Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 09:07 |
 
|
| easilyamused wrote: |
If you have under 11 permenant players on your team and lots of cash in the treasury then you better have a damn good reason. ALL teams MUST srtive for 11 permenant players.
It really is that simple. Christer's site. Christer's rules. |
I never doubted that, I was just wondering why  |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 09:14 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | I'd like to propose to the staff one of two rules of thumb.
1) No coach may knowingly ready a [B] or [R] team for two consecutive matches with more than 300k Treasury and fewer than 11 rostered players, including MNGs. (Do it once, it's a neat trick or a silly mistake; do it twice, you're hoarding.)
2) If a team has more than 300k Treasury and fewer than 11 permanent players, its coach must be able to describe (or the team composition must suggest) a clear recovery plan that requires holding onto so much cash, and a trigger event for expenditures that indicates a good-faith effort to rebuild to 11+ players. |
You say this as if we have no guidelines already and just make it up as we go along.
Oh wait. Christer gave us guidelines on how to deal with this.
He also gave every single member of the community guidelines as well and I'll try to spell it out as simple as possible.
If you have under 11 permenant players on your team and lots of cash in the treasury then you better have a damn good reason. ALL teams MUST srtive for 11 permenant players.
It really is that simple. Christer's site. Christer's rules. |
What Ps me off is having to root through the forums to find out what this really means.
| Quote: | Simple guide line, NOT a black and white ruling, as long as have around 2x the most expensive player as cash, you can use loners to rebuild your team and be prepared to replace injured/dead players.
[ |
If this is what it means why not put this is in the rules or link to it from the rules? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 10:23 |
|
Koadah, I know what you mean but the problem is that this, like may situations, is a very grey area and if Christer put in black and white exactly what was allowed and not allowed people will quickly learn to game the system.
Every case is taken on it's own merits and the staff collectively discuss cases to ensure that we are being fair and consistent in how we deal with these situations.
Put in sports terms, you wouldn't see professional teams running with ringers every game, they buy players and develop them to help them win.
While that is a loose analogy that is the intended spirit of the rules and why the only black and white rule with regards to JM is to strive for 11 permanent players.
Using JM to replace MNG players, not a problem.
Using JM to use as LOS fodder while you have a large treasury and less than 11 players, problem. |
_________________
 |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:00 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | I'd like to propose to the staff one of two rules of thumb.
1) No coach may knowingly ready a [B] or [R] team for two consecutive matches with more than 300k Treasury and fewer than 11 rostered players, including MNGs. (Do it once, it's a neat trick or a silly mistake; do it twice, you're hoarding.)
2) If a team has more than 300k Treasury and fewer than 11 permanent players, its coach must be able to describe (or the team composition must suggest) a clear recovery plan that requires holding onto so much cash, and a trigger event for expenditures that indicates a good-faith effort to rebuild to 11+ players. |
You say this as if we have no guidelines already and just make it up as we go along.
Oh wait. Christer gave us guidelines on how to deal with this.
He also gave every single member of the community guidelines as well and I'll try to spell it out as simple as possible.
If you have under 11 permenant players on your team and lots of cash in the treasury then you better have a damn good reason. ALL teams MUST srtive for 11 permenant players.
It really is that simple. Christer's site. Christer's rules. |
It is my understanding that this rule was implemented under LRB4 for specific reasons and is now simply a remnant of the former rule set.
No one seems to be able to provide any valid examples where cash hoarding via journeymen has caused any significant problems which would justify the ruling.
As usual in such cases, grumpy and/or smug replies are resorted to in order to make up for the lack of arguments. This is somewhat reminiscent of the Black Smack discussion like 4 years ago, there's even a strong overlap of people opposing what is called BBB these days and essentially answering any questions about the point of the journeymen/cash hoarding rule with stfu  |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:08 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | | [...] people are arseholes [...] |
A very sad statement. I'd pity you if you really meant to say that  |
Last edited by Frankenstein on %b %22, %2014 - %11:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
cthol
Joined: Nov 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:13 |
|
I can't for the life of me see any in-game advantage of using journeymen over linemen while hoarding millions in cash. The loner skill is a detriment. You would *always* be better of in real terms hiring a lineman. The TV is the same. The only advantage is as I have previously described: a long term team building strategy that allows low AV teams with expensive linemen (i.e. elves) to finally have 11 or 12 players, through buying them all at once. But once you have 11/12 players you team will be identical to a team that theoretically bought them one at a time.
Is the issue that you will end up with a team of, say, 7 rookie positionals and linemen and 4 awesome monster stars? Would that be very lopsided? But you could very easily end up with that anyway, just through a few vicious attritional matches.
Is there a case for teams that are not expensive & low AV? What about orcs? Would an orc team ever run with four star blockers and then journeymen? That would be even more of a disadvantage than for elves. At least elf linemen have AG4: they are some use out of the box. Orc linemen are useless except as meatbags until they skill up a bit.
What about Skaven? Low AV but cheap linemen. So you could run 3 star gutters and 2 blitzers, and 6 JM, but again, skaven linemen are so unbelievably awful that there's simply no advantage.
I am genuinely curious as to what even theoretical exploit is being prevented by this rule. |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:32 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | Put in sports terms, you wouldn't see professional teams running with ringers every game, they buy players and develop them to help them win.
While that is a loose analogy that is the intended spirit of the rules and why the only black and white rule with regards to JM is to strive for 11 permanent players. |
I am convinced that you're assumption of the "intended spirit of the rules" is arbitrary and incorrect with regard to journeymen and cash hoarding (the CRP could easily have included rules handling this point, JJ even skipped the bank rule deliberately).
Even if not, a specific ruling would only seem necessary if cash hoarding via journeymen could lead to any significant problems and exploits (which don't seem to exists - at least no one appears to be able to provide any examples).
Having said that, it's of course entirely up to the staff how much unnecessary rules they want to burden themselves with after all. I'm genuinely curious whether there is any valid reason why this rule is still in place. |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:38 |
|
To be honest, I find it pretty easy to imagine cash hoarding being a problem.
The benefit isn't in the games where you have the J-men (yes, you're worse off, duh), it's in the games/post-game sequence where you actually use the cash you shouldn't have (as easily).
Example:
Build a solid 8 player team, abuse the free LoS, hoard a million in gold, then hire a wiz every game of a tournament.
Or even just 'and then never have to worry about bench in a tournament'.
Or even 'and then dump and rebuy rerolls whenever it's needed to tweak TV during a tournament'.
J-men abuse gives money, and money gives options.
So, I think that a good guideline/rule (such as 'you may have enough reserve to buy 2x of the most expensive positional after filling out to 11 real players') would be nice to have (and post clearly on the rules page), but I do see the problem that the rule addresses.
As for grey rules: of course people will 'game the system', that is, make optimal decisions within the room you give them. If that means you give them a proper amount of room, it's not actually problematic. |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:41 |
|
| the_Sage wrote: | To be honest, I find it pretty easy to imagine cash hoarding being a problem.
The benefit isn't in the games where you have the J-men (yes, you're worse off, duh), it's in the games/post-game sequence where you actually use the cash you shouldn't have (as easily).
Example:
Build a solid 8 player team, abuse the free LoS, hoard a million in gold, then hire a wiz every game of a tournament.
Or even just 'and then never have to worry about bench in a tournament'.
Or even 'and then dump and rebuy rerolls whenever it's needed to tweak TV during a tournament'.
J-men abuse gives money, and money gives options.
So, I think that a good guideline/rule (such as 'you may have enough reserve to buy 2x of the most expensive positional after filling out to 11 real players') would be nice to have, but I do see the problem that the rule addresses. |
This can easily be accomplished without journeymen as well. It might take a couple of games more, admittedly, but not to an extent that really would matter. |
|
|
cthol
Joined: Nov 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:44 |
|
Thinking about this again, I am currently planning on staying with around 6 permanent players until I can buy 6 more, unless a journeyman skills, which happened yesterday, so I hired him. To me this is an advantage over buying a player every other game or so and then losing a player every other game or so from injury. The advantage is that I will actually have some chance of getting up to 11 / 12 players at some point, rather than constantly hovering around 5-6-7 players.
But this is only an "advantage" if there is some reason that I *should* get to 11 players. I mean, personally, I'm happy running 5 or 6 and random JM to fill in the gaps forever. The only reason I am aiming for 11 eventually is because there is a rule requiring it.
So... the only advantage (that I can see) which derives from hoarding cash while playing with multiple JM, is that it allows low AV teams with expensive linemen to more quickly achieve 11 rostered players.
So... the rule on JM is there to prevent teams from gaining an advantage with only accrues if there is some reason to have 11 players in the first place. The rule is there to prevent an advantage that accrues to teams trying to comply with the rule... ?!?
I.e. if the rule requiring 11 rostered players was not there, there would no longer be any advantage to hoarding cash while using JM, and therefore no need for the rule outlawing such advantage.
Is that right?
Seriously, if someone can show me what I'm missing here I'd appreciate it!  |
|
|
cthol
Joined: Nov 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 11:54 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | the_Sage wrote: | To be honest, I find it pretty easy to imagine cash hoarding being a problem.
The benefit isn't in the games where you have the J-men (yes, you're worse off, duh), it's in the games/post-game sequence where you actually use the cash you shouldn't have (as easily).
Example:
Build a solid 8 player team, abuse the free LoS, hoard a million in gold, then hire a wiz every game of a tournament.
Or even just 'and then never have to worry about bench in a tournament'.
Or even 'and then dump and rebuy rerolls whenever it's needed to tweak TV during a tournament'.
J-men abuse gives money, and money gives options.
So, I think that a good guideline/rule (such as 'you may have enough reserve to buy 2x of the most expensive positional after filling out to 11 real players') would be nice to have, but I do see the problem that the rule addresses. |
This can easily be accomplished without journeymen as well. It might take a couple of games more, admittedly, but not to an extent that really would matter. |
Exactly. This is just as easily achieved by firing any linemen that skill and keeping the TV low while you hoard cash.
If the problem is teams hoarding a massive pot of cash to destabilise tournaments etc, then just outlaw cash hoarding. Use the bank rules (which as far as I can remember, allow you to hoard a cushion for buying a few positionals but then charge you TV for anything above that).
But having a house rule which is grey as regards amounts of cash / JM you are allowed to have is more confusing. And it's just as "house-ruley" as the bank rules.
It still comes back to this: what specific cheesy exploit is this specific rule specifically preventing? It doesn't stop people hoarding cash, it just stops them using JM to do it. In that sense, it unfairly penalises low AV teams with expensive linemen. Dwarfs have expensive high AV linemen that don't need regular replacing: easy to hoard loads of cash. Norse have low AV cheap linemen (who I might add are possibly the best in the game insofar as they arrive fresh out of the box with block) which are cheaply replaced: easy to hoard cash. Elves have low AV expensive linemen which die regularly: not easy to hoard cash.
The JM rule prevents one of these teams from effectively hoarding loads of cash and then splurging in a tournament, but not the other two. The bank rules would prevent everyone from doing it. |
|
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 12:11 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | easilyamused wrote: | Put in sports terms, you wouldn't see professional teams running with ringers every game, they buy players and develop them to help them win.
While that is a loose analogy that is the intended spirit of the rules and why the only black and white rule with regards to JM is to strive for 11 permanent players. |
I am convinced that you're assumption of the "intended spirit of the rules" is arbitrary and incorrect with regard to journeymen and cash hoarding (the CRP could easily have included rules handling this point, JJ even skipped the bank rule deliberately).
Even if not, a specific ruling would only seem necessary if cash hoarding via journeymen could lead to any significant problems and exploits (which don't seem to exists - at least no one appears to be able to provide any examples).
Having said that, it's of course entirely up to the staff how much unnecessary rules they want to burden themselves with after all. I'm genuinely curious whether there is any valid reason why this rule is still in place. |
OK, this is clearly starting to spiral now.
I will use Box as an example here (i know, i know).
Lets for conversation sake you have a CD team, it has a nice combination of skills on the CD's and bulls (if they are being used) and you have hit the sweet spot where you can decimate your opponents with ease. Either through getting the numbers easily or your bulls are pretty safe with blodge and SH. Now lets say that you want to keep the TV at that sweet spot, whats the easiest way to do that?
JM hobbos is the answer here.
You get 2 benefits of using JM in this scenario.
1. You have 3 guys you don't care about taking LOS hits and not your killers or ball carriers.
2. If the JM gain any SPP's you dont have to worry about leaving the sweet spot as they wont be there next game so your TV is pretty stable.
Next game you rinse and repeat, all the while building up a large bank.
"That's great" I hear you say, my players are safe and I have money to replace my important players.
This is where the abuse begins. Firstly you aren't adhering to the rules all teams must strive to have 11 permanent players and secondly you are preying on weaker teams knowing that unless the dice swing you are pretty safe.
Now there are documented cases where certain teams and coaches have done exactly that and no I will not give you examples and no I don't want to see other people giving examples.
And that ladies and gentlemen is what we are trying to avoid. |
_________________
|
|
easilyamused
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 12:15 |
|
One more thing I want to add, and this applies to every aspect of FUMBBL not just JM.
If in doubt, ask an admin, we are more than happy to provide any answers needed if we are approached.
If something is in a grey area we can then have a chat amongst ourselves and can get back to you. We can also tell you straight away if what you want is something that will cause concern or problems. |
_________________
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 13:17 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | Koadah, I know what you mean but the problem is that this, like may situations, is a very grey area and if Christer put in black and white exactly what was allowed and not allowed people will quickly learn to game the system.
Every case is taken on it's own merits and the staff collectively discuss cases to ensure that we are being fair and consistent in how we deal with these situations.
Put in sports terms, you wouldn't see professional teams running with ringers every game, they buy players and develop them to help them win.
While that is a loose analogy that is the intended spirit of the rules and why the only black and white rule with regards to JM is to strive for 11 permanent players.
Using JM to replace MNG players, not a problem.
Using JM to use as LOS fodder while you have a large treasury and less than 11 players, problem. |
I do understand the concept of grey areas. Just not in this case.
The guideline that Woodstock posted seems fair enough. But it is buried in the Forums. I am certain that I saw an admin once post that 400k would be alright. That obviously changed a long time ago. But if it changes again who is going to know?
Suppose you don't follow the forums? Do you have to wait until you get the tap on the shoulder from the admins. That is one of your strikes gone. Then make a mistake...
It seems to me that you are encouraging people to play 'safe' races and allowing any chance of diversity to go down the toilet.
The races that are most complained seem to be able to rack up a fortune without even trying.
Go ARR! |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 22, 2014 - 13:26 |
|
| easilyamused wrote: | | Frankenstein wrote: | | easilyamused wrote: | Put in sports terms, you wouldn't see professional teams running with ringers every game, they buy players and develop them to help them win.
While that is a loose analogy that is the intended spirit of the rules and why the only black and white rule with regards to JM is to strive for 11 permanent players. |
I am convinced that you're assumption of the "intended spirit of the rules" is arbitrary and incorrect with regard to journeymen and cash hoarding (the CRP could easily have included rules handling this point, JJ even skipped the bank rule deliberately).
Even if not, a specific ruling would only seem necessary if cash hoarding via journeymen could lead to any significant problems and exploits (which don't seem to exists - at least no one appears to be able to provide any examples).
Having said that, it's of course entirely up to the staff how much unnecessary rules they want to burden themselves with after all. I'm genuinely curious whether there is any valid reason why this rule is still in place. |
OK, this is clearly starting to spiral now.
I will use Box as an example here (i know, i know).
Lets for conversation sake you have a CD team, it has a nice combination of skills on the CD's and bulls (if they are being used) and you have hit the sweet spot where you can decimate your opponents with ease. Either through getting the numbers easily or your bulls are pretty safe with blodge and SH. Now lets say that you want to keep the TV at that sweet spot, whats the easiest way to do that?
JM hobbos is the answer here.
You get 2 benefits of using JM in this scenario.
1. You have 3 guys you don't care about taking LOS hits and not your killers or ball carriers.
2. If the JM gain any SPP's you dont have to worry about leaving the sweet spot as they wont be there next game so your TV is pretty stable.
Next game you rinse and repeat, all the while building up a large bank.
"That's great" I hear you say, my players are safe and I have money to replace my important players.
This is where the abuse begins. Firstly you aren't adhering to the rules all teams must strive to have 11 permanent players and secondly you are preying on weaker teams knowing that unless the dice swing you are pretty safe.
Now there are documented cases where certain teams and coaches have done exactly that and no I will not give you examples and no I don't want to see other people giving examples.
And that ladies and gentlemen is what we are trying to avoid. |
Firstly, I'd like to genuinely thank you for trying to provide an actual answer instead of resorting to a conceited reply
Nevertheless, your example fails to convince me, as Chaos Dwarf teams can easily hoard tons of cash w/ or w/o journeymen anyway (and do so, as you can see in the respective Blackbox team stats).
| Quote: | | 1. You have 3 guys you don't care about taking LOS hits and not your killers or ball carriers. |
You don't care for these hobs anyway - journeymen or not.
| Quote: | | 2. If the JM gain any SPP's you dont have to worry about leaving the sweet spot as they wont be there next game so your TV is pretty stable. |
This is true for regular hobgoblins as well. Should they really get a skill, either put them on the line to die or replace them if they should really become a burden (the occasional 2 points of TV will rarely matter much).
| Quote: | | Next game you rinse and repeat, all the while building up a large bank. |
So you're building up a large bank, which has been easily accomplished by tons of teams perfectly playing within the rules. Where is the significant difference between the 2 modes of cash hoarding? And what is the problem of a large bank in the first place? As far as I can see, there is no problem at all: There are hundreds (thousands?) of teams with a large bank playing on FUMBBL for years now, if their banks would break the game, the site would probably have already accounted for the "issue" by implementing the original bank rules long ago. Not even the tournament team found it necessary to account for large banks. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
