

_________________

O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 4 more teams needed

Tricktickler

Joined: Jul 10, 2004

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 23:32

koadah wrote:

Tricktickler wrote:

MattDakka wrote:

Not the death of progression Blood Bowl, players could get some skills even with Seasons, there would just be fewer super skilled players around

Players get skills in non-progression too. In a typical non-progession tournament you start with 1100 TV to buy a team and then you add 4 skills. So you basically start at 1180 TV. Then you add another 4 skills during the tournament so at the end of the tournament the team will be at 1260 TV. So you basically play in a range from 1180-1260 TV.

Seasons are similar to this. If a season is 10 games long you start with 1100 TV to re-purchase the team (plus some bonuses if you made a lot of TDs and cas). Then during the 10 game long season the team will grow up to 1200 TV or something like that depending on how much SPPs you manage to get. And then after the season it will restart at 1100 again. So you will basically play in a range from 1100 to 1200 TV (plus bonuses from TDs and cas). So the end results of both systems are very similar since you are limited to play in a certain range.

Though the commish does not have to impose a 10 game season. For R & B a season could be 20-30 games. Though as the Box Trophy is 40 games it wouldn't make sense to end a season before that.

The longer a season is the more it is like progression and if a season was infinitely long it would be exactly like progression.

But let's say a season is 40 games long in blackbox. It would mean that all teams start at 1400 TV (plus bonuses) every new season. Why skip the range 1000-1390? Though I guess you could just start an entirely new team though if you want to play that range.

Anyway, if the seasons are long they stop resemble non-progression tournaments and they instead start functioning as a kind of upper limit of how large teams can grow in progression. Personally I think aging would be a better mechanism to achieve that.

Last edited by Tricktickler on %b %26, %2018 - %23:%Jul; edited 2 times in total

PurpleChest

Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Posted: Jul 26, 2018 - 23:34

FUMBBL Staff

Ok, first I wanted to correct mrt1212 and MattDakka, the windmills are real, it is their existence as Dragons that is illusion. It is such a lovely reference that it ought to be used correctly. Thankfully Mr Gilliam's film is due imminently and will solve this.

Then I wanted to rant and rave about MattDakka thinking his emperical feelings and preferences could pass as objective logic. But others beat me to it.

then this caught my eye. As good an example of opinion and prejudice stated as fact as you will find.

Arktoris wrote:

EM is a major improvement over aging and SE in the sense that it doesn't punish success.

In the terms by which you have chosen to define success.

Quote:

It is the goal of kids to want to become teenagers, teens to grown ups, grown ups to spouses/parents, and workers to retirement.

Cute analogy, but is it true? I know of lot of people fearful and resentful of each of those changes. people who really gained a lot of self respect from work hating retirement, people popular at school feeling lost in university. I also know people that have sweet spotted their life, refusing to move to the next stage as you feel they should.

Quote:

Aging and SE caused too much arrested development.

According to the extensive study you have done of the peak way to obtain happiness from differing board games and their in game values?

Quote:

the game gets more exciting as the TV goes up...hence why 2500TV games have more spectators.

Or they come for blood, or the notoriety of the coaches, or the 'major' tag, or the presence of others. Your guess as to why this observable effect happens might be right, but it is an opinion.

Quote:

As for the "unfair" matching of 1600 vs 2500, let's be honest. 99% of the time that's not due to the 1600 being young or down on its luck...it's because the coach is intentionally holding back their development so as to gain an unearned advantage with free inducements. It's abuse of that charity.

Judgemental much? Perhaps they enjoy playing that race at that TV? And are you saying the smaller team with the inducements is the favorite, with their unfair advantage? this feels like personal rage over a result or two dressed in the ragged clothes of opinion and playing the role of fact. All I can really add is 'who hurt you? and do you want to talk about it?'

Quote:

now that overdogs can spend cash without penalty, they can defend themselves better vs those "gaming the system".

Wow. Lets just swap "gaming the system" for "not playing Blood Bowl the way i feel it should be", identify it as the spoilt princess hissy fit it is and move on.

Quote:

SE starting at 100k is fine. It rarely kicks in and when it does, it's minor.

To me, and my teams, in my experiences. i actually agree, but am aware its my opinion.

Quote:

I will however agree, EM should be coupled to seasons. My suggestion is for Ranked and Box season to end one week before the next major. You want a better team for tourneys? Stop sitting on the sidelines and play and play a team others want to play against.

Even here you can't resist agenda forwarding, and are trying to force me, and others, to game in your way, as you define. Well, I won't. And nor will anyone else.

Quote:

It'll boost game volume on the site.

You are totally guessing, without evidence and based on your unacknowledged prejudices, preconceptions and guesses. Nice 'sell line' though.

I think we should ban people that assert opinion as objective fact, that way everyone will get a free pony. And cookies.

_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Jul 27, 2018 - 00:02

Garion wrote:

mrt1212 wrote:

The biggest issue 3k teams cause in Box is pre game fatalism or pessimism among those not expecting it. Great coaches confident in their own abilities see the cracks and weak spots on the beast and know how to deal accordingly.

You are correct here, I'm with you 100%. But it doesn't actually matter what we know. Because you need to cater for more than the hard core coaches that know how to deal with these situations. If these huge TVs scare people away from playing then that is a bad thing period.

Well that's the conundrum isn't it? If there are only 4 coaches and one of them is me with these gaudy ridiculous teams is it better for everyone to simply not activate and leave 3 hanging?

Do I bite the bullet every time and simply play teams at lower TV that I find kind of boring and eventually and invariably wind up making into a monstrosity anyway like I have with Dwarves twice over?

With a team in the 3k range literally the only time they'll find games in Box is if they're the sole team I activate and if at least one other coach activates a somewhat aged team. Otherwise every other team lower than them in TV will pounce on those matches. For a while I've been activating these the Whalelf and what were previously 1700-1800 Dwarves. I pounced on every single match in that situation with the Dwarves, sometimes the under sometimes the over.

Additionally they'll almost only find a game if there is an even amount of coaches. If there is an odd amount I will almost always be the odd man out unless two other coaches are strictly activating only long lived or short lived teams

Me: 3100 High Elves
Coach B: 1000 Undead, 1000 Dwarves, 1100 Humans
Coach C: 1050 Necromantic, 1050 Amazons, 1150 Lizardmen
Coach D: 1200 Khemri, 1200 Norse, 1250 Slann, 1800 Chaos Dwarves
Coach E: 1800 Chaos, 1800 Nurgle

Pairings should shape up as B+C and D+E. If Coach D doesn't have that 1800 Chaos Dwarves in there then it would likely be coach E + Me and then either B+C or C+D or B+D.

So while I am a likely primary factor in this, it takes at least two other coaches activating the exact teams they want without a suitable partner in age and TV to allow me a game in odd number situations.

I've had several missed activations with even 7 coaches because of this. Which is fine, I'm patient and know that there are better pairings out there and that's the life of Box.

The last piece of the puzzle is more a philosophical question: "Should people even try or be allowed to build a monster team?" to which I respond "Well it just happens!" It's happened with one of my Dwarf teams and it seems to be happening again with the other. I could meticulously prune them and carry only 12 or 13 players but within the systems of the game they're going to grow. And grow. and grow. I will induce an Apo if I have the cash in the treasury to do so and am facing a team with ClawMB which is relatively recent but treasury is basically use it or lose it and there is perilous little incentive to save cash beyond 100 or so if you have 1 or less players that cost that much to replace.

I'm not really in the business of telling others how to Blood Bowl which binds me to letting anything and everything go in every regard. Purpose of play, venue of play, style of play, anything and everything you can think of. It's why Dakka's insistence on what Box is drives me wild because not only am I directly contradictory of that belief (Oh and I do it to spite the people that say Ranked is for building fat teams to prove to them they're wrong. They said I was mad but who is mad when I show them up and violate some personal belief in the sanctity of balance that is predicated on another erroneous belief that it can't be done at all), I've encountered so many others like myself who simply play Box to alleviate themselves of the guilt of playing teams they enjoy or even simply finding people willing to play specific team types that wouldn't get much traction in Ranked.

FWIW, I've been playing for 5 years now and think I have almost 90% of possible matchups played in Box with 3000 games played so it's not like I haven't tried it all. I had a 2K Gobbo team for Nuffle's sake.

The ruleset finally caught up to what I always wanted to do and was trying to do and just made it easier. And from what I can tell by my recently played games with the Whalelf, I have only been matched against coaches that have been around for a while and know what I'm about. The outcomes have been pretty even overall - I'm definitely not dominating like some would imagine and again, that's cause I'm not a great coach and you can probably tell by my insistence on trying to build the most ridiculous fat team in Box and Ranked. Teams are only tools to express our abilities, they don't make a game in itself.