FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

MiBasse

Joined: Dec 04, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 08:56

DragonsMaw wrote:

Rerolling against a 7, it greatly increases the chances of actually GETTING that 8. It could be worse i agree, but it kicked my butt alot in rl leagues. And yes, sometimes the elves have a good chance, most times even, but when you go in several players short already, against a guy who focuses on killing, it will often ruin your elf team, and if he gets enough guys out early, often to a loss.

I'll have to disagree - if someone can get away with placing his player prone again and again (with or without you booting him) there's probably something wrong with the way you're setting up your players on the field. There are many ways to ensure that either the guy with Piling On doesn't use it or make sure that he regrets it when he does.

DragonsMaw

Joined: Oct 08, 2005

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:03

If i fouled more perhaps, but personally i don't like it. Guess its the 'fair' player in me. But even if my example is poor, my point is the same, it makes cherry picking much simpler with required acceptance with penalties.

_________________
I've lost myself and gone to find me, if I get back before I get here, please ask me to wait.

tautology

Joined: Jan 30, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:16

Quote:

I guess, what I'm looking for is a league where you can see who the best of the best coaches and teams are. I thought that was ranked but I may be wrong. By this, I am not looking simply for a tournament, but a place where you prove yourself continually game after game. So what if you worked your butt of and made a legendary team? How does anyone know how you got there?

I have no idea who is on top of the rankings right now. But for all I know that person may have sat and cherry picked games from others who are less skilled more often than not. (I know it did not happen that way)

I know that faction is meant to see who the best is, but the tier system is kind of annoying. I like both ranked and unranked because you can jump on and play anyone anytime. You just need a similar strength team.

You need only make a team a play some coaches to see who is good and who is not.

vanGorn

Joined: Feb 24, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:17

The old name "open division" for [R] was better fitting. "Ranked" is misleading, since you might think the division is mainly about coach rating. But I'm sure that's not the case for most of us coaches. Many of us just want to play.

_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.

mymLaban

Joined: Apr 20, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:42

in some way imo Ranked is actually great, i can play my bashy teams in R against who ever wants to play them, yes thats mostly other bashers, but that aint no problem, here and there some humans, lizards or even elves wants a piece of the action too, witch is usally good fun (though it can be hard to beat them nasty elves score wise) other coaches that like their CR they can play to win, in every match some coaches even tries to avoid "hard" matches and yes some even tries to avoid "fair" matches in order to keep winning, ok this can be alittle annoying but its not really my problem, i just play someone else if they dont wanna play me.

What i like the most of all things, is building up teams ofcourse i like winning matches, and get that FF and the xtra money to help me expand, but i can still do this even when lose many matches, like i did with the chaos team i made recently, they lost like allmost 10 matches or something in the first 20-30 matches, but they still have a sweet blitzer with claw/rsc a nice ballcarrier and even an ag4 catcher, so winning is not the most importent thing in my case, making cool teams that i like to play with is what i want, this is allso the reason why i (most of the time) have 5 teams all above 200/200, others like to make new teams and play in some of the lower SMACKS like rookie, pro or veteran.

So all in all i think R offers alot of options to alot of diffrent coaches and tbh i actually like it, so stop messing with R !!!!!

Daft

Joined: Aug 15, 2006

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:44

@vangorn

Fair enough. I ply there to have fun as well. So tell me, what exactly is the real difference between ranked and unranked? Why not simply pool the two together. This rookie can see no difference between the two.

<edit> Ok, in the unranked there are a few moreteam choice, but if you can pick and choose who you play against what does that matter. You just avoid what you think is unbalanced.

<2nd edit> I love the way teams are power ranked. I just think that avoiding a team proves you are inferior to them in either coaching skill or personel.

Perhaps these "softer" teams should be ranked lower. However, if you did that, the "softer team would win most games on an otherwise level playing field.

mymLaban

Joined: Apr 20, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 09:53

one diffrent is the max 40 TS diffrent rule, other that Ranked matches does effect your CR Unranked matches does not, in other words anyone can fool around making a woody team and see how it goes if they only play dwarfes, stuff like that.

Allso Unranked has alot of diffrent tourneys that you can join, some wierd once with diffrent special rules, in Ranked you can only play in a few (too few:) tourneys where the skill lvl is somewhat higher, and the teams are xtra nasty

Sysiphos

Joined: Feb 03, 2006

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:07

vanGorn wrote:

The old name "open division" for [R] was better fitting. "Ranked" is misleading, since you might think the division is mainly about coach rating. But I'm sure that's not the case for most of us coaches. Many of us just want to play.

The longer I think about it the more this is the crucial point...

Ranked = Open Division = CR

I would like to see [U] becoming an open division (where you can join some private leagues or things).

Ranked could be becoming more competitive with the new tournament series Malthor is thinking about. The reduction of teams in ranked is a possible way to go. Imho [R] should only allow open play between some tourneys (lets say some recovery games). But the standard game in it should be in a tournament.

Fama

Joined: Feb 09, 2005

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:30

Sysiphos wrote:

vanGorn wrote:

The old name "open division" for [R] was better fitting. "Ranked" is misleading, since you might think the division is mainly about coach rating. But I'm sure that's not the case for most of us coaches. Many of us just want to play.

The longer I think about it the more this is the crucial point...

Ranked = Open Division = CR

I would like to see [U] becoming an open division (where you can join some private leagues or things).

Ranked could be becoming more competitive with the new tournament series Malthor is thinking about. The reduction of teams in ranked is a possible way to go. Imho [R] should only allow open play between some tourneys (lets say some recovery games). But the standard game in it should be in a tournament.

I'd say that sounds quite good, actually.

_________________
I love deadlines. I like the wooshing sound they make when they fly by. -Douglas Adams

Side step this!

Sysiphos

Joined: Feb 03, 2006

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:38

Sysiphos wrote:

vanGorn wrote:

The old name "open division" for [R] was better fitting. "Ranked" is misleading, since you might think the division is mainly about coach rating. But I'm sure that's not the case for most of us coaches. Many of us just want to play.

The longer I think about it the more this is the crucial point...

Ranked = Open Division = CR

I would like to see [U] becoming an open division (where you can join some private leagues or things).

Ranked could be becoming more competitive with the new tournament series Malthor is thinking about. The reduction of teams in ranked is a possible way to go. Imho [R] should only allow open play between some tourneys (lets say some recovery games). But the standard game in it should be in a tournament.

and to top it off, only the tournament games count towards CR not the friendlies...

vanGorn

Joined: Feb 24, 2004

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:43

Fama wrote:

Sysiphos wrote:

vanGorn wrote:

The old name "open division" for [R] was better fitting. "Ranked" is misleading, since you might think the division is mainly about coach rating. But I'm sure that's not the case for most of us coaches. Many of us just want to play.

The longer I think about it the more this is the crucial point...

Ranked = Open Division = CR

I would like to see [U] becoming an open division (where you can join some private leagues or things).

Ranked could be becoming more competitive with the new tournament series Malthor is thinking about. The reduction of teams in ranked is a possible way to go. Imho [R] should only allow open play between some tourneys (lets say some recovery games). But the standard game in it should be in a tournament.

I'd say that sounds quite good, actually.

Is old [O] now [R] then becoming the new [T] which were the predecessor of [U]?
What about an extra coach ladder? Where you can challenge coaches above you on that ladder?

_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.

Frankenstein

Joined: Jan 26, 2005

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:51

Daft wrote:

I'm new around here but I read the purging ranked post above and had a few thoughts for a truly ranked league.

Quote:

Joined: Aug 15, 2006

Since you're new around here, you can't know that the post you refer to belongs to a lost soul which is trying to force its lunatic random ideas upon the community for several years now. If he wouldn't insult the rest of the community so excessivly (the result of a massiv obsessional neurosis), he'd deserve our sympathy - but there's absolutely no need to take any of his posts seriously, they are crusades against an entire community by a single individual strongly detached from reality.

These are former identities of him on FUMBBL and tbb.com:

Force
Toby
Cpt.Powerpoint

Last edited by Frankenstein on %b %26, %2006 - %11:%Aug; edited 2 times in total

Fama

Joined: Feb 09, 2005

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:54

Frankenstein, your links don't work.

_________________
I love deadlines. I like the wooshing sound they make when they fly by. -Douglas Adams

Side step this!

spubbbba

Joined: Jul 31, 2006

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:56

Would it not be better to put more emphasis on tournaments to determine rank?

The greatest strength of [R] is that you can find a game any time of the day and have a huge variety of teams to choose from. This also allows coaches to exploit it by avoiding certain teams, picking on less experienced players or making up loads of identical teams and retiring those that lose a player or don't get good skills.

Daft's limitations could be put into tournaments to that would determine rank, maybe lots of little ones and 4 big ones like in real BB.

This would leave [R] as an open system where players could build up their teams and if they really care about such things use their win/lose ratio to determine self worth.

Personally I'm very cynical about how good the players at the top of ranked and faction are. Can all the Elf teams in [F1] just not refuse to play against super bashy teams and get them relegated by default?

Frankenstein

Joined: Jan 26, 2005

Posted: Aug 26, 2006 - 10:57

Curious. They do for me.