koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 13:33 |
 
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 13:38 |
|
Actually - I'm glad someone brought this up. The current poll amazes me. Everyone I've ever spoken to about it before the poll has wanted the SMACK format changed. 2 questions;
Why vote to keep it the same? And..
What advantages does keeping it the same have? Currently, there are many that simply can't play due to the format. Myself included. I'd like one of the 'keep it the same' voters to start a bit of debate and try to convince me? |
|
|
Pirog
Joined: Jul 13, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 13:57 |
|
I was surprised by the result too. My guess is the multi dp teams might have discouraged a lot of people from playing Smacks at all, so they don't bother voting. But 400+ votes is quite a lot...
I really hope we get Rumble style tournaments in the future. I spend way too much time on Fumbbl as it is...sitting around for half the day waiting for a Smack to start just doesn't feel like an option. |
|
|
SeraphimRed
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:15 |
|
I agree with Purple, funnily enough. 
The only advantage I see to the current format is the quicker turn-around time, but not having played them I could be missing something. Enlighten us poor souls!
I hope the format changes to attract more coaches with less play time. |
_________________
Enhance YOUR FUMBBL
 |
|
Pehlkonikow
Joined: Oct 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:21 |
|
I totally second pirog and purplegoo (and voted option 3 btw). Introducing rumble style smacks to fumbbl would be great. There's nothing wrong with keeping the current format as it is imo, the few smacks I played so far went fine.
But as much as I enjoy playing smacks I very rarly have 3 to 4 hours spare time at my disposal. I would play more smacks if a rumble style format would be available. |
_________________
Reality is where the pizzaman comes from. |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:21 |
|
There are some spanking new minors being created, these might fill your needs. I'll link em in a minute. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:30 |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:33 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | I like the Rumble idea but don't want to be stuck with someone on a very different timezone and find it difficult to schedule the game. |
That's why I voted for the one instant game. It's curious that this topic continues to throw up people that want change, but the definative poll has over 50% that are happy. I wonder who these guys are, and what their reasoning is! 
And Sillysod, I await with baited breath. Could this be the tour....?  |
|
|
Unstoffe
Joined: Aug 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:40 |
|
Clearly a lot people like the current format, 210 votes!
So - I wouldn't advocate dropping it. But personally I can't spare the time to wait for a SMACK to start, and then play two games...
Voted for option 2, what I'd really like would be a new minor run on those lines, in addition to the existing SMACKs. |
_________________
British or thereabouts? Check out the White Isle League |
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:44 |
|
Ok, I can't find any links to the new sceduled minors that are coming out. As I understood it they are currently intended to run alongside the majors schedule and provide some glory for the smaller teams. I can't remember much more about them but when they were linked in chat they looked Teh Sexeh.
As for SMACKs, they need to remain in a format where coaches can play at least one game instantly, having a team locked and waiting around for a week just to be beaten in the first round really dosent apeal to me. I voted for the single game option because it would retain some of the speed at which the tournament is finished but allow far more people to participate such as Kodah and Purplegoo. This might also help diversify the teams that are entered into SMACKs (as the extra guys probably won't have time to be hardcore powergamers) and this might, in turn persuade a few more to join in. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced."
Last edited by SillySod on Oct 18, 2007; edited 1 time in total |
|
Qaz
Joined: Apr 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:44 |
|
I was one of them that voted to keep smack with 2 back to back games. I really liket that I have to play 2 games in a row.
That said. We need more sceduled turnements. But I think our excellent staff already knows this and are working on som minor turnements that are weekly sceduled.
When thees turnements kick in we have both weekly and smacks for the addicts |
_________________
Superstition brings bad luck.
"he who has relied least on fortune is established
the strongest"
Niccolo Machiavelli |
|
mighty_scoop
Joined: Sep 22, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:45 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | Actually - I'm glad someone brought this up. The current poll amazes me. Everyone I've ever spoken to about it before the poll has wanted the SMACK format changed. 2 questions;
Why vote to keep it the same? And..
What advantages does keeping it the same have? Currently, there are many that simply can't play due to the format. Myself included. I'd like one of the 'keep it the same' voters to start a bit of debate and try to convince me? |
I was surprised too by the poll ... my theory is, that mainly those who are currently playing the smacks voted ... they are definitely more then pleased with the current smack style ( yes, it is a lot of fun) ... but to make smacks available for more coaches (those without the time to play 2 games i a row) it is necessary to change the way they are run ...
To also allow player, who only have the time for one match in a row, to know the promise of playing smacks .... please change the way they are run ( yes ... i'm one of those "don't have time for 2 matches in a row" choaches) |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:46 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: |
And Sillysod, I await with baited breath. Could this be the tour....? |
One of them was the tour but there were others, loads of em, it'll be pretty sweet if they have time to implement their plans.
I'll repeat: Teh Sexeh |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced."
Last edited by SillySod on Oct 18, 2007; edited 1 time in total |
|
mighty_scoop
Joined: Sep 22, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:46 |
|
| Qaz wrote: | I was one of them that voted to keep smack with 2 back to back games. I really liket that I have to play 2 games in a row.
That said. We need more sceduled turnements. But I think our excellent staff already knows this and are working on som minor turnements that are weekly sceduled.
When thees turnements kick in we have both weekly and smacks for the addicts |
having both would be perhaps the best way to go |
|
|
xcver
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 18, 2007 - 14:47 |
|
a problem of the poll was also that there were two counter-options thus splitting up the against votes. When you count them together it's 50-50. Like in an US election you can than pick a random winner 
I also voted for the single game now option also because time issues on hand. |
_________________
"Power without perception is virtually useless and therefore of no true value!" - Ryouken - Master of the Hokuto no Ken Martial Arts |
|
|
|
data on the most use...
Search
