Force
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Jun 05, 2004 - 21:04 |
 
|
I just happend to read a posting by Christer where he said the average number of games per team is an unbelievable 6.25 games.
A-ha.
That explains a lot. How about making it a minumum requirement to play 5 games with a team before you are allowed ot trash it?
That way those of us who are gutty enough to play would have a chance to find decent matches in the <TR/TS 100 range. And the POWERGAMERS (he said powergamer!) who retire their teams after the first match if the winnings roll was not a six would be left out in the cold.
Oh and christer when you are reading this - would you consider to transform DivX into a ladder with the alternative ruleset? It might help traffic in DivX if there was a bit more of a competitve aspect to it. |
|
|
Elkerlyc
Joined: Mar 27, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 05, 2004 - 21:25 |
|
Is it powergaming if you start a rotters team and your Beast of Nurgle is niggled in the first match?
Or maybe sheer idiocy to continue with such a team? |
_________________
If eating animals is bad, why are they made of meat? |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 05, 2004 - 21:32 |
|
Well, I think it's a bad idea.
I always retire my teams if I haven't rolled a 6 on winnings and don't get a FF-increase as well. And I'm certainly not playing a second game with a team if it suffered any deads or SIs.
I don't want to adjust my powergamer attitude!  |
|
|
Azurus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 05, 2004 - 22:36 |
|
There is a very good reason the average is 6.25 games. This has been mathematically proven to be the best time to retire your team.
I myself have managed a 6.3 average, and so I'm nearly there. Just one more 6-game team and I'm done! |
_________________
*This is a public safety announcement. Azurus is a cynical, sarcastic idiot. Please ignore any and everything he may say. Thank you for your attention.* |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 00:15 |
|
Would you play 4 more matches with your six (6) "surviving" elves after you lost five (5) in the first two games?
I'm sure you would not. |
_________________
 |
|
Covertfun
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 00:25 |
|
Nice going, Force!
You TELL those people how to have fun.
I have come down on the other side of this general argument often - not all ways of playing the game are as "legitimate" as others. A team that plays only against High Elves is missing out on something, this is a truism. People who play with miniatures by repeatedly hurling them unpainted across the room are probably not getting value for money, at least. 
I find that blobs of blu-tac work just as well for this purpose, as does wet tissue, with a bonus that it sticks and dries where it hits. 
However...
Often in the course of my general life, I play games for fun, rather than necessarily how they are usually played, or officially intended to be played:
I work in a toy store (I've got to go there in a few moments) and I'm expecting to be see two of my regular Sunday friends pop in for a while -
One guy is 14/15, and he's been learning chess strategy from me. In most of our games, we don't have take-backs, because we both need to learn not to make mistakes in the first place.
The other little guy is about 12/13, and he is allowed to take back moves. Because he wouldn't have fun if he was held to every stupid mistake he made. If he wants to get "tournament" good, then we can start playing no take-backs.
NOW ON FUMBBL, I know of one coach in particular who left us all in no doubt as to whether he enjoys games where he gets thrashed. He even complained that I used push-outs too liberally, because he only had a few players left on the pitch 
So don't get upset if people are retiring teams - they're just not as hard-core as you, Force, and they don't have as much fun fielding an undermanned team of niggled players as a full roster of decent players.
I AGREE that they're missing out on potentially huge amounts of joy.
But that's OK, see? Because they are having fun. And this is why I am on the DNP list of one particular reasonably respected coach here at fumbbl. Because he didn't have fun against me. If anything, his team was more power-player than mine, so when his numbers were reduced and he basically had to watch me play, he was understandably upset. People with trashed teams don't want to just watch their opponent play while their mng nigglers observe the accumulation of more mng-niggles.
But if you do, that's ok, too. |
|
|
LordSigmund
Joined: Jan 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 00:44 |
|
|
thmbscrws
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 00:52 |
|
You could also take into account the fact the the rules where not really intended for extremely high tr teams and around the 200+ mark start to break down a bit so some people just prefer to play at low tr. Or maybe you enjoy getting a chance to play all the differant races extensivley and since you can't have that many teams have to shuffle them in and out. Or maybe you get bored easily and just get rid of teams when your bored with them. Or maybe a thousand other reasons, bottom line is it doesn't affect you in any way shape or form what someone else does with their teams so why bother bitching about it? |
_________________
"If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him." - Mikhail Bakunin |
|
Force
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:01 |
|
Because, if everybody retires, you are FORCED to do so as well because you dont get any reasonable matchups.
IF there were a lot of beaten up teams THEN there would be a lot of matchups between beaten up teams.
And retiering a TEAM because of a NIGGLE on a BIG GUY is totally highly undoubltetly undefendably GAY. (he said gay! ban him! feed him to the sharks!)
------ <- Bottom Line
Retiering is GAY! |
|
|
Tor_AlKir
Joined: Oct 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:04 |
|
Has there ever been a problem finding games in the 100 TR range? How would not allowing a team to retire before five games, and subsequently not allowing that user to create a new team before then, alleviate any supposed drout of 100 TR teams? Why don't we just shoot for the stars and not allow teams to be retired until they reach 200TR? Taking away someone else's freedom is no solution to a problem YOU are facing. |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:09 |
|
| Quote: | | And retiering a TEAM because of a NIGGLE on a BIG GUY is totally highly undoubltetly undefendably GAY |
How the hell can you tell that someone retired his team because of that??? It could be for a thousand other reasons. |
_________________
|
|
Force
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:11 |
|
Boy oh Boy.
people lose a player and start a new team. thats gayness in its purest form.
Everyone who turns Gaydar on can clearly see that.
Make it 3 Games then. You must play 3 games and then you must ask me for allowance to retire your team. Deal? Great, i'm glad we talked about it... |
|
|
Force
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:13 |
|
| Elkerlyc wrote: | Is it powergaming if you start a rotters team and your Beast of Nurgle is niggled in the first match?
Or maybe sheer idiocy to continue with such a team? |
I pledge for guilty as charged  |
|
|
Patonius2000
Joined: Jun 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:23 |
|
|
Habeli
Joined: Mar 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 06, 2004 - 01:43 |
|
I dont retire teams easily even when my Suomustajat got beaten in their first 3 games 3/6/3 and they made 1 bh or Dungeon Childs got their RatOgre fouled to RIP box in 1st game, thats life and both teams are going rather fine now.
Isn't the main idea to have fun not "be the best, for what ever cost"
I don't play fumbbl to be the best, no. I want to have fun and want others allso to have fun. Maybe it isn't very clever or best thing to do, if you want to get high Coach rating, but i don't care.
Main point: have fun! don't foul on last turn your opp might not like it;) |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
