| Poll |
| Hourly box activations? |
| Permantly change box to hourly activations |
|
2% |
[ 3 ] |
| Permantly change box to 30mins peak, hourly offpeak |
|
3% |
[ 4 ] |
| Trial change box to hourly activations |
|
3% |
[ 4 ] |
| Trial change box to 30mins peak, hourly offpeak |
|
24% |
[ 25 ] |
| Change nothing |
|
64% |
[ 66 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 102 |
|
SpecialOne
Joined: Oct 17, 2005
|
 Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:00 |
 
|
I see this as a natural development that we can't really do anything about. BB2 brought lots of new players to the game. Sadly it also took fumbbler away from fumbbl. That is competition within the same marked. I think we will see a decline in box to the point of oblivion. Ranked will prevail, and so will leagues. When you look at the stats you will see that on a hot saturday evening we can get 60 coaches online, some time back we easy had 110 coaches. BB2 got the better of Fumbbl, and I think we need to accept the fact that we will be smaller cummunity in the future. Maybe when big companies lose interest in BB, then we might get some players back. I think leagues and SL is keeping fumbbl afloat with new stuff happening.
The site and some features will survive the "new" competition in the marked. Box will go under... |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:03 |
|
| Rbthma wrote: | | The point is that attempting to force(how are you going to do that anyhow?) coaches to play in the Box would more than likely result in those coaches leaving FUMBBL to go play something else. Making it so that teams can jump in and out of the scheduler as they like gives them more options surrounding how they like to play not less. |
Ok, lets go down this line of thinking.
In a mystical alternate universe know as FUMBBL Christer dissolves the Ranked DIV and transfers all R teams to L. The Box is the only open div left standing.
But, wait.
IF all the coaches have their teams moved to L. Then the only change is that coaches no longer get CR from their matches. Yet all the cool things about R are still alive. The majors/Minors/XFL.........
Nothing changes, NOTHING! the only difference is my Buccaneers now have a L instead of a R next to their team name.
What happens if Box still wallows in misery of low coach population on activation?
Retire ALL Teams that do not play in the Box and truly force all coaches to play only in the Box environment? |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:04 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: |
Yeah, you actually have to play to win in a tourney. Which is what makes it competitive. And why you avoid tourneys. And why your literal interpretations and fallacious evaluations of fair and competitive are a bad basis for conversation. |
I joined the FUMBBL Cup, but yes, I avoid tourneys, nice strawman.
The main reason I don't like tourneys is because I like to play a wide array of teams and that means that I don't have generally a super farmed team, like some guys monoactivating one team only like you and other coaches in Box.
I like matches where positioning matters more than having one turners and stat freaks doing the job for their coach.
| mrt1212 wrote: |
It is categorically impossible to have something in BB be fair and competitive outside of giving everyone identical teams at a set TV and doing a tourney or league. |
The fact that we can't have perfectly balanced match is no excuse for not trying to improve the balance.
| mrt1212 wrote: | Dont believe me? In what universe is it a fair match for Dakka to play his best teams against rookie coaches fielding stunties at TV parity?
But you will say it is in fact fair because you purposefully and dishonestly only consider two criteria for fairness - TV distance and being played in Box. |
Playing vs stunties is not a fair match, but if people want to play stunties in Box I can't stop them.
I would have no problem in not considering the games played vs stunty teams for purpose of CR gain/loss (and I would probably play more often my stunty teams).
| mrt1212 wrote: |
And truth be told, you could absolutely have more competitive and fair matches in ranked if you were able to get past trying to stack the deck in your favor before the game starts with your team building and team selection. Believe it or not, some of us are just capable of doing it after years of playing. What do you think accounts for that?  |
Yes I could, but chances are I would have to accept a game vs a picker or picking/dodging myself because good coaches either try to pick you or refuse the offers.
It happens to me in SL Gamefinder where there is no CR to win, let alone in Ranked, and anyway, I'm not a fan or picking/getting picked, nor I want to waste my time by staring at the Gamefinder.
I want to activate and find a reasonably fair game quickly (that means close TV vs a not minmaxed/super high TV team played by monoactivator).
This is how I played in BB1 too when MM was introduced. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %12, %2017 - %23:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:16 |
|
| Rbthma wrote: |
The point is that attempting to force(how are you going to do that anyhow?) coaches to play in the Box would more than likely result in those coaches leaving FUMBBL to go play something else.
|
Because to gain CR and to play in majors you would have to play in Box, it's simple, while currently you can play in majors and rack CR by playing in Ranked only if you want.
So, coaches would leave FUMBBL Box matchmaking to play BB2 matchmaking? Then the change could due to better graphics, or larger userbase, but not related to the matchmaking structure of the Box.
| Rbthma wrote: | | Making it so that teams can jump in and out of the scheduler as they like gives them more options surrounding how they like to play not less. |
That was like BB1 worked, you could farm a team by playing arranged matches then putting it into matchmaking, the result was facing perfectly developed high tv team (generally cpomb spam teams) without any injury thanks to picking.
This is why I joined FOL (a private open league with matchmaking only), because I wanted to avoid unnaturally farmed team. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:24 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | The main reason I don't like tourneys is because I like to play a wide array of teams and that means that I don't have generally a super farmed team, like some guys monoactivating one team only like you and other coaches in Box.
I like matches where positioning matter more than having one turners and stat freaks doing the job for their coach.
|
What? come on man.
R/B majors have a wide variety of coaches and teams. Some coaches are serious about it and others are not. You seem to fall under the serious group of coaches. "Well, all those super farmed teams is unfair". Grow a pair man. That is the environment of a major. Either play the Meta of Tournament play in R/B or just play how you want. Don't cry and moan about how unfair tournament play is. It is what it is man.
Plus, there are a lot of tournaments that cater to set TV ranges of teams. What? There are some super farmed TV1300 teams Iam not aware of? OTS freaks and +STAT monsters.
At the end of the day if you want to win a tournament in R/B, ANY TOURNAMENT, under any format. You need to be a good coach first, understand positioning, which you seem to covet. NO ONE wins a tournament just because they have +STAT freaks and OTS players.
Get off your soap box man and man up. I grow weary of hearing this crap about R/B tournaments. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:29 |
|
Maybe if you approached Ranked from the POV that the world doesn't revolve around you and the very specific measuring stick you care about, all your fears about being picked or picking would fall by the wayside and you'd get the exact kinds of games you're looking for.
But no, you've constructed a mental prison where you're the only one who cares about the things you do with the intensity you do and almost everyone else in the conversation is looking at you going "what is this guy on about?"
Just for laughs what would you do if Christer scrubbed all the language around divisions out and obliterated CR? Would you stop playing since you have no tool of validation any longer?
If you don't have enough playmates the answer isn't to force people to play with you, the way you want, on your terms. That's hilariously selfish. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:33 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | Either play the Meta of Tournament play in R/B or just play how you want. Don't cry and moan about how unfair tournament play is. It is what it is man. |
I didn't whine about tourneys, I was just explaining why I don't like them.
My concern is for Black Box, i.e. being able to activate my teams and find a decent game quickly.
| PainState wrote: | | NO ONE wins a tournament just because they have +STAT freaks and OTS players. |
No, but if you check good coaches, they don't join tournaments with teams made by sucker players, they are good AND have well developed teams.
| PainState wrote: | | Get off your soap box man and man up. |
I don't care about tourneys, I talked about tournaments because 1) they look appealing to many FUMBBL coaches, as far as I know and 2) mrt1212 started to talk about tourneys.
About manning up, Ranker, you have 471 Black Box played, play more Box matches before telling me to man up.
If I needed to man up I would have not played 1946 games in Black Box. |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:33 |
|
| PainState wrote: | But, wait.
IF all the coaches have their teams moved to L. Then the only change is that coaches no longer get CR from their matches. Yet all the cool things about R are still alive. The majors/Minors/XFL.........
Nothing changes, NOTHING! the only difference is my Buccaneers now have a L instead of a R next to their team name. |
My thoughts exactly. If R was removed, no-one would be 'forced' to play in B. But, what it would do is to separate and distinguish the 'casual' players from the 'hardcore/competitive'.
Want casual, open play? ---> play open (unrated) games in L (choose from a variety of rulesets)
Want 'hardcore/competitive'? ---> activate in B (possibly a heavily-modified version with a rewards system that disincentivises min-maxing/mono-activation and/or with enforced diversity)
It wouldn't be that different to what is going on right now, which kind of suggests that R is surplus to requirements. The main people who would be unhappy are the gf-campers who like to pretend that they're playing 'competitively'.
Those that actually want casual play might actually prefer such a system, because there wouldn't be such an incentive for cherrypicking. I haven't seen much cherrypicking with open Secret League play in L, which doesn't have any rankings. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:36 |
|
There would still be cherry picking but it wouldn't be in the service of trying to goose a metric that provides positive feedback to the ego of some coaches. It would be in the service of merely winning in itself and building teams up among a few reasons. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:36 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: |
Just for laughs what would you do if Christer scrubbed all the language around divisions out and obliterated CR? Would you stop playing since you have no tool of validation any longer? |
Assuming that matchmaking only was the only system of pairing, I would still have the win rate % as validation tool.
| mrt1212 wrote: | | If you don't have enough playmates the answer isn't to force people to play with you, the way you want, on your terms. That's hilariously selfish. |
Well, if there is a reason outside me that causes lack of playmates, I will try to fight that reason.
In this case, Ranked is the reason, and some bad apples playing in Box as well.
You know, I'm not one of the coaches monoactivating Chaos or Nurgle at high TV, I play a variety of races at any TV, so I try to improve the environment where I play, unlike some coaches.
By the way, I could play unranked matchmaking, I mean a matchmaking like Black Box but without CR gain.
My problem with that is the division would not be appealing because coaches want to gain CR. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 23:53 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
| mrt1212 wrote: | | If you don't have enough playmates the answer isn't to force people to play with you, the way you want, on your terms. That's hilariously selfish. |
Well, if there is a reason outside me that causes lack of playmates, I will try to fight that reason.
In this case, Ranked is the reason.
You know, I'm not one of the coaches monoactivating Chaos or Nurgle at high TV, I play a variety of races at any TV, so I try to improve the environment where I play, unlike some coaches. |
See, this goes back to a fundamental error of how you are approaching this from a completely self serving POV.
You'd kill off an entire division that is more popular than your preferred one mostly for the purpose of ginning up more games for yourself.
Like, imagine if you applied this mentality to anything else in life. How often would you wind up with what you desired, you think?
If you were into jazz would you be firebombing discos?
When trying to date someone would you kill off every other man in a 10 km radius to limit the competition? If you were really into gelato would you poison places that sold pastries?
I hope this isn't a revelation but maybe what's good for Dakka is only good for Dakka and what is good for everyone else is entirely different and life happens at the crossroads of those two things. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2017 - 00:02 |
|
A COMPETITIVE division must be competitive, choosing/avoiding the opponents is against the competitive logic, this is not my point of view, is what the logic suggests, if you don't understand that I'm afraid I can't explain it better.
People playing in Ranked could play in League with the same teams (or, if they wanted to keep on playing majors and gain CR, they could use those teams in Box).
At that point, if people didn't play in League, the conclusion could be that they wanted to gain CR, to play in majors, to boost win rate. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2017 - 00:09 |
|
You're explaining a self reinforcing fallacy Dakka. This thing is this thing because it is this thing. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2017 - 00:48 |
|
So, is the box going to die if we do not address the time of activations from 15 minutes to 1 hour or every half hour?
Just for the record Iam all for changing the Box to the top of the hour there will be a activation.
WHy?
I want to force 8-20 coaches to all activate at the same time.
North America Box players, sorry, you are most likely screwed BUT hey wait! you already are, so no change. |
_________________
Comish of the:
Last edited by PainState on %b %13, %2017 - %00:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 13, 2017 - 00:50 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
