Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
  Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 12:55 |
 
|
Whats the FUMBBL policy on this? Would it be possible to offer a prize to the winner of a (maybe only private) tournament in terms of extra winnings, free wizard for next game, a Goblin or so?
I am well aware that this might open a window for filthy cheaters to maximise their team, but surely something could be done to eliminate that threat?
For example, once teams enter a tournament with a prize they are from that date never allowed to play games outside the tournament?
Ideas and/or an official statement would be appreciated.
Mithrilpoint |
|
|
Quod
Joined: May 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 13:00 |
|
I personally would love to see the "cup" rewards being able to be handed out, but I can only imagine the nightmare of code that would require. |
_________________
Teams
Vae, puto deus fio! |
|
Muyske
Joined: Feb 02, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 13:15 |
|
I don't think handing out prizes like extra winnings or a free wizard should be a big problem. You could cheat by organizing 2 team tournaments, but this could be solved by only allowing tournaments with for example at least 16 teams these prizes. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 13:30 |
|
restrict even more the acces to that team.
For example, you're team wouldn't be U anymore but [restricted:mithrilpoints tournament]
what do you think about it? |
|
|
Sparticus
Joined: Jan 31, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 13:34 |
|
or i would like to see things like the fumbbl cup, greenhorn,chaos cup ect,ect being played more requalry... |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 13:34 |
|
| Quote: | | For example, you're team wouldn't be U anymore but [restricted:mithrilpoints tournament] |
Sounds good to me, kinda like what i myself suggested. Is this possible to do right now? (some fancy html-tag-script-mumbo-jumbo i don´t know). or maybe possible to do from the group menu?
But anyway, there should probably be some standardization on which prizes are allowed.
Mith |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:09 |
|
Well why not appoint a Prize coordinator on the site (to save christer the hassle of being asked) who would be strict and all cup/ league prizes would have to be passed through the Prize coordinator. That seems the most likely and fair solution as The Spike trophy etc are in the LRB. Now someone sensible would need to be appointed who wouldnt give prizes away willy-nilly and of course it wouldnt apply to [R] or [DX]. what are peoples thoughts on this (looking to the chiefs of fumbbl here!  ) |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:24 |
|
Well, i´m not one of the chiefs of FUMBBL, but i´ll speak anyway...
I don´t know about that idea, Browwnrob_ni. It seems to me that the smarter way of doing it (for starters, anyway) is to select 3, 5 or maybe even 10 prizes that league commish´s are allowed to choose from. I think we have enough "appointments" on this site.
But any way the allmighty admins want to slice it is fine by me, as long as prizes are - in some manner - allowed.....
M
Edit : just the obvious spelling |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:31 |
|
well all im saying is that team a may win a 4 team tourney and the resulting reward is a MVP on all his players! what if he ran a tourney like that a week later and the same team won...
I think an admin would be better as consideration can be given to each application for a prize for their tournament (etc how long the tourney has been running (Like Flix's league, EMU etc) or one just starting up. you also have to consider starting TR's of teams etc as its easy to set up a tourney with 1 tr200 and the rest tr100 if you see what i mean.
I wanna see it yes but i want it done properly as well which is why an admin is the way to go here!
 |
|
|
Renegade
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:37 |
|
Sounds like a great idea to me. Prizes will undoubtedly attract more competitors which is going to benefit the tournaments. Problem is - which prizes will go to whom?
A tournament with 5 times as many members should definately recieve a greater prize than one with fewer. By the same token a small tournament with teams playing more matches should get a bigger prize than one with more members playing less games. Its a fine balance.
Personally I think you're all hoping for someting thats not going to happen. Kinda like a bloodbowl player "pulling" whilst out on the town... |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:42 |
|
| browwnrob_ni wrote: | | well all im saying is that team a may win a 4 team tourney and the resulting reward is a MVP on all his players! what if he ran a tourney like that a week later and the same team won... |
sk8bcn has a very simple solution to that imo, posted earlier in this thread.
| Quote: | restrict even more the acces to that team.
For example, you're team wouldn't be U anymore but [restricted:mithrilpoints tournament] |
If it was done this way it would be possible to maximize the teams in a given group (like your example), but it would never be possible for those teams to play anywhere else but in that group, hence removing the damage done. The teams in the group would have to stay in that group for the rest of their Bloodbowldays.
M |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:47 |
|
| Mithrilpoint wrote: | | browwnrob_ni wrote: | | well all im saying is that team a may win a 4 team tourney and the resulting reward is a MVP on all his players! what if he ran a tourney like that a week later and the same team won... |
sk8bcn has a very simple solution to that imo, posted earlier in this thread.
| Quote: | restrict even more the acces to that team.
For example, you're team wouldn't be U anymore but [restricted:mithrilpoints tournament] |
If it was done this way it would be possible to maximize the teams in a given group (like your example), but it would never be possible for those teams to play anywhere else but in that group, hence removing the damage done. The teams in the group would have to stay in that group for the rest of their Bloodbowldays.
M |
yer thats fine but isnt FUMBBL and open league?... you can play whomever you want etc... i dont see the admins buying that
only allowing prizes for [U] & [S] tournaments is perfectly fine as ranking is not an issue and like i say if an admin was introduced there would be little cheating and like renegade said the admin could decide what prize was best for the tourney, long or short, lots of members/ few members are things you cant really automate on the site... |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 14:50 |
|
| Renegade wrote: |
Personally I think you're all hoping for someting thats not going to happen. Kinda like a bloodbowl player "pulling" whilst out on the town... |
Sounds like you are speaking from experience! |
|
|
Mithrilpoint
Joined: Mar 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 15:16 |
|
Surely FUMBBL is an open league, but Div U tournaments/leagues are not. And my question is only about Div U leagues and tournaments.
To sum up my points :
1. A "Prize-Admin" would be great but also a luxury. Simple rules would be better imo. For example picking 3 prizes which are allowed. (50 K, +3 FF, RR)
2. Locking teams in tournaments with prizes. Teams can not leave, only retire. This should eliminate cheating.
3. Freedom for the league commish to decide which prize - if any - his or hers league/tournament should offer. No Admins involved. No bureaucracy. Just fun
I found this thread : http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=851&highlight=price+tournament
This was over a year ago, so i´ll just ask the allmighty admins - what is the official opinion on this idea? |
|
|
Quod
Joined: May 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 14, 2004 - 15:17 |
|
I would (as I have said) LOVE to see some of those tourneys played out, and a "prize" co-ordinator sounds awesome. |
_________________
Teams
Vae, puto deus fio! |
|
|
|
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
