33 coaches online • Server time: 00:37
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post FUMBBL Dice 2021goto Post Unable to activate t...goto Post Creating a tournamen...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 17:25 Reply with quote Back to top

FUMBBL rebuy ratios etc were modified specifically with worst case scenario on wins etc in mind. The assumption being that a heavily winning coach is targeting SPP, preserving players and selecting skills in a manner a heavily losing coach cannot and does not need rewarded "twice", wheras the heavily losing coach doesn't need doubly "punished" within a matchmaking structure.

If anyone should be malding over that (and to clarify, anyone with a sense of competition shouldn't), then it is the people who win heavily.

_________________
Image
Mingoose



Joined: Jul 28, 2016

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 17:56 Reply with quote Back to top

My humble suggestion is to exclude the agent fees from the 1350k cap. It would improve the experience immensely. At the end of a season, you would select which players you would pay the agent fees for. That amount would be deducted from your treasury. After that, your treasury would be drained as prescribed by the redraft rules, with a cap of 1350k.

This would build a great mechanic into the seasons. Lets say you have a developed team where many of your players are two season veterans, and a few are at 5+ seasons; lets say the average agent fee per player is 40k across 8 players. That means you MUST end your season with 320gp in the bank to save them all. You will also need to consider paying for the actual TV of the player after you have paid that ransom out of your potential 1350k (assuming you have the full amount). I think this adds another level of team building strategy that can really drive the meta. Right now your in-season performance doesn't have a huge impact on your next season; it isn't hard to get to 1350k for the redraft. But if you suddenly need to horde an additional 300k by the end of the season, you will be seeing every game as an opportunity to add to the bank and save your precious pixels.

The most fun will be in a couple years when a beloved long term player has many seasons under their belt. Every season will be devoted to raising the cash to save that player from retirement. Imagine having a storied club with 2 or 3 players sitting at 10 seasons. You would be staring down a 600k bill at the end of the season. Better score some TD's to keep them around! And we don't need to worry about killer teams being built, because after all the agent fees are paid you still need to redraft your team inside 1350k.

I would hate to create a situation where the current leaderboards are untouchable forevermore. I have one player on a top list, and trying to climb that list is a compelling reason to play on FUMBBL.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 18:08 Reply with quote Back to top

Mingoose wrote:

I would hate to create a situation where the current leaderboards are untouchable forevermore. I have one player on a top list, and trying to climb that list is a compelling reason to play on FUMBBL.


It is a different game. If anything you'd need new leader boards. That is if you think that leader boards are still worth having.

_________________
Image
[SL] Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - ALWAYS recruiting
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:00 Reply with quote Back to top

Preserving players over seasons while maintaining a relatively low(ered) TV simply creates a meta of minmax which is even worse for new teams/coaches than what is already present.

I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Quote:
The whole point of the rules is to stop you retaining key players. You see "key player" on your newly trimmed team, others see "farmed superstar who makes a minmax team function".


replace "key player" with "beloved long term player" - it's the same thing. The rules explicitly do not want you to be able to do this.

_________________
Image
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:13 Reply with quote Back to top

It's possible to retain a key player for 1-2 seasons (and even 3), as far as I understand. Keep the super star, cycle the rest. If the rules don't want people to retain key players well, they quite fail at achieving that.
Also, as I already said, it's weird to give 6 skill slots to players if the rules' intent is to discourage having key players.
If you want a more organic team building and spreading of skills across several players is better to limit the skill slots each player can have.
With 3 skill slots per player you are encouraged to spread the skills on more than a single player.
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:21 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:


I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Quote:
The whole point of the rules is to stop you retaining key players. You see "key player" on your newly trimmed team, others see "farmed superstar who makes a minmax team function".




I'm sorry AD but this is not true. The choice of site management to implement the rules with 15 game seasons, and a 1350 cap is what stops the retention of key players. The perception is that more people will play more games at the lower TV.

I will move on to league, cyanide, or just play dwarfs.
Mingoose



Joined: Jul 28, 2016

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:38 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Preserving players over seasons while maintaining a relatively low(ered) TV simply creates a meta of minmax which is even worse for new teams/coaches than what is already present.

I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Quote:
The whole point of the rules is to stop you retaining key players. You see "key player" on your newly trimmed team, others see "farmed superstar who makes a minmax team function".


replace "key player" with "beloved long term player" - it's the same thing. The rules explicitly do not want you to be able to do this.


This is a pessimistic and myopic take. "Farmed Superstars" are absolutely prevented by the 1350 redraft limit, and if they are not lower that limit. A "Beloved player" can be a single skill skeleton that always does your fouling, and you named something special, and you want him to accumulate as many fouls as possible because it is hilarious. Or a two skill blitzer that scored a miraculous TD to pull out a spectacular win that you will always remember because 'Joe Blow II' did it.

Honestly, with the low redraft TV limit, "beloved players" are likely to remain low in TV, because to maximize their skills would be to make them unviable inside the TV cap. I could see 15 season players with three skills and hundreds of unused SPP, just so you can have a narrative with your favorite player.

The funniest thing about your contention is that it is 100% self defeating. You are encouraging MORE farmed superstars. You are encouraging the farming of massive SPP loads onto rookie players, pay the 20k, and then roll up a monster on game 1 that completely unbalances the season. Not only are you killing the fun of player development, but you are making the problem you seek to remedy worse.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:44 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Preserving players over seasons while maintaining a relatively low(ered) TV simply creates a meta of minmax which is even worse for new teams/coaches than what is already present.

I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Quote:
The whole point of the rules is to stop you retaining key players. You see "key player" on your newly trimmed team, others see "farmed superstar who makes a minmax team function".


replace "key player" with "beloved long term player" - it's the same thing. The rules explicitly do not want you to be able to do this.


Do you mean Official rules or Fumbbl Competitive Division rules?

_________________
Image
[SL] Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - ALWAYS recruiting
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:48 Reply with quote Back to top

Mingoose wrote:
A "Beloved player" can be a single skill skeleton that always does your fouling, and you named something special, and you want him to accumulate as many fouls as possible because it is hilarious. Or a two skill blitzer that scored a miraculous TD to pull out a spectacular win that you will always remember because 'Joe Blow II' did it.


It could be a 100 game player with zero skills. That is not exactly min/maxing.

This is a ruleset for people who call players "pieces". Wink

_________________
Image
[SL] Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - ALWAYS recruiting
Mingoose



Joined: Jul 28, 2016

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 19:52 Reply with quote Back to top

koadah wrote:

This is a ruleset for people who call players "pieces". Wink


110% accurate. Perfect for TT players with limited feasible timelines, and online chess players.
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 20:15 Reply with quote Back to top

Mingoose wrote:
ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Preserving players over seasons while maintaining a relatively low(ered) TV simply creates a meta of minmax which is even worse for new teams/coaches than what is already present.

I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Quote:
The whole point of the rules is to stop you retaining key players. You see "key player" on your newly trimmed team, others see "farmed superstar who makes a minmax team function".


replace "key player" with "beloved long term player" - it's the same thing. The rules explicitly do not want you to be able to do this.


This is a pessimistic and myopic take. "Farmed Superstars" are absolutely prevented by the 1350 redraft limit, and if they are not lower that limit. A "Beloved player" can be a single skill skeleton that always does your fouling, and you named something special, and you want him to accumulate as many fouls as possible because it is hilarious. Or a two skill blitzer that scored a miraculous TD to pull out a spectacular win that you will always remember because 'Joe Blow II' did it.

Honestly, with the low redraft TV limit, "beloved players" are likely to remain low in TV, because to maximize their skills would be to make them unviable inside the TV cap. I could see 15 season players with three skills and hundreds of unused SPP, just so you can have a narrative with your favorite player.

The funniest thing about your contention is that it is 100% self defeating. You are encouraging MORE farmed superstars. You are encouraging the farming of massive SPP loads onto rookie players, pay the 20k, and then roll up a monster on game 1 that completely unbalances the season. Not only are you killing the fun of player development, but you are making the problem you seek to remedy worse.


I personally am doing nothing. The rules as written are making it impossible for players to continue endlessly season after season.

Yes, you could simply sit with spp stacked on one player and spend it when he is forced to - but he's either going to be an expensive one skill player for a long time doing this (if he's not a big spp gainer), or you're risking a player/positional with good access for a long-term payoff
in a game where SI and worse are more common.

That's an interesting nuance instead of the crp/fumbbl 2016 (aka not really 2016) situation of simply endlessly carrying a 3+ skill player on your team forever.

The above take btw isn't pessimistic, myopic, *or even mine* it's the viewpoint of many, many new coaches on this site and one of the barriers to entry/participation in the current divisions and tournaments.

_________________
Image
Mingoose



Joined: Jul 28, 2016

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 20:30 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:

The rules as written are making it impossible for players to continue endlessly season after season.


No they don't, the rules as written include a cap as optional.

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Yes, you could simply sit with spp stacked on one player and spend it when he is forced to - but he's either going to be an expensive one skill player for a long time doing this (if he's not a big spp gainer), or you're risking a player/positional with good access for a long-term payoff
in a game where SI and worse are more common.


You are downplaying the viability of this strategy. I guarantee that this will be the preferred way to prep for a tournament. Start rookie team, selectively score with certain players, don't select a single skill for the whole season, next season you unload all your SPP game 1.

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:

The above take btw isn't pessimistic, myopic, *or even mine* it's the viewpoint of many, many new coaches on this site and one of the barriers to entry/participation in the current divisions and tournaments.


Glad you share my viewpoint then, if you don't share the contrary one. At any rate, I would say those many, many new coaches will not be pleased when min maxed teams run amok and they have to be dragged back down into the min/max level every 15 games, just when they managed to drag their TV up out of Smallman territory. The only min/maxing the agency fees solve is the random skill discount, which I don't know will play out. It will be very hard and time consuming to roll into true min/max levels given the staggering amount of terrible skills.
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 20:42 Reply with quote Back to top

Mingoose wrote:
ArrestedDevelopment wrote:

The rules as written are making it impossible for players to continue endlessly season after season.


No they don't, the rules as written include a cap as optional.

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:
Yes, you could simply sit with spp stacked on one player and spend it when he is forced to - but he's either going to be an expensive one skill player for a long time doing this (if he's not a big spp gainer), or you're risking a player/positional with good access for a long-term payoff
in a game where SI and worse are more common.


You are downplaying the viability of this strategy. I guarantee that this will be the preferred way to prep for a tournament. Start rookie team, selectively score with certain players, don't select a single skill for the whole season, next season you unload all your SPP game 1.

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:

The above take btw isn't pessimistic, myopic, *or even mine* it's the viewpoint of many, many new coaches on this site and one of the barriers to entry/participation in the current divisions and tournaments.


Glad you share my viewpoint then, if you don't share the contrary one. At any rate, I would say those many, many new coaches will not be pleased when min maxed teams run amok and they have to be dragged back down into the min/max level every 15 games, just when they managed to drag their TV up out of Smallman territory. The only min/maxing the agency fees solve is the random skill discount, which I don't know will play out. It will be very hard and time consuming to roll into true min/max levels given the staggering amount of terrible skills.


I'm hardly downplaying the strategy, I've openly talked about doing it on DE on the podcast to fill up on guard, simply cycling which blitzers spend for the double - 2 take dodge s1, 2 save for guard, switch S2, then begin to consider who gets cycled in s3 and s4 - this allows for a peak at the end of s2 when you enter a tournament with a minimum of 4 guard.

It's nuanced, it's not without risk (both to winrate and the defenceless or otherwise weaker players you are holding back spp on) and it still results in you shipping out players long, long before the endless legends of crp etc.

It's also a reason I've suggested we include a "can't play teams in season 2+" line in the scheduler for season 1 teams in 2020, and actually would prefer a system where teams were matched roughly by games played rather than TV if it were possible (to be closer to TT).


The cap in the rules is optional but is there quite obviously for leagues that fall on the larger side. And FUMBBL's divisions are larger beyond anything GW are considering here.

Let's not be stupid about it - the rebuy was/is tested in/for small private leagues where a cap would have been unnecessary both due to the size of divisions and the fact many people would reroll their team anyway.
I know from at least one person involved in said testing that the 1350tv limit and 15 games proscribed by FUMBBL is "probably too generous" for season 2+ growth within the system.

_________________
Image
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 20:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Here is the thing. The site owner has made the decision that 1350 TV redraft and a 15 game season is best for the site in the competitive division. The thought is that casual players generally play games in the lower range. Most players are casual players. This is in part, to encourage more of those players to play more often.

I can respect that. After all, I do get to play this game for free on a very well run website with a dedicated owner and fan base.

However, let's not say that the new rules are not meant to allow play at higher TV or with older teams and players. They do and it does. You simply choose to have longer seasons and/or a higher cap. (Or not use the optional season rule at all.)

We will see how it goes but right now I think Dwarfs will be the way to go in the new competitive division. I hope Secret League is able to generate enough interest to get games easily. However, with a 1350 cap I will be keeping a close eye on BB3 to see how they set up their leagues.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Jul 22, 2021 - 20:44 Reply with quote Back to top

With Clawmb nerf the minmax territory is not as dangerous as it was during CRP, with Chaos Pact, Norse, Amazons, Necro and Chorfs rampaging at low TV with 2 or more PO/Cpomb killers.
If people kept on playing then they should still play with the new rules.
The issue I see is that teams requiring some development will lose appeal.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic