Delta
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 17:26 |
|
annachie wrote: | SkiJunkies masterpiece that we call fumbbl. |
SkiJunkies masterpiece is the JavaBB client.
Fumbbl is Christer's masterpiece.
{wanders off to continue praising the two TRUE gods} |
_________________ Cain is for Charlie and Delta is for Cain |
|
Delta
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 17:28 |
|
AFK_Eagle wrote: | Question, though--would such games be permissable to upload the results? Does the fumbbl site only recognize game results with a tag showing the latest client version? Or do you simply need your version to match your opponent's? |
I always thought that the only overiding factor was that both players were using the same version of the client, not necessarily the latest. |
_________________ Cain is for Charlie and Delta is for Cain |
|
nazerdemus
Joined: Nov 02, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 17:29 |
|
Keep spreading the word delta ! |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 17:37 |
|
Delta wrote: | I always thought that the only overiding factor was that both players were using the same version of the client, not necessarily the latest. |
Nope. If either or both of you are using the wrong version you should get a popup telling you so at the beginning of the match and you will not be able to upload it. |
_________________ Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 17:55 |
|
what if skijunkie doesn't change the code, but that your opponent has to just respect the rule by himself, even if the client does not compell him to do so ? a bit like the pass block thing ?
just my 2 cents |
_________________ 'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
NNNChef
Joined: Dec 09, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 18:41 |
|
I wood appreciate that a league manager could use rules he thinks are best for his league and not the rules that other people think are right.
That doesnt mean, that I dont like the rules review. The rules changes are very good and I am grateful to the guys who work out the rules every year. But the special rule with the 11 players woud cause trouble in my league.
In other cases I think this rule is very good, especialy in the ranked division. |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 19:40 |
|
Quote: |
Delta wrote:
I always thought that the only overiding factor was that both players were using the same version of the client, not necessarily the latest.
Nope. If either or both of you are using the wrong version you should get a popup telling you so at the beginning of the match and you will not be able to upload it.
|
I dont think that is right Mojo. I specifically played a game that had been interuppted using an older version of the client after the new one had been sent out. The game uploaded fine.
I have also seen numerous occasions when coaches upload a game under an old version the same day the new version came out without any issues. So I think as long as both coaches have the same version it is OK.
Unless this has recently changed. |
_________________ Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
AvatarDM
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 21:52 |
|
Well, the site won't stop you from uploading a game played with an older version of the client afaik, but it's against the rules. So please don't do it unless the rules change. |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 22:23 |
|
Quote: |
Well, the site won't stop you from uploading a game played with an older version of the client afaik, but it's against the rules. So please don't do it unless the rules change.
|
I totally agree. The only exception though would be a game that was dropped in mid-game and needs to be completed. The only way to finish it would be to use the version that was originally used. |
_________________ Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
Cortelll
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 22:49 |
|
That's cool, I usually put 3 guys when it's turn 8th and I have to set up, but I really didn't know about the rule, I will be more careful from now on.
|
_________________ Cortelll
Bloodbowl World Cup
Vamps Group |
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 19, 2004 - 22:50 |
|
Mully wrote: | ...I have also seen numerous occasions when coaches upload a game under an old version the same day the new version came out without any issues. So I think as long as both coaches have the same version it is OK... |
I'm certainly not positive but I always thought it was just a "grace period" to make sure that the client wasn't bugged (and, typically, patched in short order) and to allow everyone a chance to finish up any games.
Just my preconceived notion, I have no way of actually knowing for sure.
Either way, this is all dependent upon a JBB update which does not yet exist. It is illegal to set up less than 11 players (or as many as you have available for the drive), even if the client lets you.
Any player-run tourneys who use such a setup need to do some rethinking. Perhaps the admins might let it go with permission in special circumstances... I have no clue. Allowing exceptions to basic league rules (in this case, use the latest LRB rules and don't cheat) seems problematic at best. |
_________________ Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
NNNChef
Joined: Dec 09, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 20, 2004 - 00:08 |
|
If the rule with the minimum of 11 Players will be implemented in JBB it would be great, when this rule won't apply for league games.
I would like it, if league manager had some free space making their own rules in their leagues. |
|
|
Delta
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 20, 2004 - 03:11 |
|
BadMrMojo wrote: | Any player-run tourneys who use such a setup need to do some rethinking. Perhaps the admins might let it go with permission in special circumstances... I have no clue. Allowing exceptions to basic league rules (in this case, use the latest LRB rules and don't cheat) seems problematic at best. |
Well I would hope that the powers that be take into account the popularity of tourneys like MNF etc, which are specifically geared to a lower number of players.
It might be that *they* decide to accept such tourneys only in DX or U for example. Or even that they let things continue as they are and overlook this infringement of the LRB in the interests of fun.
Until something is made official it's all just speculation. |
_________________ Cain is for Charlie and Delta is for Cain |
|
annachie
Joined: Jul 27, 2004
|
  Posted:
Nov 20, 2004 - 04:21 |
|
Well, since any of the lower player leagues would be unranked, then unranked is the only place where asking for this to be effective. afaik any tournement/league is unranked with a few noticable exceptions that could probably switch to purely U anyway.
The other is that it really is a small change, perhaps made a little bigger by specifing that it only be for U teams only, and really we just need enough people to ask to make SkiJunkie think it a worthwile change to take the time to do. |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Nov 20, 2004 - 05:42 |
|
I actually don't want Ski to implement it at all. I'd much rather see everyone just play by the rules.
Think for a moment. You wouldn't try to take 2 turns in a row in Monopoly just because your opponent wasn't looking, would you? So why would you try to put less than 11 players on the field just because JBB doesn't force you to do so?
It seems better than trying to code JBB and FUMBBL to force the (as yet uncoded) 11 player rule except, possibly, for div U and then make sure that everyone knows that it is only turned off because some people might have written consent of the admins to ignore it. Whew. What a pain in the ass.
Just tell your opponents that it is part of the rules and they have to play by it. Also, do so yourself. If it does get coded into JBB, I hope it is enforced for everyone (as much as I adore the MNF setup) just to avoid the hassles for the admins. It's going to be a nightmare to enforce if we make everyone jump through hoops to get exactly what they want.
Also, everyone seems to forget this sort of thing, but adding something like this to the setup code always has the potential to cause new bugs. What if your really great game gets bugged and you have to restart because your opponent got "I am the greatest" and it crashes when you try to set up? Wouldn't that suck? With all due respect to Ski, he's only human and mistakes can happen. Leaving the greatest margin of error is the closest you can come to avoiding them. I, personally, would rather just see it enforced by the players obeying the rules.... that way people can play their 7-man or 4-man or whatever tourneys they want with JBB... even if not on FUMBBL.
There are other users, you know...
{ edit: Also, this is really Ski's call. Whatever he decides, we all have to follow the rules anyway, so it shouldn't make much of a difference. Now that I'm thinking of it, his original goal was to make it fully LRB compliant. Adding this code would be yet another step towards doing so, so I would expect to see it in - just because he can and it is part of the overall scheme. I think that's a bit unfortunate but it is really not my place to complain about it... particularly since I plan on following the FUMBBL rules anyway. } |
_________________ Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies |
|
|