18 coaches online • Server time: 02:01
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Secret League Americ...goto Post Mighty Blow/Pile Dri...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
How do you feel about Min TV + Max Inducements
It's all part of the fun
48%
 48%  [ 35 ]
It's a little unethical
13%
 13%  [ 10 ]
It should be banned
11%
 11%  [ 8 ]
Morg ate all the pies!
26%
 26%  [ 19 ]
Total Votes : 72


SideshowBob



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2022 - 21:09 Reply with quote Back to top

I agree with everything Kinks said above with the one addition. Playing vs Morg in RRR is not a very fun experience. I rather do something else for one hour, but because of the knock out structure you have to go through the agony every now and then.

Games are just watching Morg blitz your players with 3db for 16-24 turns and hope that you somehow survive. And if you actually win, chances are you wont win yor next game because of removals.
JB



Joined: Jul 05, 2004

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2022 - 23:59 Reply with quote Back to top

I would like to avoid weighing in on this with too much personal and/or anecdotal references. That being said, I do believe that Morg-Snots are "easy mode" for the current RRR Meta and should be reviewed. Thanks for keeping an open mind!

Rather than framing this as a Morg/Hakflem/Starplayer problem, you need to define what RRR should be going forward.
Currently, coaches need to at least consider playing with or against star players. You can field a joke team of 11 Human Linos and still get a game… This is completely different to C or B (whenever it returns), where you wouldn't even get scheduled in such matchups. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that RRR was initially designed as a gateway tournament for R. Then again, that was at least two rulesets ago, so maybe a little soul-searching is needed.

If you do want a meta with star players, I would say lean into it and fully commit to this. Sort of a NAF “light” event, with maybe a bit more than 1kk treasury and even a few initial skill options. Personally, I would be a huge fan of that, but I understand that this was not the original spirit in which RRR was founded.

Therefore, a second option needs to be considered. Get RRR to only allow matchups that could at least in theory be scheduled between two rookie teams through the gamefinder/C. I.e. a mandatory TV range that would prohibit certain builds.

I get that you don’t want to change a successful format after more than 500 iterations, and I appreciate the statistical approach to this (considering actual win percentages etc.). However, I strongly believe that the current ruleset will inevitably lead to a low level of diversity in the RRR. Additionally, a lot of teams that are going through the RRR will be close to unplayable in C. For these reasons, I think that you will need to commit to either option above in order to keep the RRR popular and viable within the fumbbl environment.
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 01:23 Reply with quote Back to top

While I agree that Morg is a problem (as are a few other stars), I don't understand the suggestion you've made:

JB wrote:
Sort of a NAF “light” event, with maybe a bit more than 1kk treasury and even a few initial skill options.


We have that. Its 1000tv (instead of a bit more), with 0 initial skills (the low end of a few). That is NAF light? So I'm not sure what you want?

Or more accurately, I'm not sure about how changing those numbers (+100-200 tv including skills) a small amount will change anything? Morg will still blitz every turn and bash your team up?
JB



Joined: Jul 05, 2004

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 09:12 Reply with quote Back to top

What I meant was to create a tournament environment that keeps as many races as possible competitive. I believe that this is in general what NAF tabletop tournaments are aiming for with team tiers, skill packages, inducements including stars, resurrection (?) etc.

Even though I would personally really like such an option on fumbbl, I am not sure that this would be in the founding spirit of RRR. That's why I didn't indulge in a larger thought experiment of what exactly a RRR/NAF-esque tournament environment look like.
stej



Joined: Jan 05, 2009

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 10:18 Reply with quote Back to top

Give everyone a free Morg. It can be the MoRRRg competition
uzkulak



Joined: Mar 30, 2004

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 10:43 Reply with quote Back to top

which leads us to the popular tongue twister

More Morgs mostly makes more Ogres mighty more-often - maybe.
SideshowBob



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 18:33 Reply with quote Back to top

Kondor wrote:


Next up to complain about will be Dwarfs and Amazons. Will that be a more pleasant discussion? Would you rather see these teams dominating Rookie Rumbles?

Isn't it actually refreshing to see stunty teams winning tournaments even if they are Rookie Rumbles.


Well to be honest there has been over 500 rumbles played and there hasnt been much whining about Dwarfs/Amazon, so I doubt that will start if someone makes sure that Morg is ”taken care of”
maznaz



Joined: Jan 26, 2004

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 18:44 Reply with quote Back to top

Kondor wrote:
maznaz wrote:
I think limiting the tv range for RRRs solves the problem neatly and without changing any BB rules. Also, the fact that lots of high CR coaches choose this team is an endorsement of its strength not a counterpoint of any sort. A huge proportion of CR success is the choices you make before you even start the game.


What??? There will always be rosters that are stronger or weaker in different environments. By essentially taking Morg from snotlings those high CR players will simply move to the next roster they thing is the most competitive in this environment.

Next up to complain about will be Dwarfs and Amazons. Will that be a more pleasant discussion? Would you rather see these teams dominating Rookie Rumbles?

Isn't it actually refreshing to see stunty teams winning tournaments even if they are Rookie Rumbles.


Okay I'll bite and explain why this is different. This tournament format is for rookies. Undeveloped teams before their players progress and gain skills, reliability and prowess. The teams that are in question here aren't rookie teams of snotlings that have a progression path ahead of them. In fact skilling up is deleterious to the team's chances of success. They take advantage of the skillsets of star players to create a different type of team that's essentially frozen in time. Injuries don't affect them as the stars come back regardless and the rookies are easily replaced. There will always be strongest and weakest teams, but when the overwhelming strongest pick is a roster which has no progression path and is purely contrived to be a meta pick for this format and nothing more, then it warrants criticism I think.
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 18:50 Reply with quote Back to top

SideshowBob wrote:
Kondor wrote:


Next up to complain about will be Dwarfs and Amazons. Will that be a more pleasant discussion? Would you rather see these teams dominating Rookie Rumbles?

Isn't it actually refreshing to see stunty teams winning tournaments even if they are Rookie Rumbles.


Well to be honest there has been over 500 rumbles played and there hasnt been much whining about Dwarfs/Amazon, so I doubt that will start if someone makes sure that Morg is ”taken care of”


Well, we will just have to wait and see. People have always complained about dwarfs but you are correct, I have not seen a complaint about them specifically in RRRs. My guess is that with the new low TV meta on Fumbbl dwarfs will be very prevalent once we have a Black Box scheduler. That will bleed into RRRs also.

Still, it does not matter much. Whatever the tournament commissioner wants to do is fine. I'm just happy to see stunties doing well. But then I also enjoy seeing stars on the pitch. I think they are a really cool part of the game. I would like to see more matches with TV gaps so that we would have more on the field.
SideshowBob



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 19:24 Reply with quote Back to top

[quote="Kondor"]
SideshowBob wrote:


Well, we will just have to wait and see. People have always complained about dwarfs but you are correct, I have not seen a complaint about them specifically in RRRs. My guess is that with the new low TV meta on Fumbbl dwarfs will be very prevalent once we have a Black Box scheduler. That will bleed into RRRs also.

Still, it does not matter much. Whatever the tournament commissioner wants to do is fine. I'm just happy to see stunties doing well. But then I also enjoy seeing stars on the pitch. I think they are a really cool part of the game. I would like to see more matches with TV gaps so that we would have more on the field.


I used to like stars too. Then I started to run into op-Morg in every other RRR.
Java



Joined: Jan 27, 2018

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 19:59 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm not going to repeat myself from over on discord, but if the problem is Morg, don't make up anything overcomplicated, any solution you propose (star price cap, minimum TV, maximum amount of leftover cash) has the effect of (1) limiting people's choices arbitrarily (2) damage (unintentionally?) the effectiveness of other rosters that don't need/deserve any meddling with.

If the problem is Morg, just ban Morg.
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jan 20, 2022 - 20:02 Reply with quote Back to top

I've been idly replying to the discussion on the #minors channel on discord, but I hadn't realised this was a fully fledged topic on the forums. Mea culpa.

Some thoughts:

A lot of the points raised in this thread are actually just extensions of the personal ethics of the complainant applied to the game - the opening post already has outlined "acceptable" use of inducements, as well as a formula that the user feels would keep games at a point he feels meritious.

That's all well and good, but it's just a personal opinion.

The rate of the RRR wins by snots etc is actually where my initial interest was piqued, but there's layers to this issue.

Who are the coaches actually winning RRRs with these? Mostly top tier coaches and those with experience of the roster (from TT or on FUMBBL itself).

Does the win% data actually suggesting something is off - both in terms of the roster performance, but also in terms of the performance of the coaches utilising the roster in tournaments?

Do we actually have meaningful data with which to sort the expected performance of these races?
The last point here is pertinent, because a lot of these complaints boil down to essentially "tier 3 teams shouldn't be winning tournaments". But the fact of the matter is, snots are only "tier 3" because we say they are based upon the accepted team strengths and performances in and of historical metas. And those tierlists one defers to are based upon winrates of teams either developing over time in a progressive environment, or playing in a resurrection tournament with set skill choices (the number of which is completely at tournament organiser discretion).

Is Morg even "the problem"?
I'm seeing a few complaints about his mb+2, and boring play. Those of us who spent 10+ years in CRP will tell you that st6 and mb+2 aren't necessary for blitz and hide boredom - it used to be the preserve of the (c)pomber in every game and those were never banned either.
Yes it can lead to games where cas dice are decisive. "Can" being the operative word.
But then can so can the snotling roster at its base level anyway - it has access to 2 trolls, 2 pump wagons, 50k bribes, has riotous rookies to get up to 20+ on the team: it is actually going to be a potentially painful roster for a lot of teams at low TV anyway, especially those that lack block or natural MB themselves.

And on top of that roster you slot in an ma9, proxy ag5, strength 3 gutter runner. And we're sitting talking about Morg as "the problem"?

If we look at tournaments in general on FUMBBL, rather than only RRRs, we basically have no data really. But I would point out that in my time on the site people entering stunties and doing well with them were celebrated, not castigated.
Cdassak has had one of his games linked in here and questioned.
A few things:
I don't need to defend Cdassak himself, but he's one of the best coaches on this site (with the tournament wins to back it up) and is well known for using stunty teams in the past when he had more time to play. This sort of win from him is very, very far from an aberration and actually drawing him with stunties in a tournament has been something most coaches would wish to avoid for a long, long time.
Ironically of course, in the match in question, the team that actually fit the 2020 rules properly was the flings, the orcs having not went through a rebuy.
And actually yes, that is exactly the sort of thing we want to see in tournaments - rookie/low-development teams being able to compete vs lovingly "crafted" open-MM teams is actually something that has been long talked about as a benefit of 2020 rules: because it stops tournaments being gate-kept by massive behemoths or those who can simply churn out game after game for the perfect team.

To finish this post, I'd also point out that the practice of entering low-tv stunties in tournaments has a long and storied history on FUMBBL - prov's rookie goblins in black cup, fumbbl cup; Grue's rookie ogres in FUMBBL cup, JohnDaker's goblins in FUMBBL cup are all fondly remembered by anyone who witnessed them, and in some cases regarded as legendary.

And RRRs aren't regarded any differently - in fact when we had the full tournament roster running during CRP and 2016, RRRs into (ARR) Brawls was regarded as a legitimate way to play your stunty team, starting at a very low tv and simply only playing tournament games to make sure you always got inducements until you had played enough games to have the opportunity for big gap games in the blackbox.
It was also something I personally recommended to people if they had the (scheduling) time to do it during the box trophy.

These rookie rumbles are not the sacrosanct right of tier 1 teams to simply turn up and win a tournament then continue along their merry way developing via games in competitive (or ranked or box).

They never have been.

The majority of RRR winning teams aren't turning up in competitive play every week, they're binned - the majority of the coaches who play in them aren't interested in developing the team for other tournaments or in random play. I can name several coaches with a veritable graveyard of retired (officially or unofficially) rookie rumble winners on their homepages.

Pointing out that these teams wouldn't be able to get a game in C/R/B after winning the tournament, or would be unable to be scheduled at all at the start is missing the point of the very tournament you are entering.

_________________
Image
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 21, 2022 - 06:50 Reply with quote Back to top

I don't believe I have ever said this in a thread. Really, EVER.

I agree with everything ArrestedDevelopment just said.
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Jan 21, 2022 - 08:18 Reply with quote Back to top

As an aside, as I'm sure anyone who remembers my posts from the first thread on moving away from TV-MM will be wondering why someone who openly warned people that this would/could be an issue months ago is quite happy to let it continue in RRRs:

We have absolutely no idea how the final setup of the site/divisions will stand once the rebuy is implemented and a scheduler is returned to the divisions. It may once more be that RRRs (and maybe Low Brawls, should they return) are once more the only way to start a low TV stunty team. It might not.

But we're in the midst of the most fluid set of rules in recent memory for Blood Bowl, GW have put out numerous errata already and show no signs in abandoning this pattern. Stars may be revisited, stats may be changed, inducements altered. We have no idea.

But we do know this: banning a particular star from a tournament setting, any official site tournament setting, on FUMBBL creates a precedent. Even if you do it via a backdoor method like a minimum TV (which has its own issues anyway).

I set out my stall arguing against letting "predatory with inducements" etc become a thing in the main division, and I did it because weaker coaches and newer coaches deserve protecting. But that does not apply to tournaments. Tournaments are no-holds barred scrapfests where doing everything within the rules of the game and the site are acceptable. And in reality, there should be an avenue for people to play teams competitively with inducements, and it's for the betterment of the site if that's in tournaments and not simply against new coaches.

_________________
Image
SideshowBob



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 21, 2022 - 08:41 Reply with quote Back to top

ArrestedDevelopment wrote:


Does the win% data actually suggesting something is off - both in terms of the roster performance, but also in terms of the performance of the coaches utilising the roster in tournaments?



I agree with a lot of stuff you say, but you don't think a 78 % win rate suggest something is off? That means that these coaches will go to final on average EVERY RRR when they bring Morgsnots.

Even if they are top coaches they still have to go through a lot of other top coaches. And I would say its near impossible for anyone (except Storr) to have that win% in RRRs where things usually are a bit more random.

Also, with no disrespect, but I haven't seen any of the guys in this thread defending the Morgsnots playing in many RRRs so far.

The only reason I stick with it is that I prefer playing tournaments. When smacks are back I will leave the rumbles and never look back as long as Morg is sucking out all the fun.

EDIT: This morgsnot hack is probably a good way for farming CR too. I'm sure there are a few coaches out there that cares about such things.
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