Price
Joined: Oct 03, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 17:05 |
|
I decided to create a fluff-based Vampire only team too see how they would fare ('True Blood' Bowlers). In all honesty they don't do as badly as they could, but when facing a full team of 11 or 12 will almost always get well and truely mauled. I'm pretty sure this could cahnce once I've got a good few re-rolls, but for now I would simply get slaughtered.
One game I have played however was against 8 High Elves (mostly unskilled). This turned out to be a really close run game, with my 'Off for a bite' turnovers, fewer guys and no re-rolls being offset by the fact that Vamps are naturally pretty damn good players. After thinking about this game for a minute, I came up with the basics of an idea.
From time to time some teams get well and truely nailed in one (or all) of their first few games. Some slip up a bit later and lose their skilled players. What I was thinking of doing was making a 'sportman-like' group either for teams which, like mine, struggle because of fluff or because they have lost around 3-5 players. A team either gets back on its feet or gains enough skill to play against regular teams.
Now I know that people often take a dim view of so-called 'recovery' games, but surely teams should be playing against others who are of roughly equal strength and skill. Most people have probably been in a situation where they can't seem to find a similar team to play after a particularly dismal match, something like this is a better option that simply retiring the team.
If anybody has an opinion on the matter I would like to hear it so that I can guage the general concensus. Feel free to post here or PM me. |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 17:18 |
|
I take a great view of recovery games. I'd check out a recovery channel for sure. Not sure a group would work. |
_________________ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
paulhicks
Joined: Jul 19, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 17:58 |
|
If such a group were allowed there would be no way to have agreements before the game about not fouling etc as this is against the rules so whats to stop someone just destroying a weak team. also while i dont realy have a problem with people looking for recovery games i get a bit fed up of seeing teams with 10 or even 11 starting players claiming they need a recovery just cuz a few of their subs are mng. theres realy no point in asking for a recovery. just put the team on gamefinder and turn down the matches you dont like |
_________________ Spelling, grammer and sense are for noobs! |
|
Nordmark
Joined: Sep 09, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 18:16 |
|
There already is a spotrsmanlike group
NFL
Are you a gentleman? Prove it!
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=group&op=view&group=2221
Well it´s a tournamnet but still..
You don´t have many players. Why not play them as 4vs4? Just be careful so that this possible recov channel doesn´t become another toll of cherrypicking. |
_________________ ”The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is the fear of the unknown.” - H.P. Lovecraft |
|
The_Mighty_Ren
Joined: Oct 12, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 18:37 |
|
Was thinking about this myself last night. Why not just do it as a forum page? Have people post the link to their team, TR/TS and the number of players available for their next match. People could then PM the coaches if they had suitable opponents and arrange a time to play.
Pro- It would be easier to arrangea match than the "join gamefinder and hope" approach.
Cons- The page would require the regular editing and deleting of posts. |
|
|
Azurus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Mar 05, 2005 - 18:49 |
|
That's been done before Ren.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work. The forums are just far too slow for finding games. By the time another bashed-up team sees the post and sends a PM, you've probably got bored and played another game anyway.
On the main idea: I suggested this once too, after seeing a couple of threads on recovery games. The general consensus is it wouldn't work, mostly because opinions differ on what a 'recovery game' is. Some people will ask for one just because they have a single mng on an 11-man roster, which is just wrong, they could play a full strength team with little problem.
On the other hand, my eternally-mashed DE team in U (who generally average 9 roster players) have stopped looking for recovery games, since they've proved they can still be competitive regardless.
It's all a matter of perception, which is why it's hard to 'organize' recovery games. It would be interesting to see how a channel works, but i think you'd probably just see it get flooded by teams that ere basically healthy and just looking for an easy game. |
_________________ *This is a public safety announcement. Azurus is a cynical, sarcastic idiot. Please ignore any and everything he may say. Thank you for your attention.* |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 06, 2005 - 00:24 |
|
I join Azurus on this point. Needing a recory is ok, getting some is possible either; you should simply take time to find it. |
|
|
Flynn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Mar 06, 2005 - 00:28 |
|
to nordmark
/boo
heheheh |
_________________ Proud to be a professor in Wuhan's Fouling Academy
Goodbye Cusi |
|
Nordmark
Joined: Sep 09, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 07, 2005 - 18:33 |
|
Thrall wrote: | to nordmark
/boo |
Right back at ya |
_________________ ”The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is the fear of the unknown.” - H.P. Lovecraft |
|
CorporateSlave3
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 07, 2005 - 18:55 |
|
paulhicks wrote: | If such a group were allowed there would be no way to have agreements before the game about not fouling etc as this is against the rules so whats to stop someone just destroying a weak team. |
Isnt' the 'no pre-game agreements' rule confined to Ranked division? I only mention this because this was after all posted in an Unranked forum. There are certainly Unranked groups that do not allow fouling, wouldn't this just be about the same thing? (as long as it was confined to Unranked teams, of crourse) |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Mar 07, 2005 - 19:34 |
|
CorporateSlave3 wrote: | Isnt' the 'no pre-game agreements' rule confined to Ranked division? |
I think that, technically, all U groups with specific in-game rules should be worded as, "Doing <whatever> is grounds for removal from the group/league/tourney/whatever."
You can't really stop someone from fouling even in the no-fouling league, to use an example. You not allowed to agree before the match not to do so. You CAN, however, as a tournament organizer, apply penalties to reinforce the desired goal. In other words, as a player, you always have the option to play however you want by the FUMBBL rules but there may be additional group-specific rules in some groups which have group-specific consequences - affecting only that particular league, not FUMBBL as a whole.
As an example, let's say someone in a 4v4 league bought a 5th and 6th player for a match and proceeded to use them to outnumber and generally mop up their opponent. While there are - and should be - NO fumbbl-specific problems (he didn't break any fumbbl rules), I would expect the person to be booted from the group. The poor coach playing against him, however, is still bound by the FUMBBL rules and has to play out the game.
Gray area? Yeah... but I think it's supposed to apply to all divisions. It is clear enough, however, that it is predominantly for open play, rather than tourneys.
Back on topic a bit, rather than a haven for battered teams (which are generally temporarily battered, at best), I think a group for fun and creative team designs sounds like a decent idea. Maybe you could find a way to arbitrarily award points for the cleverness of the rosters or something.
{ edit: a little clarification on FUMBBL- vs group-specific } |
_________________ Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
CorporateSlave3
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 07, 2005 - 20:19 |
|
Ah yes, well that is generally what I meant. In which sense, paulhicks is right, there is no way to stop someone from mauling teams in such a group...but having the group rules written so that such a coach would then be penalized by being kicked from the group would be acceptable?
So the rule DOES apply to all divisons, but does not limit the rules that may be applied to specific groups? i.e. Joining a 'no fouling' group is no so much an implicit 'agreement not to foul' ever game, as much as an acceptance that fouling withing group games would cause you to be disqualified from the group tournament? |
_________________ ***Did you know? 42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot? |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Mar 07, 2005 - 20:23 |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
  Posted:
Mar 08, 2005 - 12:29 |
|
Unranked is somehow designed for free games and tournament. I am not ok with all you said.
Creating an no-foul group in R is illegal IMO.
But playing at 6 would be cheating in a 4vs4 and therefore allow a disconnection.->But if I am wrong would it mean that you are supposed to play as soon as the game is set up?
Could I then say elf vs elf but connect with my chaos team?
IMO some insight about these things are necessar. |
|
|
dr_scitt
Joined: Nov 16, 2003
|
  Posted:
Mar 08, 2005 - 13:35 |
|
From the user guide:
Quote: |
A game is considered to have started at the moment the clients connect. At this point you are committed to the game and must play it out. Note that this includes scenarios where your opponent purchased new players after the mutual agreement to play. This rule does not apply if any of the participants connects with a team other than the one the game was agreed on.
|
Makes it quite clear on the elf v elf case, the player can disconnect straight away if you try using your chaos. I suppose taking the letter of the law on the user guide you could buy extra players for a 4v4 group game and the other person would have to play (though why someone would want to such a pointless thing is another matter).
The recovery channel sounds a good idea to me (surely everyones had that team that has lost a couple of players early on but has some skill rolls worth keeping the team running for). Just the worry that such a channel would be abused by people making arrangements before games. |
|
|
|