harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
 Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:07 |
 
|
RE Uuni:
(I'm repeating myself again, when it becomes clear that coaches are not reading what I write before, this will be removed from you).
1. This is not a precedent, as I've said at least twice already, possibly 3 or 4 times. We use Vicius's teachings for protocol on vampire bugs. These mostly/all ? have been removed from the latest version of the game, however were meant for FFB, and if the same bug arises is the correct protocol.
2. How rare a bug is, has no bearing on it's importance. It certainly occurs more than 1 in 13 though (even though my 1 test didn't bring up anything, or it maybe that test mode doesn't bring the bug up at all). |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:11 |
|
| xnoelx wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | How should I react if a coach came to me, with replays, and well put documentation, that made it pretty clear a coach was taking shadowing to abuse this bug? |
But this is already covered by site rules. Abusing obvious bugs for your own benefit, etc...
And has there even been a reported case of that yet, bearing in mind the bug has existed for quite a while already? |
Ahhh so, what do you think are the chances of a coach with a shadowing player, clicking to shadow a blitzer, purely to kill the blitz attempt?
I would say pretty high, in fact I would say it's happening. I know it's crossed my mind several times. Coaches shouldn't be put in this situation. Either it's allowed or it isn't. |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:17 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | RE Uuni:
(I'm repeating myself again, when it becomes clear that coaches are not reading what I write before, this will be removed from you). |
It seems clear, that I don't get you the way you want. Perhaps it is best for me to step out of this conversation. I do not understand what "removed from you" means.
My point was to try to convey you some of the silent knowledge from the FFB 1.0 testing period, where I was charged with listing the FFB house rules. Usability was a main concern there. FFB benefit from the opinions over a dozen of a tester. I feel they made the client much better.
If you feel I have offended you, perhaps you should talk to someone else in testing or development. Also other admins may be able to offer you the guidance you seek. My apologies. |
|
|
Azure
Joined: Jan 30, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:20 |
|
This discussion is important - please focus on constructive posts.
| harvestmouse wrote: | Ok, let's look at a hypothetical situation (yes the chances of this are low, bloodly low, but it is possible).
FUMBBL cup final. Turn 7. Coach Demonspawn has a strip ball skink that can blitz the stalling wood elf catcher. Coach Angelcloud, has put a shadower on the skink. Demonspawn elects to blitz the carrier, and reaches him, only to find that his blitz has been negated by the shadowing bug. Angelcloud's turn 7 he moves the carrier to another spot, and puts the shadower back on the strip ball skink.
Turn 8, demonspawn again elects to blitz with the strip ball skink. Ok, what happens then?
Whatever is decided, all concerned should be aware of the correct protocol in this situation (and what should happen in the T7 blitz too). |
I do see what you are saying here - and certainly this is a tough situation. If we ignore everything else, then honestly rolling the dice in chat or something similar may be the only fair approach.
On the flip side I will give you another possible (although also unlikely) situation:
Same game, Demonspawn has the ball and is trying to score on turn 16. However, coach Angelcloud marks him with a shadowing player. Coach Demonspawn's player is only MA 6 vs MA 10 shadower. Coach Demonspawn blitzs with the intent to move several spaces to say gain an assist or something and then blitz the shadower. Or intends to dodge away until uses dodge RR then try the 1d blitz on the shadower.
However, we make the rule that you can not shadow someone who is blitzing...thus the shadower does not shadow - and gives up the free TD...instead of making them dodge 6 times.
Another (perhaps better) example. Demonspawn wants to dodge away a BT sauras to blitz off a DT on his ballcarrier. Now, if shadowing works, he has to start making 5+ dodges, and his plan will likely fail. However, if we disallow shadowing because of the bug - then he just 2+ dodges to get the blitz off and (assuming it works) walks in to score. |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:26 |
|
I've got a few shadowers on my ranked teams and it's pretty rare shadowing causes a bug. as already mentioned, I bet it's the dodge bug more than anything.
does logging out and back in for both coaches solve the situation?
I'd hate for 1 or 3 solution to be implemented over such low frequency bug. Generally, I and the other coach simply work out a solution. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:26 |
|
Ok, right now the coach has an ethical decision to make. "Do I shadow (knowing that it will/could kill my opponents blitz attempt, or do I not shadow, as ethically my shadowing player has very little chance of affecting the outcome, if played by the rules."
The coach should not have to make this choice, and the choice should be "removed from you."
Either (it being say yes to shadowing). 1. The site doesn't allow it. 2. The site allows it under certain conditions. 3. The site does allow you to do it.
The bottom line is, I feel certain (as with other bug situations) that a decision should be made on what the coach can and can't do in these situations.
In no way, do I feel I'm the soul person qualified to make that decision. Personally, I don't overly care which (or another even better alternative) method we use to rule on this, but we need 1.
I nor any other coach should be put in the ethical situation where their main reason for pressing shadowing is in the hope to kill the blitz attempt, and therefore it comes down to the ethics of the coach, whether they do or don't press that button. That's just plain wrong. Either it's allowed or it isn't. |
|
|
anisdrin
Joined: Apr 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:27 |
|
There is no way to solve it without harming the blitzing player or the shadowing player.
In tournament I think that rolling in chat is best option.
If there is an abuse then admins will have to be there to solve it. |
|
|
Verminardo
Joined: Sep 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:29 |
|
Concerning the point of "abusing" this bug, I would say it cannot really be abused as such, since marking players is the whole point of Shadowing, so you can hardly call it abuse if someone marks a player with his Shadower (Edit: well maybe if someone started spamming Shadowing on low MA players). |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:34 |
|
Difficult............I think maybe we need better knowledge of the bug before making a decision.
So unless anyone new comes forward with better information, I suggest we do the following.
1. Play as if the bug does not exist.
*2. Log (on the bug report) any cases of it happening (please do this, so we can understand it better).
*3. Log here, any cases of it happening, and situations where you expect it to happen and it doesn't.
4. Review the situation, when more information on it, is obtained.
* 2 & 3 especially applies to pygmy coaches, who have the most information on this bug. |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:36 |
|
well if it has to come down to a Draconian policy I vote for solution #3...as the whole reason why shadowing was invented in the first place is to sabotage your opponent's key actions (such as his blitz or TD) |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
I agree with the approach of careful testing. I'd suggest test matches with various test-cases worked out to try to cause the bug to see if it's repeatable. Perhaps there's some specific case that causes it, or maybe the coach can click things slightly differently to avoid the bug. Then we'd be better positioned to understand the risk. |
|
|
gamelsetlmatch
Joined: Mar 05, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 17:59 |
|
If anything, the shadow player cannot continue to shadow within two squares of the blitz target so that the block can be performed and not have this specific bug be an issue. |
_________________
Stargate!
“In our play we reveal what kind of people we are.” |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 18:11 |
|
Tricky stuff, this. Sounds a really pokey bug. I would be inclined to agree with the idea of the site-rule (in this case being play it how the client sees it until such a time as it's fixed. I agree with Synn and Azure.
I think those that know about it will take it upon themselves to talk about it before it happens and settle it in chat, but I'm not sure how the admins can hope to enforce some sort of site-wide ruling. Not everyone will read the thread.
It's a bit tricky with the general site policy being 'Bug abuse will not be tolerated'. But I can't see an elegant way around this one. It's not the old KOR bug where you could just sod off 3 squares into the opponent's half and cheat. It's more of a tricky issue.
I suppose we're lucky (outside of the specific Stunty usage case) that Shadowing is a bit sub optimal and so infrequently seen. Someone find Kalimar and get him some time off work!  |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 18:21 |
|
The biggest problem with it, is that when the bug occurs, it's very difficult to think of a fair 'bodged solution'.
Quite often the blitz move is near the end of the turn, and if that then fails, how do you come to an acceptable solution? The 4 times that it's occurred to me, there really hasn't been an obvious fair way to work around it. And that tends to leave a bitter taste for one or both coaches.
It maybe Draconian to say 'This is what you do!', however sometimes being Draconian is in the best interest of everyone involved. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 23, 2013 - 18:37 |
|
Blood Bowl + Democracy = mega failure, in most cases. Sometimes better to be the big bad wolf. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
