MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
 Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:02 |
 
|
350CTV cap is for first season.
After first season there is no gap and its just for casual teambuilding and sillyness.
Imo good that competitive gaming in fumbbl is focused on first season box and tournaments. Nobody plays after first season serious and its more like gamefinder with faster games. |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:03 |
|
350CTV cap is for first season.
After first season there is no gap and its just for casual teambuilding and sillyness.
Imo good that competitive gaming in fumbbl is focused on first season box and tournaments. Nobody plays after first season serious and its more like gamefinder with faster games. |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:33 |
|
I don't think that Elyod and Malmir don't play seriously their games.
Both have played teams after Season 1 and both are competitive, not casual teambuilders silly coaches.
This is enough to dismiss an universal statement such as: "Nobody plays after first season serious..." |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:44 |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:47 |
|
I love it when you erase every playstyle that's not yours, Merry. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 13:58 |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 14:23 |
|
Anyway, yeah, so ...
A) Is this a fair synopsis of where we sit re: going to games instead of TV?
Pro:
1) It's more faithful to the designers' intent.
2) The rules seem to be encouraging it.
Con:
1) TV imbalance may result and be unfun.
2) We're already doing it by TV.
B) with regard to those TV imbalances, I think those games can sometimes suck (and sometimes not, as stars just keep getting better), but I have to say that as-is, if I have a couple MNGs, I already have a feeling about the next match, given the new TV. The matchup created will feel a little artificial, and knowing who the MNGs are I kinda already know which side will gain from the artificiality of it.
So I don't think that avoiding big teams in rebuilders is the upside a lot of people think it is, not in the current edition when "big" is relative and the underdog has never had it so good. To me, it's more like "GW made this thing, let's not try to force it into the box of the thing we had before." I can see aspects of the game that will suffer if we stick to the current matchmaking philosophy, and in the last 5 years the RAW has reclaimed the space of that philosophy, so why don't we move in that direction?
Games are art. Let's let the artists cook. Then if we don't like what they're serving, we can break out the old seasonings again. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 14:47 |
|
A) Don't agree with the Pro list, no.
I don't think you can just 'anyway' all of the problems, and make it sound a consensus
Con list I do agree with
B) Don't agree, because we're at different places on the fundamentals |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 15:08 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: |
1) It's more faithful to the designers' intent. |
I don't think that is relevant unless the designer was designing for this kind of league.
It is the Commissioner's opinion rather than the Designer's that counts IMO
| JackassRampant wrote: |
2) The rules seem to be encouraging it. |
You probably explained how. I can't say that I "got it". 
| JackassRampant wrote: | | B)... |
Or... See how it goes and if it look bad look at fixing it. |
_________________
Secret League rosters, old style skill progression, no re-draft or 2016 rules. Or... 4000k All Stars. 7th January! |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 15:12 |
|
yeah... I'm surprised this thread has gone on this long. It's an awful idea.
I agree that Blackbox essentially is a league, but it is not a Scheduled League. The difference is very important!!!
TV is meant to roughly represent a teams strength (though tiers are also part of that formula, as are racial biases). If you spin in the Box you want your match up to be as closely matched as possible and TV generally does a reasonable job at this.
I would hate to play another pimped up team straight after a team of mine took a beating and a big tv drop... There is no fun to be had there...
I see no benefits to matching on games played in an open environment and lots of negatives
Also @Jackass if you want to play based on number of games played you can: Play in gamefinder and only select opponents teams that have played a similar number of games... But I'd put money on that no one, including you, would select an opposition that has the same number of games played but has a vastly superior TV (with the exception of stunty coaches) |
_________________
 |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 15:49 |
|
Ysah, I will most likely quit Competitive and Blackbox going into this edition. I will give it a good faith effort, but I expect an unpalatable dominant strategy to emerge. I hope to be proven wrong, but I can't imagine how a desirable meta will emerge from TV matching in this ruleset. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 16:04 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | Ysah, I will most likely quit Competitive and Blackbox going into this edition. I will give it a good faith effort, but I expect an unpalatable dominant strategy to emerge. I hope to be proven wrong, but I can't imagine how a desirable meta will emerge from TV matching in this ruleset. |
Doesn't an unpalatable dominant strategy emerge every edition? In fact we've had low TV min max Amazons since 2012 ish... that's never changed.
I don't see how this rule set changes anything from the previous one really in terms of TV matching. It'll be much the same. |
_________________
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 16:47 |
|
I think that, if you really want to play Blood Bowl, you can do it with the BB2025 edition too.
Maybe your favourite races will not be competitive and rewarding to play, I feel and understand you, but you can play other ones.
I would have loved to play more Elves in BB2020 but they suck too much, I just play other teams.
Better than not playing Blood Bowl at all. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 17:38 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | | Ysah, I will most likely quit Competitive and Blackbox going into this edition. I will give it a good faith effort, but I expect an unpalatable dominant strategy to emerge. I hope to be proven wrong, but I can't imagine how a desirable meta will emerge from TV matching in this ruleset. |
Doesn't an unpalatable dominant strategy emerge every edition? In fact we've had low TV min max Amazons since 2012 ish... that's never changed.
I don't see how this rule set changes anything from the previous one really in terms of TV matching. It'll be much the same. |
No, I mean, if you look at the progression system, gaming around TV will lead to much worse results for the kinds of games most of us like to play than we are used to getting. It will be stat bowl, with skills as a little bit here and there to fill in the details. Meanwhile, league BB will trundle along without much of this effect. They won't resemble each other.
My argument is that the meaning of TV has changed significantly over the last 2 editions, in a way that I predict will come home to roost in this one. It is no longer a measure of strength, but a resource basis first and a compensation mechanism second.
@MattDakka, I will keep playing... league BB. I will also play B/C until I see the truth of my prediction. But, I mean, the math is glaring.
Also, by "dominant strategy," I mean, "there's this way or a wrong way." That's what saving for stats will be on most players in TV matching, for most players across most rosters. We don't have that. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor.
Last edited by JackassRampant on Dec 17, 2025; edited 1 time in total |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 17, 2025 - 17:44 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | Garion wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | | Ysah, I will most likely quit Competitive and Blackbox going into this edition. I will give it a good faith effort, but I expect an unpalatable dominant strategy to emerge. I hope to be proven wrong, but I can't imagine how a desirable meta will emerge from TV matching in this ruleset. |
Doesn't an unpalatable dominant strategy emerge every edition? In fact we've had low TV min max Amazons since 2012 ish... that's never changed.
I don't see how this rule set changes anything from the previous one really in terms of TV matching. It'll be much the same. |
No, I mean, if you look at the progression system, gaming around TV will lead to much worse results for the kinds of games most of us like to play than we are used to getting. It will be stat bowl, with skills as a little bit here and there to fill in the details. Meanwhile, league BB will trundle along without much of this effect.
My argument is that the meaning of TV has changed significantly over the last 2 editions, in a way that I predict will come home to roost in this one. It is no longer a measure of strength, but a resource basis first and a compensation mechanism second.
|
I don't think it's changed at all. It's always been exactly what it is. It's just easier to game now coz every one can get secondaries and stats whenever they like. Whereas before if you were so inclined to game the system it required a little effort |
_________________
|
|
|
|
| |
Bloody goblins
Search
