GoodWill
Joined: Feb 23, 2009
|
  Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 15:47 |
 
|
Ok, here is another question concerning how to find reasonable games:
What's up with those people hanging out on the gamefinder while still having larger amounts of cash left on their team?
Sure, sometimes you can go figure they are saving for the big-guy or a reroll
but more often than just occasionally there seems to be much more need for something else:
- they might be down to 10 players
- they might be lacking a positional they could easily afford
- they might not even have an apoth yet
Is it a common practice to put your team on the gamefinder, get a fair matchup
and buy a kick-ass positional shortly before joining the game?
Or are those people just kinda dim and think having a little extra cash is always a good thing,
especially when your team isn't developed yet? |
|
|
Grod
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 15:51 |
|
| GoodWill wrote: |
Or are those people just kinda dim ... ? |
Yes. But because they think it is cool to trick you with a last second purchase. |
_________________
I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
Hogshine
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 15:55 |
|
If a team looks like it has a lot of cash, just ask the coach about it and what he's planning on spending it on. In my experience, very few coaches lie about this sort of thing. If the purchase stops the game being fair, then you won't have joined yet, so can just find another one.
Of course, if you get the feeling they're not being entirely honest about it, then you can just delay joining/hosting the game for a moment to see if that big wad of cash goes somewhere, and the same applies. I've done this to people before, they may well threaten to report you, and say you'll get banned etc, but as long as you haven't connected on the client, the game hasn't started.
Some of my teams have a lot of cash, at higher TRs they're saving for tournaments/majors. It could well be the case at lower TRs (especially with humans or Undead, I would imagine). My lizardman teams tend not to replace skinks if they're down on saurii/krox or want another reroll, so would potentially have a fair bit of cash, and fewer than 11 players. |
|
|
xcver
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:04 |
|
Listen to Hogshine |
_________________
"Power without perception is virtually useless and therefore of no true value!" - Ryouken - Master of the Hokuto no Ken Martial Arts |
|
Cribbleobblepie
Joined: Dec 15, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:09 |
|
Just ask them, Hogshine speaketh the truth! |
_________________
"You've been DONE!" |
|
duttydave
Joined: Dec 16, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:11 |
|
I fell foul of this 'sneak hiring' for the first time yesterday. I had a team at 146/121 and in need of a recovery match. I offered an opponent a match up whose team was 147/130. I thought this was reasonably fair.
Unfortunately, my own fault, I had failed to take too much notice of his spare cash in the treasury. By the time I connected to the game he had hired a star player and his tr/ts was 147/154 to my 146/121.
I will not be fooled like this again. The game was no fun and a bit of a walkover for my opponent. What kind of person enjoys winning like that?
Whilst not against the rules I found it dishonest and lame in the extreme. This 'opponent' is now the first entry on my Blacklist.
I will be a lot more diligent in arranging Ranked matches in future.
Thanks Hogshine for the advice. If necessary I will delay in connecting if I smell a rat. |
|
|
GoodWill
Joined: Feb 23, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:28 |
|
| duttydave wrote: |
Whilst not against the rules I found it dishonest and lame in the extreme. This 'opponent' is now the first entry on my Blacklist.
|
Speaking of rules:
Is it legitimate to agree on stuff like this and refuse to play the game when the agreement isn't met? (Even when the client has opened already ...) |
|
|
Optihut
Joined: Dec 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:32 |
|
| GoodWill wrote: | Speaking of rules:
Is it legitimate to agree on stuff like this and refuse to play the game when the agreement isn't met? (Even when the client has opened already ...) |
As far as I know, you have to play once you connect to the game. If you don't want to, then check beforehand. |
|
|
duttydave
Joined: Dec 16, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:35 |
|
To quote the Site Rules:
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.
That's why, on the bottom line, it was my own fault for not checking my opponent's treasury beforehand. Once the Client had connected I was committed to the game.
I've just noticed that the same opponent is sitting there with 180k in the team's treasury. Be warned folks. I know that I will never be playing that individual again. |
|
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:39 |
|
| duttydave wrote: |
Whilst not against the rules I found it dishonest and lame in the extreme. This 'opponent' is now the first entry on my Blacklist.
I will be a lot more diligent in arranging Ranked matches in future.
Thanks Hogshine for the advice. If necessary I will delay in connecting if I smell a rat. |
I've got some coaches on my blacklist for this BS, too. It's just a weak move by a loser coach who doesn't think he can win a fair match. Goblins are sort of an exception since the stars are kinda standard (flings too, to a lesser degree).
I now pre-screen for coaches with suspicious cash as well. I tend to worry more about the undead team with 90k spare than the TR240 chaos team with 240k though. |
|
|
duttydave
Joined: Dec 16, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:45 |
|
For Goblins and 'Flings this is fair enough.
I have had matches when my opponents tell me up front that they will hire a mystery star. All well and good. You can take or leave it before the game starts.
It's the loathsome sneak hiring that saw me waste an hour or so of my time playing a thoroughly unenjoyable game that I resent. |
|
|
Thomcat
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:51 |
|
I often have cash in bank on GF with 10 men for next game. And sometimes I am asked what I would not call fair matchups and then I often tell the opponent only if I can use the moeny to buy a lino (that would make the game much more fair) and 50% of the time people refuse and then I know that they are just not looking for fair matchups. So to me that is a win win situation for me. when I need recovery I would like it to go to people who play fair matches - and not to people that just prey on bashed teams. |
_________________
Og inviterer hermed alle danskere MED godt humør ind i #fumbbl.dk |
|
GoodWill
Joined: Feb 23, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 16:58 |
|
| duttydave wrote: | To quote the Site Rules:
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.
That's why, on the bottom line, it was my own fault for not checking my opponent's treasury beforehand. Once the Client had connected I was committed to the game.
I've just noticed that the same opponent is sitting there with 180k in the team's treasury. Be warned folks. I know that I will never be playing that individual again. |
I guess rules have to draw the line somewhere, otherwise they could be too easily exploited.
I still find it kinda dumb the rules are asking for ...
Coaches are expected to play reasonably balanced games. Play against lower rated teams is allowed, but should not be abused. It is understood that sometimes teams need a recovery game against a lower ranked team after a particuarly bloody game, but excessive play against lower ranked teams creates an unfair advantage and will not be tolerated.
... and then won't let you reliably arrange balanced games by agreeing on a game under the premise you/ your oppo wont hire a star-player or something.
---
@ Thomcat:
What are you keeping the cash for? In LRB4 it really makes no sense unless you are actually saving for something big or the tournament-scenario mentioned by Hogshine.
Anything else will just bloat your TR and award your oppo handicaps ... ? |
|
|
fly
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 17:00 |
|
my POV: ask what they do with the money. if they say they spare it but hire stuff sneakily, they lied and the game agreement isn't valid. |
_________________
I play for fun. I play to win.
Do you play CPOMB 'cause you can't win otherwise?
No, that's a rhetorical question. |
|
Doowa
Joined: Nov 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 05, 2009 - 17:09 |
|
| GoodWill wrote: | Speaking of rules:
Is it legitimate to agree on stuff like this and refuse to play the game when the agreement isn't met? (Even when the client has opened already ...) |
| FUMBBL RULES wrote: |
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. |
the question is: "Can you close the client fast enough, so there's no prof / saved game file, that says you where ever there...?"  |
_________________
I play the game of life and have never once lost... |
|
|
|
TSC Draft
Search
