28 coaches online • Server time: 09:37
* * * Did you know? There are 342276 active teams in FUMBBL.
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Advice against ST4 A...goto Post DIBBL Awardsgoto Post Blackbox Sprint Cham...
Purplegoo
Last seen 20 minutes ago
High Elf
Legend
High Elf
Record
186/39/46
Win Percentage
76%
Wood Elf
Legend
Wood Elf
Record
191/32/41
Win Percentage
78%
Overall
[R]
Legend
Overall
Record
1152/263/326
Win Percentage
74%
Archive

2019

2019-12-05 14:07:21
rating 6
2019-11-28 12:56:48
rating 4.2
2019-10-31 21:03:52
rating 5.7
2019-10-01 22:14:02
rating 5.8
2019-08-30 20:42:57
rating 5.8
2019-07-31 22:06:42
rating 5.2
2019-06-01 21:19:02
rating 5.8
2019-04-30 20:50:51
rating 4.8
2019-04-12 11:48:46
rating 6
2019-03-31 22:12:47
rating 6
2019-02-28 22:15:36
rating 6
2019-01-31 22:36:53
rating 4.3

2018

2018-11-30 18:48:22
rating 5.2
2018-10-31 21:31:37
rating 3.5
2018-09-28 21:04:52
rating 5.3
2018-08-29 17:19:08
rating 4.8
2018-07-31 11:28:46
rating 6
2018-06-29 17:21:49
rating 4.3
2018-05-31 22:31:52
rating 6
2018-05-01 22:21:48
rating 5.3
2018-03-30 21:58:47
rating 5.7
2018-02-28 20:53:29
rating 5.3
2018-01-31 22:10:32
rating 5.3
2018-01-08 23:13:09
rating 5.6

2017

2017-02-27 22:16:44
rating 5.7
2017-01-19 21:01:15
rating 4.8
2017-01-16 20:19:25
rating 3.5
2017-01-07 16:30:25
rating 5.3

2016

2016-11-07 21:21:31
rating 4.7
2016-10-13 12:48:51
rating 5.3
2016-09-12 09:06:48
rating 4.4
2016-09-08 21:05:08
rating 6
2016-09-05 18:57:28
rating 5.8
2016-09-01 19:24:37
rating 6
2016-08-30 21:34:24
rating 6
2016-08-28 11:26:25
rating 5
2016-06-24 06:34:00
rating 6
2016-06-22 20:55:03
rating 3.5
2016-06-20 19:18:03
rating 0
2016-06-13 21:12:57
rating 5.2
2016-05-18 19:37:27
rating 4.2
2016-05-15 20:23:20
rating 4.9
2016-04-11 12:44:27
rating 5.4
2016-04-04 09:20:28
rating 4.3
2016-04-01 18:40:48
rating 4.3
2016-03-29 18:47:58
rating 4.3
2016-03-25 11:39:15
rating 5.4
2016-03-24 09:16:47
rating 4.3
2016-03-20 12:35:28
rating 5.4
2016-01-17 21:05:12
rating 4.3
2016-01-14 19:47:35
rating 5
2016-01-11 20:58:21
rating 5.4
2016-01-09 19:03:09
rating 6
2016-01-06 19:39:11
rating 5.5

2015

2015-12-22 19:49:53
rating 6
2015-12-03 19:20:34
rating 5.3
2015-11-26 08:41:28
rating 4.3
2015-11-23 22:13:44
rating 4.8
2015-11-20 22:13:14
rating 5
2015-11-16 19:40:13
rating 5.3
2015-11-05 14:44:28
rating 4.3
2015-11-01 11:12:19
rating 5.3
2015-10-19 11:16:03
rating 6
2015-08-17 23:19:49
rating 4.8
2015-08-14 20:44:56
rating 4
2015-08-10 17:05:27
rating 5.2
2015-07-25 12:24:57
rating 4.9
2015-07-20 22:21:44
rating 3.5
2015-06-14 20:22:26
rating 5.4
2015-06-11 22:42:00
rating 5.2
2015-06-08 22:04:49
rating 6
2015-06-03 22:22:44
rating 5.2
2015-05-27 23:26:35
rating 5.3
2015-05-26 20:03:18
rating 6
2015-05-10 17:11:14
rating 5.6
2015-05-09 16:27:45
rating 5.8
2015-03-29 12:40:53
rating 6
2015-03-23 20:00:14
rating 5.6
2015-03-15 16:30:16
rating 5.6
2015-03-08 17:44:13
rating 5.5
2015-02-24 19:03:23
rating 5.1
2015-01-29 20:45:56
rating 5
2015-01-12 09:44:16
rating 5.5

2014

2014-12-30 19:45:18
rating 5.3
2014-08-02 11:18:38
rating 5.8
2014-04-18 20:12:27
rating 5.6
2014-03-22 10:18:13
rating 5.8
2014-01-19 10:47:29
rating 6

2013

2013-12-23 17:59:38
rating 5.8
2013-10-14 19:20:12
rating 5.6
2013-07-03 21:03:39
rating 4.8
2013-04-15 17:28:27
rating 5.8
2013-03-19 21:14:15
rating 4.7
2013-03-13 19:41:40
rating 5.1

2012

2012-10-16 20:56:34
rating 4.3
2012-07-28 09:44:26
rating 5
2012-07-13 19:52:14
rating 5.3
2012-04-19 21:10:11
rating 5
2012-03-02 18:47:22
rating 5.1

2011

2011-11-29 19:45:04
rating 5.1
2011-11-22 10:02:09
rating 5.4
2011-11-15 21:03:30
rating 4.5
2011-11-01 21:39:43
rating 5.1
2011-09-25 16:48:03
rating 4.9
2011-05-23 16:04:59
rating 5.6
2011-02-27 11:51:34
rating 4.8
2011-01-20 12:45:03
rating 5.7

2010

2010-11-11 17:50:10
rating 5.4
2010-09-28 20:56:23
rating 4.8
2010-08-30 16:25:01
rating 5
2010-08-01 21:22:32
rating 4.9
2010-04-04 21:25:57
rating 4.6
2010-02-17 20:09:59
rating 3.5
2010-01-05 12:05:02
rating 4.6

2009

2009-12-21 11:19:56
rating 4.8
2009-10-04 20:50:45
rating 4.5
2009-08-22 14:18:13
rating 3.8
2009-08-09 09:12:55
rating 4.7
2009-08-02 21:07:56
rating 4.7
2009-05-05 21:24:46
rating 5.1
2009-01-25 11:17:28
rating 5

2008

2008-11-04 20:06:44
rating 4.6
2008-10-15 20:26:30
rating 4.8
2008-06-03 11:50:09
rating 5.1
2008-02-16 15:47:30
rating 5
2008-01-06 10:48:05
rating 5.1
2008-01-03 21:03:34
rating 4.6

2007

2007-11-12 15:51:33
rating 4.7
2007-10-27 19:33:15
rating 4.8
2007-09-20 15:15:48
rating 4.2
2007-09-10 10:11:44
rating 4.5
2007-08-17 17:11:56
rating 4.6
2007-08-17 13:46:09
rating 3.8
2007-08-02 15:32:47
rating 4.5
2007-07-31 12:11:50
rating 3.9
2007-07-30 18:44:45
rating 3.8
2007-07-30 09:51:58
rating 3.6
2011-02-27 11:51:34
56 votes, rating 4.8
Entry to the Scrub Zone
I had a little internal conversation this morning, and I decided for the first time in my Blood Bowling life, that I, Purplegoo, am a scrub.

For those unfamiliar with the term, I direct you to Plorg’s interesting 2008 thread Playing to Win. For those that can’t be arsed to click, to paraphrase, a scrub is someone not doing their utmost to win, probably by playing with some self-imposed mantra or rule set. Plorg’s first post lays it out better than I ever could, but common Blood Bowling scrubs you’ve encountered before are coaches who apply some bizarre morale code to Fouling. They won’t take Claw on doubles because they‘re cool and it's 'OP', that sort of thing. They impose their own made up values, rules or system that aren’t in the rules of the game and as such, aren’t totally playing to win (’This is broken, I won‘t use it!’ is a common scrub saying), but justify it to themselves somehow.

Now, previously, I’ve been pretty much as hardcore in terms of a FUMBBLer as you can be, and had a bit of a chuckle at scrubs. I’ve made my teams as good as possible, used every facet of the rules in a way that I think maximises my chance to win games (note: since picking is at least formally against the rules, I’m not counting trying not to do it as previous scrubness…). But I realised today that currently, I’m not, through some application of my own moral compass that actually has no place in the game.

I’m speaking about Blackbox minmaxing. I played a guy today (I should note here, I am in no way having a go at anyone else for playing to win within the rules, moreover, I’m being self critical) who had Dwarves. Dwarves at TV1400 with a million banked. My Journeymen bolstered Rats took a good kicking (I must confess I thought I was significantly unlucky and that didn‘t help, but then, all losers do, don't we?), and the super honed megastar Runner plus some guys steamrollered me into submission. I tut when I see 1 SV Skaven with 400k banked and such Gutter Runners a ‘real’ team at 1650 would have zero chance of winning. I have a knee-jerk ‘I’m better than that’ reaction when I see a horrid minmax Pact team, even though I shouldn’t. Tipping the scales in your own direction through careful and good team building has always been a way to win a Blood Bowl game, and it still is.

Again, no harm to these guys. They’re simply hardcore winners. They don’t long for the romance of a ‘real’ long term team, developed over a TV range with a storied history of knockbacks and returns to greatness. They are playing the numbers of the Blackbox system very well, and winning a hatful of games, and afterall, what’s more important than that? I used to think nothing. Once you add to the fact there’s essentially nothing wrong with this behaviour with the feeling that there’s nothing you could do about it even if you wanted to (erm, TS won’t work, the Bank won’t help, it‘s in the flipping rules…?!) you have to accept this is the new, ‘professional‘, optimal way to play Blood Bowl in LRB6 in the B division. You minmax, you keep your team in a sweet spot of TV, you maximise your wins. Don't like it? Tough, thems the rules.

Now, luckily for me, I’m alright at the game. Even playing in B as a scrub, I’m winning more than I did in the old R, so I’m happy I don’t survive on picking to get by, and that I can win plenty of games in a ‘competitive’ environment (laughable as the suggestion is that B > R in competitiveness, but that’s for another day…), but it does strike me as something that a newer, less hardcore coach will get fed up with fast. You come, afterall, from TT where you build teams over a quick season, you don't have time to team build like this.

The answer for all of us scrubs might be to escape to R where we can all apply our moral code to our games and play the way we find most fun. I suspect when tournaments are introduced, most will, but we’ll wait and see. I’m a little disappointed that I’ve joined the ranks of the scrubs in my old age, but I guess you can’t change how you feel about stuff like minmaxing; it’s just not for me.

So, I guess I’ll carry on playing B for a bit (at least until game finder is less of a wasteland), but sub optimally. I suspect all of you hardcore gamers will be licking your lips. More easy scrub meat for you. But you know, at least we’re cool?

And, to end in a way that might please blog fans, a Top Gun picture;



Rate this entry
Comments
Posted by Calcium on 2011-02-27 12:03:33
More elitist bollocks. If you have no problem with how another coach plays/builds, then why the lengthy blog about it?

Haters gunna hat
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-27 12:07:36
Bless you. Why blog about anything by that logic? Delete the blog section!

I don't mind anyone having an opinion on any blog. So fair enough. I do love this silly vendetta you seem to have against me though, I'm enjoying your made up hate! :D

pac will be delighted 'elitist' has reared it's head so instantly again. ;)
Posted by Calcium on 2011-02-27 12:10:06
:) I actually think you're ok, we've had some good chats...

But expecting other coaches to comply to your idea of 'cool' or 'fun' no matter how much you dress it up with 'No harm to these guys' is the height of anal here. Evo had a point I think....
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-27 12:15:15
You're reading things that aren't there, frankly.

I'm a bit concerned I'm 'OK' today. Who knows where it might lead at this pace of warming?! O.O
Posted by Calcium on 2011-02-27 12:38:39
Yesterday's hate belongs in yesterday....

'You gotta let Goose go Mav....You gotta let him go'
Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2011-02-27 12:40:05
Cal, you need to take the sunglasses off mate. Something is colouring what you read. :)

Pgoo isn't saying people have to play like him, he is saying he doesn't want to play min/max. Big difference.

Don't be so fast to take offense. This blog isn't aggressive, hell it's not even passive aggressive. It's mostly plain boring. :D
Posted by MadTias on 2011-02-27 13:50:55
I share your sentiments Purplegoo. I've been trying to analyze why I feel different about the new TV minmaxing compared to the old TS minmaxing (mostly for SMACKs) that we were used to. So far, I haven't been able to nail down what the difference is, but the new minmaxing just seems... off somehow.

I don't know yet where this will lead me, perhaps I will come to the conclusion that there really is no difference and start minmaxing my own teams better. But right now I just have this bad feeling about it.
Posted by spubbbba on 2011-02-27 14:18:23
Surely it's only scrub behaviour if you complain about the tactic and start calling for it to be banned or nerfed?

It's just like someone choosing to use goblins over Dwarfs. Complaining about Dwarfs being OP and your goblins having no chance and starting yet another tedious thread about nerfing them is scrub behaviour. Playing goblins because they are more fun for you than dwarfs whilst trying your best to beat dwarfs but accepting that the odds are not in your favour is totally different.

p.s. Purplegoo smells.
Posted by Frankenstein on 2011-02-27 14:53:02
Thanks for bringing this guide back to my attention. It also made me realize why I dislike the old DP and the new Clawjupomb so much:

Both reward scrubs way too much. Even more so than random fouling with khemri, clawjupomb allows scrubs to casually win numerous games without any skill at all.

Worse game design is hardly possible.
Posted by Reisender on 2011-02-27 16:11:06
+1 text

+1 subtext

+5 picture subtext

= rated 7
Posted by Timlagor on 2011-02-27 16:39:36
Oops.. hit post there..

If you're mostly interested incompetition it seems weird to play a richly varied and totally unbalanced-by-intention game like BB. I'll play to win on the field (especially in the competitive Division [L]!) but choosing not to think everyone should build the same one or two winning teams does not make you a scrub.
Posted by Timlagor on 2011-02-27 17:25:46
To put it another way.. we aren't playing Poker.
Posted by Frankenstein on 2011-02-27 17:26:15
BTW:

If Galak would have redesigned Starcraft, he'd probably have come up with a version where exactly 1 race with exactly 1 build would have been the only way to go for non-scrubs. In my book, Galak and the rest of the BBRC are definitely game-design scrubs.
Posted by Cavetroll on 2011-02-27 18:08:28
Good blog, it gave me food for thought. I'm not sure where I fall into this whole scrub vs. min-max scale. Somewhere along the 'undecided' spectrum I think. I have yet to make a Clawpombju or Clawjupomb team yet, but that's not to say that I won't. For now, I'll keep enjoying [B] and what little [R] I can get, and trying to discern the secrets of LRB6/CRP. And I'll keep getting a good chuckle out of the whole 'Danger Zone' craze that's sweeping the site :)
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-27 18:32:51
Urgh, spent all afternoon reformatting after a virus beat up McAfee like a Claw/MB/PO does a Lineorc...

Spubb, 'A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win. ' - I think that (in online BB) referrs to rules systems you impose on yourself, like not minmaxing, rather than playing challenging games to your utmost, like Gobbos / Dorfs. Perhaps I make errors in my understanding, I dunno.

And Frankie, not going near game design. I guess this is the game now, it's how we use it that is the thing.
Posted by Frankenstein on 2011-02-27 18:53:10
Dunno purplegoo, a game becoming one-dimensional and sophisticated as let's say Snake and Ladders or Monopoly isn't something I'm particularly keen on wasting my time for.

Not that I would not be keen on wasting my time in general, of course ;)
Posted by PigStar-69 on 2011-02-27 19:55:42
i thought this blog actally meant you had a scrub. with soap or something. too good to be true i guess ;-)
Posted by Carnis on 2011-02-27 20:17:58
I sense the same nostalgia of old R that a lot of older coaches seem to cling to in this blog. There's nothing stopping us 'evil minmaxers' from building the team to the glorious future while remaining in a sweetspot for winning all the time.. The team still developds, just less organically and more planned, but isnt that part of the game anyway, planning.

The cases where you have 4 legends and 8 rookies are a different one altogether, mind. I dont really think they are that hot either to be perfectly honest.
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-27 20:21:45
I do think you miss the point somewhat.

But then, you don't seem to be a scrub. You're using the system for all it's worth. And all power to you. I'll sit in my scrub house, think it's cheap and not real BB (before I chastise myself and remind myself I'm probably in the wrong), and everyone's a winner!
Posted by studmandudebro on 2011-02-27 21:44:56
i saw all those words and was like ahah noooo

but then i saw mav and was like 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Posted by studmandudebro on 2011-02-27 21:46:43
i just skimmed this blog and i saw minmax fouling and claw

i think u would be a good fit for top gun academy where u can learn the secrets behind all of this things and also oiled volleyball
Posted by koadah on 2011-02-27 22:12:44
This blog will be interesting when one of these 1400 teams wins a Major.
Posted by Cloggy on 2011-02-27 22:35:20
Agreed with text, but had to rate 1 for picture.

Seriously....

Top Gun wasn't even cool when it was first released.
Posted by DonTomaso on 2011-02-27 22:44:32
Yep, have played some of them... So, leaving the box.

It is perfectly legal, and I assume they have fun in their own way, and all credit to them for that. My guess is that they'll grow tired of it, and quit after a while... But I hope they had fun.

I still think they're idiots.
Posted by DukeTyrion on 2011-02-27 22:52:42
I think I must have been a scrub at one point :-P

I played my first 1500 odd games without a DP, since I thought it was horribly overpowered in LRB 4, although I never complained if anyone else used it, and didn't refuse games against DP teams.

Ended up using DP though after I started to realise that it was kind of difficult to get along in a league without it. Plus I became a bit calmer about he whole DP thing after i saw it had been nerfed in LRB 5.
Posted by RC on 2011-02-27 23:15:59
Hi Purp. Glad you arent joining them.
Play to win, min/maxing is the only winning tactic. I think/ feel that the crp rules is ment for teams at ma tv1600-1800. Around there, before the bashers take tackle on their r killers ia a really good sweet spot for elf teams. So turn the tables and min max other teams.
Posted by Arktoris on 2011-02-28 00:26:16
just another coach beginning to realise that the future isn't [B]
Posted by nin on 2011-02-28 00:55:10
This scrub/yes/not discusion is a bit weird, you can be quite competitive while playing no Tree flings if you really try to win with them.

Likewise, playing Norse and trying to win and get a positive cas ratio at the same time can be challenging.

...and there is this majors issue, minmaxing at low/middle TV won't win many of those, and getting as far as posible in tournaments is a good goal for a competitive coach.

I feel that sometimes playing the "best" race with "optimun" build is not enought for me. I just need to play something different and succed to feel like I've achieved something.

So nowadays it's Rats and UnderRats for me (wich means I can posibly raise some Claw+MB+PO+Spitefullswearing monsters... but in a different fasion) and I don't feel much scub myshelf.
Posted by Gran on 2011-02-28 03:07:46
I'm also a scrub, always was, always will be. My main reason for this - and my main issue with the 'Playing to Win'-text Plorg quoted - is that I mainly play for recreation and for the enjoyment I get from having fun together with someone else. Yes, I know what Sirlin said about my fun being low and uniformed and his "winner fun" being of a higher quality, but I think that his analysis is flawed in that he only recognises one point with a game, winning. Everything else is secondary, almost pointless. If it doesn't increase your chance of winning there's no point in doing it.

For me a game of BloodBowl is as much a social event as it is a game. I will do my best to win, but I'm really there to relax, chat and enjoy the experience. Minmaxing in and of itself is not necessarily a problem for me in this respect, though I won't do it myself (even if I wanted to I don't have the skills), but what is a problem is the fact that quite a few of the minmaxing coaches seem to have bought into this idea that everything and anything that doesn't add to his chances of winning should be dropped, and this seem to include such things as chatting, friendliness and common courtesy (beyond "X enters the game" ,gl & hf, gg, *X has left the game*).

To draw the whole thing to it's point I'll throw in an analogy. To me, this particular form of minmaxing is like saying that the point of sex is to cum, full stop. Nothing else, the quicker the better. 2 minutes of furious wanking is a higher form of art then an hour or two with the spouse.

I cannot dictate how other people should play this game, and I don't want to either. I think that one of the best things with FUMBBL is it's ability to allow a wast range of people to enjoy BB the way that suits them the best. I would not want it any other way. However, I don't have that much time to spend on games, and with this new trend in [B] I now run a risk of having to spend that time watching some guy wanking. For an hour. And that just isn't my cup of tea.
Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2011-02-28 11:26:30
Nothing brings stuff to a point line an analogy! :D
Posted by Calcium on 2011-02-28 11:32:25
Especially a 'wanking' analogy eh?
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-28 11:57:17
Just when you thought you'd read everything to do with BB, eh? :)

Dunno quite what to say!
Posted by DatMonsta on 2011-02-28 15:33:51
Rated 6, i feel the same as Purplegoo,
+1 for Grans comment!

Great that somebody feels the same as me, so i'm a scrub too!
Now Purplegoo, give me a comment about those TopGun-Gayacademy Claw/MB/PO-Users! They will be very lonely (them and the min-maxers) when evreybody else left the box, because of some guys destroying the chances of their opponents to have fun (look at Grans comment for further explanation).
As long as i stay in the box i will go on playing my not optimized Lizzies, Vamps or whatever!
Posted by Calcium on 2011-02-28 16:10:07
MOAR CRY MAYBE?
Posted by koadah on 2011-02-28 16:28:40
Why does it make someone a scrub if they want to play with the big boys instead of having the hardest team in kindergarten?

If there's no one left to play except Calcium I guess I'll be needing more claw. ;)
Posted by Purplegoo on 2011-02-28 16:31:59
DatMonsta, I've been nothing but complimentary about those that want to play the minmax way. Good luck to them! The fun police should never get in the way. Not a fan of starting a ‘this must be stopped’ thread, afterall, as I said at the time, thems the rules! You have to be deliberately (if entertainingly) fishing for fights to see anything else. ;)
Posted by PurpleChest on 2011-03-01 02:21:41
Don't worry about calcium, he just gets a bit emo.

PG, play as makes you happy. Grab yourself a label if it makes you feel good, but i wouldn't personally choose to listen to as missguided and simplistic a voice as that post/article/book you linked to.
Posted by pythrr on 2011-03-01 16:49:30
META
Posted by pac on 2011-03-01 21:17:12
"For those unfamiliar with the term, I direct you to Plorg’s interesting 2008 thread Playing to Win. For those that can’t be arsed to click, to paraphrase, a scrub is someone not doing their utmost to win, probably by playing with some self-imposed mantra or rule set. Plorg’s first post lays it out better than I ever could, but common Blood Bowling scrubs you’ve encountered before are coaches who apply some bizarre morale code to Fouling. They won’t take Claw on doubles because they‘re cool and it's 'OP', that sort of thing. They impose their own made up values, rules or system that aren’t in the rules of the game and as such, aren’t totally playing to win (’This is broken, I won‘t use it!’ is a common scrub saying), but justify it to themselves somehow."

No, this is not the definition. A "scrub" is a coach who does things like this _while_ pretending (or wanting) to be a top or competitive coach.

In addition, the concept of "scrub" is only significant if you think the competition is meaningful. If you think the game is worth the candle. Who's the champion of [B]?

And you are far too hung up on the whole concept. ;)
Posted by The_Murker on 2011-03-03 04:17:07
Well said by PAC. Someone's definition of a made up word is a pretty meaningless thing to get hung up on. I see box as an arena to compete with any team at any TV, once you get to that TV you want to be at. Not there yet? Expect your team with 5 games to lose to one with 35 games, because his team has put in the hours and yours has not. The linked article is excellent, other than the use of a stupid word. It is great in terms of playing like a winner, vice playing like a whinner, or recreational gamer.