47 coaches online • Server time: 20:30
* * * Did you know? The highest combined winnings in a single match is 250000.
Recent Forum Topics  Learning BB in YouTu... | Conceding v Goblins/... | Advice tabletop tour... |
2013-09-12 01:39:11
34 votes, rating 5.2
34 votes, rating 5.2
Competitive Play?
In May of 2011, I created the Undead All-Skulls: an Undead team where every player was a Skeleton. I played only one game with the team. Not surprisingly, the game resulted in a loss. It was fun, but I decided that the experiment was ultimately doomed to fail, and I retired the team.
Recently, some coaches have begun to play all-Zombie Necro and all-Thrall Vamp teams. But these teams are not, like mine ostensibly was, created with the hopes of building the best team possible from bad players. Instead, they are deliberately handicapped not only by having a sub-standard roster, but also by putting behavioral requirements on their players, pre-determining skill selection for each player, and allowing other coaches to dictate what those behaviors and skills may be regardless of how self-destructive.
I think these teams are brilliant. But. Is there a "but"?
Deliberately designing teams to fail seems not only to be acceptable behavior, but encouraged in the source material. Few would argue, for example, that Ogre teams are designed to have a competitive parity with Orcs or Dwarves. Yet here they are, side by side in the rulebook. From interviews with a couple of game designers named Jervis and Tom (whoever they are), it is clear that this lack of parity was deliberate not only to broaden the "fluff" and comedy of the game, but also to give more advanced coaches additional challenges. The designers anticipated that the sheer nonsense of the Stunties, Ogres, and Vamps would help keep the game as interesting as possible, and let each player decide on their own how much emphasis to place on winning, and how much to place on the silliness inherent in the game. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to win with a team of Boneheads, Blood Lusts, and Stunties. Warning: this team will self-destruct in 5... 4... 3... 1, 1. TURNOVER
Here on FUMBBL, there are a variety of divisions to satisfy a variety of coach preferences. In League play, house rules may be substituted into the game, and the Stuntyleeg uses a whole set of custom rosters. Ranked and Blackbox divisions, on the other hand, are supposed to be "competitive"- even though, according to the designers, Blood Bowl is just barely supposed to be a competitive game. Nonetheless, a little sabre rattling has already been heard about the recent Zombie and Thrall "Fun" teams encouraging reportable (site-rule violating) uncompetitive play.
What's going on here? Are these teams using some exploit to give themselves an inappropriate advantage? Quite the opposite. Are they "rolling over" to help their friends get free SPP's and build for the next Major? No, they're playing in the Blackbox, facing all opponents with equal doomed resolve. Are they violating the spirit of competition, trolling their opponents or conceding matches when they shouldn't? In spite of their self-imposed restrictions, these coaches do still seem to be trying to win! So, what's the problem?
In my opinion, there isn't one. I love these stupid teams! And if they refuse to let one of their players ever cross the LoS because he's a "defender", decline to stand one up because he's "playing dead", or refuse to go for the ball because a player "fouls whenever possible"... more power to them! As long as they accept opponents indiscriminately, follow their hilariously designed behaviors consistently, and remain good sports the whole time, I think we could use more of these teams, not less. These fun teams aren't violations- they are inspirations.
No ifs ands or buts.
Recently, some coaches have begun to play all-Zombie Necro and all-Thrall Vamp teams. But these teams are not, like mine ostensibly was, created with the hopes of building the best team possible from bad players. Instead, they are deliberately handicapped not only by having a sub-standard roster, but also by putting behavioral requirements on their players, pre-determining skill selection for each player, and allowing other coaches to dictate what those behaviors and skills may be regardless of how self-destructive.
I think these teams are brilliant. But. Is there a "but"?
Deliberately designing teams to fail seems not only to be acceptable behavior, but encouraged in the source material. Few would argue, for example, that Ogre teams are designed to have a competitive parity with Orcs or Dwarves. Yet here they are, side by side in the rulebook. From interviews with a couple of game designers named Jervis and Tom (whoever they are), it is clear that this lack of parity was deliberate not only to broaden the "fluff" and comedy of the game, but also to give more advanced coaches additional challenges. The designers anticipated that the sheer nonsense of the Stunties, Ogres, and Vamps would help keep the game as interesting as possible, and let each player decide on their own how much emphasis to place on winning, and how much to place on the silliness inherent in the game. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to win with a team of Boneheads, Blood Lusts, and Stunties. Warning: this team will self-destruct in 5... 4... 3... 1, 1. TURNOVER
Here on FUMBBL, there are a variety of divisions to satisfy a variety of coach preferences. In League play, house rules may be substituted into the game, and the Stuntyleeg uses a whole set of custom rosters. Ranked and Blackbox divisions, on the other hand, are supposed to be "competitive"- even though, according to the designers, Blood Bowl is just barely supposed to be a competitive game. Nonetheless, a little sabre rattling has already been heard about the recent Zombie and Thrall "Fun" teams encouraging reportable (site-rule violating) uncompetitive play.
What's going on here? Are these teams using some exploit to give themselves an inappropriate advantage? Quite the opposite. Are they "rolling over" to help their friends get free SPP's and build for the next Major? No, they're playing in the Blackbox, facing all opponents with equal doomed resolve. Are they violating the spirit of competition, trolling their opponents or conceding matches when they shouldn't? In spite of their self-imposed restrictions, these coaches do still seem to be trying to win! So, what's the problem?
In my opinion, there isn't one. I love these stupid teams! And if they refuse to let one of their players ever cross the LoS because he's a "defender", decline to stand one up because he's "playing dead", or refuse to go for the ball because a player "fouls whenever possible"... more power to them! As long as they accept opponents indiscriminately, follow their hilariously designed behaviors consistently, and remain good sports the whole time, I think we could use more of these teams, not less. These fun teams aren't violations- they are inspirations.
No ifs ands or buts.
Comments
Posted by CastleMan on 2013-09-12 01:54:25
well written
Posted by FredAstaire on 2013-09-12 02:00:46
Hear hear
Posted by Espionage on 2013-09-12 02:10:54
Agreed.
Posted by PaddyMick on 2013-09-12 02:22:51
Yep sounds about right
Take the competitive play rule to it's logical conclusion and we'd all be min maxing
Take the competitive play rule to it's logical conclusion and we'd all be min maxing
Posted by latulike on 2013-09-12 02:28:29
Yes.
Posted by LostInTheMists on 2013-09-12 02:35:14
As the proud coach of an all-skeleton team (Only the Bonely), I can say this - my team is meant to be crushed, hammered, and generally pounded into pulp. Occasionally, I score. Rarely, I win. But damned if it ain't fun.
Skeletons - just like Doritos. Crunch all you want. I'll make more.
Skeletons - just like Doritos. Crunch all you want. I'll make more.
Posted by licker on 2013-09-12 05:15:02
I would agree.
However.
Others would not.
Mostly, who gives a crap?
However.
Others would not.
Mostly, who gives a crap?
Posted by pythrr on 2013-09-12 07:25:13
" who gives a crap?"
THIS. Play, or play not, no one cares.
:)
THIS. Play, or play not, no one cares.
:)
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-09-12 07:49:16
This is aimed at me. The competitive rule is for Box and Ranked (and Stunty) and is about in game events, not out of game builds and skill choices. To simplify this if you are having trouble understanding it. When you are in game, you should try your best to win.
I'm not going to get into the concept of these teams as a whole, they're fun and the community likes them. And generally it's none of my business.
Rabe however wanted for his player to refuse to stand up. I pointed out that it is likely to infringe on the competitive play rule.
Competitive Play is a site rule, we all agreed to abide by. If you don't like it, play in League or don't play here at all. Christer's house, Christer's rules.
I'm not going to get into the concept of these teams as a whole, they're fun and the community likes them. And generally it's none of my business.
Rabe however wanted for his player to refuse to stand up. I pointed out that it is likely to infringe on the competitive play rule.
Competitive Play is a site rule, we all agreed to abide by. If you don't like it, play in League or don't play here at all. Christer's house, Christer's rules.
Posted by Chainsaw on 2013-09-12 09:21:39
Refusing to stand up is a stupid behaviour.
At least if you are trying to foul or trying to throw a long bomb or holding position, it is doing *something*. Doing *nothing* is pointless. I'm with HM on this one.
At least if you are trying to foul or trying to throw a long bomb or holding position, it is doing *something*. Doing *nothing* is pointless. I'm with HM on this one.
Posted by the_Sage on 2013-09-12 11:08:50
Good writeup.
Thanks for the clarifications regarding the limitations of the competitive play rule HM.
I'd been wondering about its application to these teams (and the Agility Monsters, for instance).
Thanks for the clarifications regarding the limitations of the competitive play rule HM.
I'd been wondering about its application to these teams (and the Agility Monsters, for instance).
Posted by the_Sage on 2013-09-12 11:12:02
Hrm, so it doesn't apply to the Agility Monsters, but it does apply to the Angry Newscasters?
Posted by Dalfort on 2013-09-12 11:35:14
Excellent blog, very interesting and a good read BUT if it is "aimed" at HM it wasnt needed as his post about in the thread about Rabe's choice of player/on field trait was merely cautionary to award anyone being cited for a rules breach. As a poor player and owner of several theme teams I could be looked upon with a raised eye as I have sailed very close at times to the rules, specifically my Intercepting Trees teams Project Pass Block Tree, I would have needed ten-fold more games had I not asked my opponents to read the bio before playing me, included a table which showed the number of interception attempts given (if that isnt a shame wall I dont know what it is!).
In conclusion, play more eat less and obesity will decline. oh wait wrong forum/blog...
In conclusion, play more eat less and obesity will decline. oh wait wrong forum/blog...
Posted by Chainsaw on 2013-09-12 11:40:53
No the_Sage, not about the Agility Monsters.
Recently there have been a spate of community-chosen behaviour teams. You pick a player, you give him characteristics, and the coach with the team then implements that on the field.
e.g. I create an undead team ask people to adopt players. Carlo would pick a zombie and say, "ALWAYS FOULS!" So that zombie gets dp as a skill, and aynthing else Carlo specifies, and it will always foul.
In this case Rabe has adopted a player and said it plays dead i.e. lies down all game. That's just silly (and there's a very high bar for silly).
Recently there have been a spate of community-chosen behaviour teams. You pick a player, you give him characteristics, and the coach with the team then implements that on the field.
e.g. I create an undead team ask people to adopt players. Carlo would pick a zombie and say, "ALWAYS FOULS!" So that zombie gets dp as a skill, and aynthing else Carlo specifies, and it will always foul.
In this case Rabe has adopted a player and said it plays dead i.e. lies down all game. That's just silly (and there's a very high bar for silly).
Posted by B_SIDE on 2013-09-12 11:45:03
Chainsaw, I agree that it is a stupid behavior. But there are only two types of programmed behaviors possible: those that are irrelevant to play, and those that cause sub-optimal play.
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-09-12 12:15:57
Ok, in a bid to seem less confrontational:
Obviously the blog wasn't 'aimed at me' but was inspired by what I said/did.
"If you don't like it, play in League or don't play here at all. Christer's house, Christer's rules."
Wasn't aimed at B-Side, but at anyone who isn't happy to abide by Christer's law.
Personally I think the League Division is the perfect environment for themed teams. Most of my teams now are themed and silly, and I only play them in League. Ok, I don't get that many games, but I'm happy with the freedom I have and the knowledge I well within the site rules.
Obviously the blog wasn't 'aimed at me' but was inspired by what I said/did.
"If you don't like it, play in League or don't play here at all. Christer's house, Christer's rules."
Wasn't aimed at B-Side, but at anyone who isn't happy to abide by Christer's law.
Personally I think the League Division is the perfect environment for themed teams. Most of my teams now are themed and silly, and I only play them in League. Ok, I don't get that many games, but I'm happy with the freedom I have and the knowledge I well within the site rules.
Posted by paradocks on 2013-09-12 12:45:20
i used to refuse to get up for school in the morning
Posted by SzieberthAdam on 2013-09-12 14:29:02
Paul Morphy -- quazi chess world champion of his era -- played a numerous games without his queenside rook.
I could imagine a damn good coach with a strong race to play competitively by constantly placing one of his players to the corner and keeping it there.
I could imagine a damn good coach with a strong race to play competitively by constantly placing one of his players to the corner and keeping it there.
Posted by BillBrasky on 2013-09-12 14:33:49
I very much enjoy those theme teams.
I think the play-style can be competitive regardless of the build.
Otherwise, we should probably bar all Tier 3 teams from R & B, due to the uncompetitive nature of the teams.
I say leave the build out of the equation. If the coach is handing the opponent free TDs, sure admin action should be warranted.
I think the play-style can be competitive regardless of the build.
Otherwise, we should probably bar all Tier 3 teams from R & B, due to the uncompetitive nature of the teams.
I say leave the build out of the equation. If the coach is handing the opponent free TDs, sure admin action should be warranted.
Posted by B_SIDE on 2013-09-12 14:52:57
To clarify, this blog is not meant to endorse anyone breaking site rules. I realize now that it could reasonably be interpreted that way. Perhaps iconoclasm is an affectation of my literary style.
Posted by BillBrasky on 2013-09-12 15:53:35
B_Side... You heretic!
Posted by PainState on 2013-09-12 15:59:19
Well this is interesting.
SO themed teams are unbalancing? Unbalancing for what? Oh, so a team might get to play them and uber pimp skill up for a deep major run? So this is all about majors/tournaments?
What about the restriction on how many times you can play a specific team in a short time span?
Are we saying that if you coach a themed team you are not trying to win with what you got? A themed team that is sub par but that does not mean you are not trying to win.
Box themed teams spread the love out equally based on TV and random nature of activation.
Ranked themed teams spread the love out because every one challenges them and the coach of the themed team gets his pick of the litter to improve his chances of winning playing against and equally inept team.
So who is uber pimping skilling up playing against these guys again?
So lets take this to the end of insanity. So Rabes avatar when knocked down does not stand back up. Ok, you could say that is stupid.
BUT does that mean if you run across a coach who has a AV5 woodie who always mans the LOS and almost every game on the opening turn is put in the KO/CAS box is fine. Well he obviously is also laying down and not playing. So is that coach who keeps an AV5 LOS fodder player not playing competitivly? Do you have to pass a litmus test by some board of coaches who look at your team and decide if you are competitive or not and assign you to a DIV? Do they eventually say it is not the team but you who is not competitive and then ship you off to Kodah to play is some scrub coach league and you are banned from open play until you win a tournament over there and can come back.
All because of tournament play? It is a open Div that alows all coaches to participate in. BUT this idea of themed teams not being competitive it is now not trully open because we are rubbing our hands over the idea that some teams might get a tournament advanatage is stupid.
Remeber guys L play is not open play. You cannot get into every single L league with any team of your choice. L play is restrictive not open like some coaches make it out to be.
My final stab at this.
I love R/B majors and tournaments but this puts me over the top that "we" would restrict themed teams because of the tournament scene. Has it become so competitive around here that one or two matches against one of these teams turns briefs into thongs on the ramification that one match might have on a major next month?
SO themed teams are unbalancing? Unbalancing for what? Oh, so a team might get to play them and uber pimp skill up for a deep major run? So this is all about majors/tournaments?
What about the restriction on how many times you can play a specific team in a short time span?
Are we saying that if you coach a themed team you are not trying to win with what you got? A themed team that is sub par but that does not mean you are not trying to win.
Box themed teams spread the love out equally based on TV and random nature of activation.
Ranked themed teams spread the love out because every one challenges them and the coach of the themed team gets his pick of the litter to improve his chances of winning playing against and equally inept team.
So who is uber pimping skilling up playing against these guys again?
So lets take this to the end of insanity. So Rabes avatar when knocked down does not stand back up. Ok, you could say that is stupid.
BUT does that mean if you run across a coach who has a AV5 woodie who always mans the LOS and almost every game on the opening turn is put in the KO/CAS box is fine. Well he obviously is also laying down and not playing. So is that coach who keeps an AV5 LOS fodder player not playing competitivly? Do you have to pass a litmus test by some board of coaches who look at your team and decide if you are competitive or not and assign you to a DIV? Do they eventually say it is not the team but you who is not competitive and then ship you off to Kodah to play is some scrub coach league and you are banned from open play until you win a tournament over there and can come back.
All because of tournament play? It is a open Div that alows all coaches to participate in. BUT this idea of themed teams not being competitive it is now not trully open because we are rubbing our hands over the idea that some teams might get a tournament advanatage is stupid.
Remeber guys L play is not open play. You cannot get into every single L league with any team of your choice. L play is restrictive not open like some coaches make it out to be.
My final stab at this.
I love R/B majors and tournaments but this puts me over the top that "we" would restrict themed teams because of the tournament scene. Has it become so competitive around here that one or two matches against one of these teams turns briefs into thongs on the ramification that one match might have on a major next month?
Posted by licker on 2013-09-12 16:51:42
Personally I think those theme teams are freaking stupid to play in R or B, and I think they violate the spirit of competition this site is supposed to hold you to.
However, I also don't really care how a coach chooses to play his team (meaning I don't really care about that competition rule other than as it would apply to issues of farming spp intentionally).
The admins will make whatever decision about these teams that they will make, and we'll all either bellyache about double standards or we'll get threads locked or probably both.
I agree with those who say these teams should live in L and play against each other and 16 man snot teams. Because no matter how interesting or silly or whatever these teams are in B they are still annoying to play frankly, because it's not a real game, it's not remotely competitive, and thus, it's not particularly interesting for those who would rather spend their time in B playing meaningful matches.
R is another matter, as if you don't want to face those teams you can easily not face them.
However, I also don't really care how a coach chooses to play his team (meaning I don't really care about that competition rule other than as it would apply to issues of farming spp intentionally).
The admins will make whatever decision about these teams that they will make, and we'll all either bellyache about double standards or we'll get threads locked or probably both.
I agree with those who say these teams should live in L and play against each other and 16 man snot teams. Because no matter how interesting or silly or whatever these teams are in B they are still annoying to play frankly, because it's not a real game, it's not remotely competitive, and thus, it's not particularly interesting for those who would rather spend their time in B playing meaningful matches.
R is another matter, as if you don't want to face those teams you can easily not face them.
Posted by licker on 2013-09-12 16:53:02
Also, Pain, L is as open as R you do not need to join a league to play another L team, though most Leagues restrict teams applied to them from playing outside of the league. However, there are likely plenty of L teams that are not in fact members of an actual league.
Posted by the_Sage on 2013-09-12 16:53:03
Wow I have to say Rabe's avatar is silly. If I were his coach I'd just fire him. That'd be fluffy enough. =)
Posted by SzieberthAdam on 2013-09-12 19:41:53
Competition versus cooperation is one of the main aspect of human communities and interactions. Our new world order is based on competition, despite cooperation is proved to have bigger gains. Competition makes you serious about things. This kind of seriousness makes a coach angry on rolls or suffered injuries. I know about crashed keyboards, and mouses aswell which were seriously injured during bloodbowl games.
I also have themed teams because my nature is not as competitive as others' and these teams loose the level of competitivenes abit. You alienate them from [R] and [B], you alienate me from the site.
You all compete with your good fellows for a job, for a price, for a seat, for a win. Calm down and look around. Is the constant race you want all around you?
I also have themed teams because my nature is not as competitive as others' and these teams loose the level of competitivenes abit. You alienate them from [R] and [B], you alienate me from the site.
You all compete with your good fellows for a job, for a price, for a seat, for a win. Calm down and look around. Is the constant race you want all around you?
Posted by Wreckage on 2013-09-12 19:59:51
I don't particularly like the kind of competition where a third person looks over my shoulder and decides on whose excrements look prettier.
I like measureable competition. Like: Winning a game rather than the crowd voting who played better.
Where the guy wins who knocks somebody to the ground rather than three guys sitting the background counting muscle flexing or something.
It's certainly true that gaining somebodies admiration isn't random and needs skill but it is always anti-progress, because people admire what they recognise as good. Unmeasurable competition doesn't really produce advancement.
I don't think real life has ever put me in a real competition situation. I don't think I have ever been in a situation in my life where I felt that I had been defeated or won.
Thats a feeling I only ever get from games. And man: Playing an all skelli team, competing with it, going to the top, winning with it and convincing other people that it is a good build after the fact (not that it is in that case). But thats what real progress is meant to be like.
I like measureable competition. Like: Winning a game rather than the crowd voting who played better.
Where the guy wins who knocks somebody to the ground rather than three guys sitting the background counting muscle flexing or something.
It's certainly true that gaining somebodies admiration isn't random and needs skill but it is always anti-progress, because people admire what they recognise as good. Unmeasurable competition doesn't really produce advancement.
I don't think real life has ever put me in a real competition situation. I don't think I have ever been in a situation in my life where I felt that I had been defeated or won.
Thats a feeling I only ever get from games. And man: Playing an all skelli team, competing with it, going to the top, winning with it and convincing other people that it is a good build after the fact (not that it is in that case). But thats what real progress is meant to be like.
Posted by licker on 2013-09-12 22:16:38
An all skele or zomb team isn't necessarily uncompetitive for it's TV value. I thought we were talking about those teams where each player gets some kind of personality which doesn't really make for a cohesive competitive strategy. The extremes are players who won't cross midfield, or who won't stand up, or who always blitz the ball.
Teams like that, while fun and maybe fluffy, are pointless in B in my opinion. An all zomb team, much like just playing Ogres, is not competitive when compared to dwarves, but those teams are still nominally playing to win without any unreasonable restrictions on what the individual players are allowed to do within a game.
That said, I don't really care if coaches want to play these silly teams, I just don't see how they can be considered 'legit' to be played in B with respect to other rulings made along the lines of non-competitive play in the past. Further, if I still bothered to play B, I would be irritated to draw such a team as I don't want a silly walk over game.
Teams like that, while fun and maybe fluffy, are pointless in B in my opinion. An all zomb team, much like just playing Ogres, is not competitive when compared to dwarves, but those teams are still nominally playing to win without any unreasonable restrictions on what the individual players are allowed to do within a game.
That said, I don't really care if coaches want to play these silly teams, I just don't see how they can be considered 'legit' to be played in B with respect to other rulings made along the lines of non-competitive play in the past. Further, if I still bothered to play B, I would be irritated to draw such a team as I don't want a silly walk over game.
Posted by harvestmouse on 2013-09-12 22:32:47
"I thought we were talking about those teams where each player gets some kind of personality which doesn't really make for a cohesive competitive strategy. The extremes are players who won't cross midfield, or who won't stand up, or who always blitz the ball."
I don't think that really matters anymore, the mob has spoken. It's obvious the admins are out to get us, and are intent on banning anything from playing whilst eating chocolate bars to brindle cats.
I don't think that really matters anymore, the mob has spoken. It's obvious the admins are out to get us, and are intent on banning anything from playing whilst eating chocolate bars to brindle cats.
Posted by garyt1 on 2013-09-12 23:18:13
It will be a while before we get an all zombie team as favourites for the FUMBBL cup but seeing the antics of the fluffy zombie team is amusing.
Posted by Wreckage on 2013-09-13 00:17:13
As for the competative play rule: I think it is easily the most unpopular rule on the site, so there should be no surprise that any mentioning it will likely trigger a reaction.
I still think it's nice and also polite of the administration to point out if a certain kind of behavior might trigger a response and to give the coaches a chance to adapt their teams properly.
It's not like the rule is going to go away after all.
I still think it's nice and also polite of the administration to point out if a certain kind of behavior might trigger a response and to give the coaches a chance to adapt their teams properly.
It's not like the rule is going to go away after all.
Posted by fidius on 2013-09-13 06:14:02
I would like to request functionality to rate a blog 6 and the comments 1.
Posted by shusaku on 2013-09-13 14:06:56
I think licker has a point. While playing with such a team can surely be fun. Playing against it, can be tough. Expecially when you have limited time and were planing for a nice competetive game in the box and then you have to face such a team. Instead of playing blood bowl you are in a situation where you can have a nice chat or do something else because the game isnt interesting. It can be fun sure. But it wont be what you were looking for.
Posted by SzieberthAdam on 2013-09-13 16:10:48
What else than fun you're looking for?
Posted by Scaramanga on 2013-09-13 17:58:07
I have more fun against a team like than against dwarfs.
Posted by skouidji on 2013-09-14 16:04:05
Well written !
I think i need to post a comment as the founder of the Dead Community team just to make things clear to you, followers :)
When i've created this team my first idea was to combine fun and competition with a fully functionnal necromantic team, by "fully functional" i mean the usual set we play with necros (which is adding the werewolves, wights, golems, ghouls and zombies.) With the though that most of the coaches would like to be one important player, as example : a blitzing werewolf, i decided to make a full zombie team. That would neutralize the jealousy for everyone who wanted to be a "important" player in the team.
Why did i decide to play in the Blackbox division ? simple ! because if i tried the Ranked division, i would have picked the "already a win" teams who would play against me and i didnt want that. I wanted competition and challenges. By that i mean i wouldnt have the choices of the opponent teams i would meet.
During a match, some of my followers will say the same as i do, i'm trying to be competitive even with the behaviors and the bad rolls. Because if you watch some of my matches that i've done you'll see that i'm very unlucky with the rolls and i'm trying the best to win :)
Also, some behaviors have been modified because of the "useless" meaning approched. For example : Calthor wanna lived longer than the other zombies and would has been on the bench forever. I asked him to change his behavior for something else and he is now known as "the defender" which his mission is to stay on the team's endzone and attack any intruders. And this is a great idea because it's hard for a zombie to cover all the field when he has only 4MA.
Since i created this team, i only have good comments, great interactions with the other coaches and alot of new friends :)
Maybe one day, when i'll have the time for this, i'll make a league which be called "The Behaviors league" ;)
p.s : Sorry for my english, i know it is not THAT good :)
I think i need to post a comment as the founder of the Dead Community team just to make things clear to you, followers :)
When i've created this team my first idea was to combine fun and competition with a fully functionnal necromantic team, by "fully functional" i mean the usual set we play with necros (which is adding the werewolves, wights, golems, ghouls and zombies.) With the though that most of the coaches would like to be one important player, as example : a blitzing werewolf, i decided to make a full zombie team. That would neutralize the jealousy for everyone who wanted to be a "important" player in the team.
Why did i decide to play in the Blackbox division ? simple ! because if i tried the Ranked division, i would have picked the "already a win" teams who would play against me and i didnt want that. I wanted competition and challenges. By that i mean i wouldnt have the choices of the opponent teams i would meet.
During a match, some of my followers will say the same as i do, i'm trying to be competitive even with the behaviors and the bad rolls. Because if you watch some of my matches that i've done you'll see that i'm very unlucky with the rolls and i'm trying the best to win :)
Also, some behaviors have been modified because of the "useless" meaning approched. For example : Calthor wanna lived longer than the other zombies and would has been on the bench forever. I asked him to change his behavior for something else and he is now known as "the defender" which his mission is to stay on the team's endzone and attack any intruders. And this is a great idea because it's hard for a zombie to cover all the field when he has only 4MA.
Since i created this team, i only have good comments, great interactions with the other coaches and alot of new friends :)
Maybe one day, when i'll have the time for this, i'll make a league which be called "The Behaviors league" ;)
p.s : Sorry for my english, i know it is not THAT good :)