| 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 |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
 Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 18:46 |
 
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | licker wrote: |
Yes, B only, that seems to have been proven to not be a good idea already. |
It's not a good idea to put a "competitive" division like R in unfair competition with a true competitive division like B. Both divisions affect CR and allow to join majors, but only one allows to pick/dodge matches. It's quite a logical consequence that more people will play in R. |
Oh the majors. Who cares. Really, who cares? Besides you apparently. You can still have your 'pure major' for teams which only used the scheduler anyway. The rest? Who cares. Anyone with enough time can pimp a team from R or B already, this worry about the 'purity' of the majors is nonsense.
| MattDakka wrote: |
Because currently you can play in R only and not in B if you want, farm CR there and join majors.
Force people to play in B to earn CR and join majors, more games will be played. |
The majors are already split dude, if you want to play an R major you have to have an R team...
But again, who freaking cares? The majors are fun (for some) because they are total pimped out teams. You want a different major? Make your own and run it.
| MattDakka wrote: |
It's not only CR, I don't want to face a R Amazon team who never played vs Dwarfs with my B Amazon team who had his fair share of Chaos Dwarfs and Dwarfs in Box. |
Why does this matter? Seriously? Why the hell does this matter? First of all the picker team probably is at a TV beyond yours so why would you ever play them in the first place? Why would they suddenly jump in the scheduler if they are just a picker team?
Unless you're once again talking about that thing that no one cares about.
| MattDakka wrote: | | A team built with the possibility of choosing/dodging opponents has been built in an easier way and it will be probably better developed, with more stat freaks etc. |
So what? Who cares? There is no 'stat freak' competition, and if you're still worried about the thing that no one cares about you don't seem to understand how it already works. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 18:49 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
It's not only CR, I don't want to face a R Amazon team who never played vs Dwarfs with my B Amazon team who had his fair share of Chaos Dwarfs and Dwarfs in Box.
A team built with the possibility of choosing/dodging opponents has been built in an easier way and it will be probably better developed, with more stat freaks etc. |
That is the crux of it. How many people care?
This isn't BB1 where people could just play dozens of matches vs their second account.
I am guessing that "no dwarf zons" wouldn't join the scheduler that often. You know. For fear of meeting Dwarves
Are you not hardcore enough to take on strong elves etc? |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 18:53 |
|
| Licker wrote: | | This is about simply getting more games scheduled and played. Especially at the off peak hours where B is simply dead already, and R might as well be. |
I very much disagree with this, as do many others who have posted in this thread who actually play in R/B 
There is no point trying to simply increase the number of games, without doing anything to try to improve the quality of the matchups. What are you going to do? Go round to people's houses and put a gun to their head to make them play on FUMBBL? (I suppose it is an option ..)
Perhaps there is some underlying reason that the player pool is in decline on here? |
_________________
"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!!"  |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 18:57 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | What is wrong with the quality of the games? |
You probably wouldn't know, koadah, given that you've only played 1 game in either R or B this year, and that was back in July
| koadah wrote: | | On gamefinder you can pick a 'quality' game. |
A quality game from who's point-of-view? We all know there are many coaches that hang out on the gf that have a very one-sided view of what a 'quality' game is.
| koadah wrote: | | But hey, how many people (apart from Matt) are going to insist on 'pure' scheduler? |
I'm very much with Matt on this. There should be a clearer distinction in the main divisions between casual and competitive. Frankly, if I were 'king', I would do away with R entirely. It's a very odd compromise between casual/competitive that doesn't really suit either camp. |
Indeed. 
So tell me, what is wrong with the games?
Are you talking not enough games? Too many bashers? Too many pickers what?
Heh heh heh.
Move all of Ranked to League and let people play vs teams from different rulesets. Yeah. That's great. I'll vote for that.
I can't see Christer going for that though. We could let every league have their own scheduler too like on Cyanide. |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:01 |
|
| Cloggy wrote: | | Time to accept that people play where they do because it's where they have the most fun. Pure and simple. |
For sure getting easy wins is fun, I don't doubt that. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:04 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | Licker wrote: | | This is about simply getting more games scheduled and played. Especially at the off peak hours where B is simply dead already, and R might as well be. |
I very much disagree with this, as do many others who have posted in this thread who actually play in R/B
There is no point trying to simply increase the number of games, without doing anything to try to improve the quality of the matchups. What are you going to do? Go round to people's houses and put a gun to their head to make them play on FUMBBL? (I suppose it is an option ..)
Perhaps there is some underlying reason that the player pool is in decline on here? |
Is this a chicken and egg question?
Don't give me the 'actually play R/B' either, I've played plenty of R and B. Just not in the last year? Whatever, you can get a game if you sit around long enough, but that's part of the problem. Go to BB2 and you will have a game in 5 minutes, occasionally 10 (max, usually not even that long).
This isn't about 'quality of game' because what does that even mean? This is purely about numbers at this point, because without some baseline number of activations you can't begin to worry about quality in the first place.
There is another underlying issue with both R and B, and that is a lack of unified reason to play in either. Everyone has their own reasons, and, as Matt shows, can feel pretty strongly that everyone should share those reasons.
How do you sell a division when there is no ultimate reason for playing in it? There is no leader board (there sort of is, but it's not very useful) for example. There is no broader competition you have to qualify for (some touraments sort of do this, but mostly just a TV cutoff). People can go play R, pick like mad, have a pimped team, others can go play whomever, what's the point?
So truly, there doesn't have to be a point, but without 'something bigger' people will lose interest, people will become jaded about how others are playing, people will leave.
Again, R and B are what the coaches have made of them, because they are allowed to make them whatever they want. I think this is a failing mechanism, doomed in the long run to serve only a small insulated group.
Might be time to rethink the entire premise.
BB2 has 'rethought' it, and weather you like or hate it (I have mixed opinions on it) with the CCL there is at last a competitive division with a clear reason to participate which nearly all coaches share, else they go play COL where literally nothing matters.
Does FUMBBL need a CCL type reboot? I think it wouldn't hurt, and I think you can (maybe need to) revisit the tournament scene and how it would tie into a CCL type division. But if nothing else, even people who have no aspirations of making the tournament cut, still play and enjoy CCL type divisions because they are all there for the same reason. |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:09 |
|
| koadah wrote: | So tell me, what is wrong with the games?
Are you talking not enough games? Too many bashers? Too many pickers what? |
R: Yes, too many pickers and munchkins who sit on the gf for over an hour so they can pimp up a meaningless e-manhood and feel good about themselves (the same issues that have always plagued R)
B: A small handful of 'bad actors' that have driven everyone else away through min/maxing and monoactivating, especially in the off-peak timezones.
Your suggestion of merging R/B doesn't really do anything to combat any of those issues. the same issues these divisions have always had, that have never really been dealt with.
| koadah wrote: | | Move all of Ranked to League and let people play vs teams from different rulesets. Yeah. That's great. I'll vote for that. Mr. Green |
People are playing open games in L using various rulesets right now, and it seems to be working pretty well. |
_________________
"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!!" |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:12 |
|
| licker wrote: |
Oh the majors. Who cares. Really, who cares? Besides you apparently. |
Uhm, no, I don't care a lot about majors, but there is interest for majors on FUMBBL, as far as I know (by chatting with coaches and watching major games, they generally have many spectators).
I quite often see coaches asking themselves what team they are going to bring to the incoming major, so I guess that majors are an incentive to play and develop a team.
| licker wrote: | | You can still have your 'pure major' for teams which only used the scheduler anyway. |
My concern is not having a "pure major team", my concern is having a fair game where fair means I face a team that plays and is paired with the same system I use (blind matchmaking) and without a great TV gap.
| licker wrote: | | Anyone with enough time can pimp a team from R or B already, this worry about the 'purity' of the majors is nonsense. |
And currently, since more games are played with the gamefinder and not with the blind matchmaking and due to the possibility of picking/dodging, the teams playing in Ranked are generally more finely tuned than the Box team.
| licker wrote: |
The majors are already split dude, if you want to play an R major you have to have an R team... |
Not the FUMBBL Cup, you are going to face pimped Ranked teams with your Black Box team .
| licker wrote: |
Why does this matter? Seriously? Why the hell does this matter? First of all the picker team probably is at a TV beyond yours so why would you ever play them in the first place? Why would they suddenly jump in the scheduler if they are just a picker team?
|
I don't know why, but the possibility exists, maybe because they want to play that last game needed to get a skill on a key player or to buy an extra lino, or because desperate and willing to play a game due to lack of time.
| licker wrote: | | So what? Who cares? There is no 'stat freak' competition, and if you're still worried about the thing that no one cares about you don't seem to understand how it already works. |
There is not stat freak competition, but, if a division is classified as competitive the teams should be paired with the same system and they should play under the same conditions.
I don't compete for the stat freak, but I want to use wisely that hour when I play a match.
Playing a match where a super player is more influent that positioning honestly could make that 1 hour-long game not interesting/funny/meaningful, and besides that, not fair, and a competitive division should be, for its very definition, as fair and balanced as possible, it's not a matter of my own personal preference, I just follow logic.
edit. What is CCL? |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %12, %2017 - %19:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:23 |
|
Matt your point is invalid because a pimped R team wouldn't get matched against a B team, because the TV would be too different
If you grab a bunch of equal TV comparisons between R and B there wouldn't be significant differences. You'd probably struggle to guess which div they were from, (ignoring number of games played)
Maybe R teams take less claw so they can still get games but still, that's a minor difference and would resolve fairly quickly
I like the idea of merging R and B.
WMDs played smallkosp the other day, https://fumbbl.com/p/match?id=3936902 just 3 CAS total. So bash teams just aren't that scary any more without Piling On - so why keep them separate?
OR: if only B existed now, would you create R? |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:26 |
|
There is no such thing as a fair game when you're doing everything in your power before the game starts to have a better team at TV parity than the opponent. How self deluded are you to not see the glaring crack in the facade of 'fairness' here? |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:27 |
|
@licker: I actually agree with much of what you say there.
| licker wrote: | | Is this a chicken and egg question? |
To some extent, yes. The thing is, if part of the reason for the decline in games played is the quality of the matchups, I think it will hard to reverse that trend without confronting the 'quality' issue as well.
| licker wrote: | | This isn't about 'quality of game' because what does that even mean? |
Surely you have to admit that there are good BB matchups and bad BB matchups? I mean, you must have been on the receiving end of enough 'bad' Box matchups? Presumably that's part of the reason you don't play there?
The rest of your post, I very much agree with.
| licker wrote: | | Might be time to rethink the entire premise. |
Yes! This is what I was saying a couple of pages ago 
Btw, I don't know what the heck CCL/COL are - I don't play much on BB2. |
_________________
"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!!" |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:27 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | Matt your point is invalid because a pimped R team wouldn't get matched against a B team, because the TV would be too different
|
Only with a TV gap cap implemented and/or no monoactivators. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:30 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | | There is no such thing as a fair game when you're doing everything in your power before the game starts to have a better team at TV parity than the opponent. How self deluded are you to not see the glaring crack in the facade of 'fairness' here? |
And when two teams can do different things before the game (one can pick/dodge, the other cannot) the fairness is for sure lesser.
There is less fairness when two teams from different pairing systems are paired. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:35 |
|
In hearthstone you pick a deck (monoactivate) and click Play, and it spins for a moment then you get an opponent
If there is few people online it tells you estimated wait time, and you sit and wait until it finds a match
Same for other blizzard games like overwatch, wow arena battles, and many others I'm sure.
Admittedly they have massive player base tho.
Why does box need to be on a timer at all?
If 2 people are in que and are suitable, they should play. The collusion issue could be solved by not letting coaches play each other again within say 5 games |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 12, 2017 - 19:37 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | Sp00keh wrote: | Matt your point is invalid because a pimped R team wouldn't get matched against a B team, because the TV would be too different
|
Only with a TV gap cap implemented and/or no monoactivators. |
What?
No
It'd still be a TV matching environment, where opponents are roughly equal size.
But regardless of matching, it won't matter which division they came from |
Last edited by Sp00keh on %b %12, %2017 - %19:%Oct; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
Secret League Americ...
Search
