| Poll |
| Should the TS difference rule go? |
| Yes! Stunties need fair odds more than anyone else. |
|
19% |
[ 24 ] |
| No, all stunties should be relegated to Stunty Leeg. |
|
11% |
[ 14 ] |
| I don't care. |
|
17% |
[ 21 ] |
| This poll is stupid. |
|
51% |
[ 63 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 122 |
|
MiBasse
Joined: Dec 04, 2004
|
 Posted:
Sep 18, 2005 - 21:47 |
 
|
| freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | i never voted, because the option 'I think it fine as it is, and stunties can play where they like' isn't there. |
My point exactly  |
|
|
seandon12
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2005 - 21:57 |
|
Ok stunties arent made to be an 'real' competetive team, the TS system reflects how even ur chances are of winning ur next game, if they reomved the 40 TS rule then sure u wouldnt have handicaps against you but you wud be playing sum1 with a much higher TS so have very little chance of winning, whereas if at the moment you play someone with equal TS then you should hve an EQUAL chance of winning, handicaps arent really ment to affect the game that much, but i bet if the whole handiap system was removed (just an if it was kinda thing) and u plaed same TS with sunties teams i honestly think they would have a fair chance of winning a fair ammount of games all those diving tackle and 2 big guys and many cheap star players make them a harsh team to play sometimes, handicaps usually even it out, But overall IMO if u care about winning dont use a stunty team IMO thats not what they are there for
(alot of this may have already been said, i didnt read all the thread) |
_________________
All Hail Macavity Mighty Leader of the forums, I pay homage to him! |
|
CorporateSlave3
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2005 - 22:26 |
|
| Skrofler wrote: | Well, let's put it this way. If I wanted easy games I wouldn't be playing goblins. I just think that their natural disadvantages are enough. I don't need TS messing things up.
I want tough opposition. I want to play even TR games. I just don't want to give handicap because
A) I shouldn't have to
and
B) The wrong handicap roll could easily reduce my chances by a lot. |
I guess I'm still not clear how you are all that restricted in seeking even TR games by the 40 point TS rule. Maybe once in a while there will be an even TR team that has greater than 40TS due to them being some race that tends to have inflated TR like woo elves, and you being injured with a MNG or two on a key player - but for the most part, playing even TR under the current system will just mean you playing up TS by 30-40 points. Which you seem perfectly willing to do.
Is your objection just to the occasional game against an even TR team that happens to have a high TS? Like a 180/200 team that you can't play with your 180/140 gobbos for example? (I still would like to have some concrete examples presented to back up your point of view, it would help me and a lot of others understand I think) You do realize that even with a handicap or two, you wouls stand a far better chance of winning a game against a TR 160/150 team with your 180/140 gobbos than a game such as I mentioned above, 180/200 vs 180/140. 60 points of TS represents a rather HUGE advantage this team would have over you. And the basic problem is not that you are willing to play this game as a 'fair' match (which it most certainly is NOT*), but that the opposition would be getting an unfair advantage relative to all the other coaches who are playing even TR/TS games.
TS isn't perfect, but it isn't random either, and in a competetive division like Ranked it really is necessary to ensure games remain relatively evenly balanced.
*I guess what confuses us is how you would see such a match up of 180/200 vs 180/140 as more fair to the lower TS team than a 160/150 vs 180/140 matchup. One handicap is given, but at a gain of 50 relative TS points - which represents an awful lot of skills, stats, players, and general advantage.
And this isn't even an 'even up TR' matchup to begin with! But the closer you get in TR the less even the match is going to be for the stunties. That's not a mechanic of TS or any Fumbbl rule, that's the way the game is designed. Stunties are at a disadvantage at even TR. Just the way Blood Bowl is... |
_________________
***Did you know? 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot? |
|
CorporateSlave3
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 18, 2005 - 22:33 |
|
Long story short:
I do agree that the Ranked 40TS rule descriminates relating to stunties especially. However, I think if anything it helps protect them from unfair matches. Right now, they can play even TR matches pretty much with impunity. They can play down in TR for a TS match but have to give a handicap or two - but anyone playing down has to do that anyway. Finally, they CANNOT be picked on by teams with much higher TS which, whether some people think so or not, will have a very big advantage against the little guys. TS is not perfect, but it fulfills its intended function rather well.
It protects teams that are at a winning disadvantage (from being stunty - or being injured with MNG) from being picked on by teams that have similar TR - but a great advantage due to team composition. |
_________________
***Did you know? 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot? |
|
Skrofler
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 09:27 |
|
| RedFish wrote: | | In this case the change was that the TS limit was introduced - the stunty coaches suffers and almost everyone else benefits. Was this a good or a bad change? I'd say good as it benefits the vast majority of coaches and only affects a minority of coaches. |
I see what you're saying. When was this introduction of TS anyway?
| RedFish wrote: | | On top of this most experienced stunty coaches would disagree with you when you claim that giving up handicaps is worse than playing against equally TS rated teams and give up 1+ handicaps. |
This really doesn't matter since the option to choose would logically always be best. Coaches handle different challenges in different ways.
| RedFish wrote: | | If you're afraid of Virus fire the nigglers - sensible on any team really. Giving up 1 handicap is not worse than playing up 24 in TS. |
To me, saying "fire the nigglers" is like saying "fire all the players with useful skills". A stunty team can rarely afford to fire an important niggler. Anyway, of course it isn't just that one result. It's mostly results 21, 31, 33, 41 and 61, which are often worse than facing a few extra skills, but also knowing the opposition. With handicaps anything could happen.
| RedFish wrote: | | What upsets me is your interpretation of the poll. You look at the few in favor, say only 7 disagree and then simply discard the vote of 32 who have used an option you gave them and say they are too dumb to understand the topic when you didn't even give them the choice of saying "I disagree - the current TS rules are good." That's rather insulting to the intelligence of every coach here. |
There's no need to get upset. I have merely pointed out what is obvious when you look at the replies I've gotten: Most people who reply didn't understand the problem. (and that's definately not saying anyone is dumb. that's your interpretation)
There's rarely any reason to expect a fresh idea to be greeted by masses of cheering supporters. The important thing (about poll interpretation) was that my idea has some popularity so there ought to be some point in discussing the issue and its options to see if something can be gained from it.
Your point is also taken. I could have made more poll options. |
|
|
Skrofler
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 09:38 |
|
| CorporateSlave3 wrote: | | Is your objection just to the occasional game against an even TR team that happens to have a high TS? Like a 180/200 team that you can't play with your 180/140 gobbos for example? (I still would like to have some concrete examples presented to back up your point of view, it would help me and a lot of others understand I think) |
Yes, I actually wrote that's in my opening post. The most disturbing part of this whole thing is that I am having a really hard time finding a lizard, undead or necro team that I am actually allowed to play against.
But also the general unfairness of not giving me enough choice. That should be enough for anyone to want to revolt.
| CorporateSlave3 wrote: | | However, I think if anything it helps protect them from unfair matches. |
This kind of view is actually a tiny bit infuriating. You can not be protected from something you want to do. If I want to play stronger teams nobody can "protect" me from it. They can only stop me from doing it. |
|
|
OldBugman
Joined: May 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 09:41 |
|
why would it
currently 156/124 for your gobbos..
you could play a team with TS164.. thats most teams with around 155ish TR. |
|
|
The_Mighty_Ren
Joined: Oct 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 09:43 |
|
| RedFish wrote: | | freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | i never voted, because the option 'I think it fine as it is, and stunties can play where they like' isn't there. |
My point exactly |
Which is why I, and I imagine a good % of the 40 (currently) others who agree with me voted for "this is a stupid poll".
ANY poll which gives such a slanted bunch of answers is, in my opinion, stupid. |
_________________
Every time you foul me, a kitten dies.
Join the League of Heroic Failure - lose with dignity. |
|
tza
Joined: Aug 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 09:45 |
|
| Skrofler wrote: | | That's beside the point. If I wanted star players I would hire star players, but I don't. The problem remains and I can't be blamed for it simply because I refuse to throw away money at one time boosts to my TS. |
Then quit whining ffs.
Gobbos are meant to play dirty and mean, not playing elf bowl. So, get going with those starplayers or chose your games against higher TS oponents...or simply give away the handicaps.
Because YOU chose to play it differently, don't expect the world to change. |
|
|
mUst
Joined: Jan 05, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:39 |
|
bahhhh goblings do just fine, mine kicked alot of elven ass when they were around, and one of the best winningrecords too... misspelled the first time i think the name was |
|
|
Skrofler
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:55 |
|
| tza wrote: | | Skrofler wrote: | | That's beside the point. If I wanted star players I would hire star players, but I don't. The problem remains and I can't be blamed for it simply because I refuse to throw away money at one time boosts to my TS. |
Then quit whining ffs.
Gobbos are meant to play dirty and mean, not playing elf bowl. So, get going with those starplayers or chose your games against higher TS oponents...or simply give away the handicaps.
Because YOU chose to play it differently, don't expect the world to change. |
I don't choose to play differently because there is no norm. There is no right way to play. There are only a number of different ways to play. |
|
|
OverDose
Joined: Apr 07, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:57 |
|
[OFFTOPIC!]
| MixX wrote: | Hehe that happens everywhere not just in Stunty! Earlier today I had a coach claiming I was "extremely lucky" for making a 3+ pickup (with reroll) a 4+ pass (with Pass) and a 2+ catch (with Catch)... heh!
I would say the right reason to play stunty leeg is for the craziness.. anything can happen, and it usually doesn´t matter. |
Hmm. Maybe not "extremely" lucky, but lucky still, since that manouver had a 62,7 % chance of success. 3+ RR is 31/36, 4+ RR is 27/36, and a 2+ RR is 35/36. So in my opinion that kind of manouvers should not be used unless the situation looks dire indeed.
[/OFFTOPIC!] |
|
|
Skrofler
Joined: Aug 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 10:58 |
|
| OldBugman wrote: | why would it
currently 156/124 for your gobbos..
you could play a team with TS164.. thats most teams with around 155ish TR. |
Currently is irrelevant and "most teams" is not enough. |
|
|
origami
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 18:02 |
|
| Skrofler wrote: | | This kind of view is actually a tiny bit infuriating. You can not be protected from something you want to do. If I want to play stronger teams nobody can "protect" me from it. They can only stop me from doing it. |
Actually, the rule is not here to protect you from unfair matches. The rule is here to protect the CR system from abuse.
The truth of the matter is that for every coach who has the ability to find a +40 TS match that won't result in him being massacred, there are dozens who are merely prey for those looking to abuse the system.
| Skrofler wrote: | | There's rarely any reason to expect a fresh idea to be greeted by masses of cheering supporters. |
It is certainly possible that you have come up with a brilliant new idea, and all of us are just too stuck in our ways to realize it.
The other possibility is that you are wrong.
When I look at your profile, I see a coach who has played 42 games, winning 56%, coach standing 1013. That's certainly respectable.
However, let's take a look at the profiles of a few of the coaches who say that you are wrong.
CorporateSlave3: 514 games played, winning 63%, Coach standing 185
Origami: 652 games played, winning 67%, coach standing 71
freak_in_a_frock: 922 game played (214 of those with ranked Halflings), winning 52%, coach standing 171
We are all free to draw our own conclusions. |
|
|
Arcon
Joined: Mar 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 19, 2005 - 18:10 |
|
uhm I get my head buzzing...
I have to agree to many good posts by different coaches who pointed out that is is close to perfect the way it is now.
Sorry to say this, Skrofler, but I get the impression you are spending far too much time for this argument and will never step back from your point of view no matter what we will ever say. You can continue posting for years, there will be no majority saying that you are right. So, take the points of the good coaches and take your time thinking about them.
I can´t remember when the TS was introduced, but it was intruduced to prevent extreme cherry picking (maybe that was not the only reason). And it works very fine. You maybe can´t imagine the flood of teams that would love to play you, but leave your team down to 1 BG and 3 stunties maybe, because they are so far overpowered.
I do not play Goblins, but Halflings in Ranked. And I can tell you I never hesitate to accept a game when I give 1 or 2 handicaps.
The TS is pretty good in determining how good the actual team is and how good the chance is to win next game. Playing a team with far higher TS is not only not the most clever thing to do, but will most of the time not result in a real "game", and talking about stunties, will also mean a lot of harm for the stunty team.
I agree that there are some bad results on the handicap table, but mostly the results are so weak that they will not influence the game to a greater degree. At least not as much as a package of Block/Tackle players (higher TS) |
|
|
|
|
| |
RNG speculations
Search
