13 coaches online • Server time: 06:33
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post DIBBL Awardsgoto Post Waikikamukau Festiva...goto Post FUMBBLer of the Year...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Christer



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 10:40
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

With roughly a month remaining for the first Blackbox Trophy, I can only conclude that the project has been very successful. I'm estimating that around 20 coaches will complete the full 200 matches and more or less 250 coaches participating in total.

With that, I would want to hear from you what you think of the format, and what could potentially be adjusted for season 2.

The format is absolutely designed for people who can play a high number of games, with an average of nearly a match every other day for the year. While I'm fine with having a format where activity is rewarded, I am absolutely willing to consider diversions from this yearly format. Maybe a version with fewer games? Maybe a version that's shorter in time? Perhaps a variant where we introduce the BB season rollover rules to try those out (although this would probably be started at a later date due to the development requirements).

Either way, let me know what you think. I'm open for all sorts of ideas (but no promises for changes obviously).


Last edited by Christer on Aug 29, 2018 - 11:49; edited 1 time in total
fxiii



Joined: Oct 30, 2012

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 11:11 Reply with quote Back to top

i enjoyed this trophy a lot, great event !

i woudl'nt change anything (or maybe less advantage on racial lead, 2.5 points is huge)

the tiers may be reviewed too (could be more than 4 for a differetn cost of squad)

could also do some quick trophies (100 games in 6 monthes twice a year) but there's really an interest fo fit to the team 40 games long, 20 is kind of short)

anyway, thanks for all the great job done Smile
Verminardo



Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 11:16 Reply with quote Back to top

Christer wrote:
Maybe a version with fewer games? Maybe a version that's shorter in time?


This would certainly help me, though of course if you limit it too much it's not going to be that interesting any more. Maybe you could allow the more active coaches to make several runs for it? If you greatly reduce the number of games you probably can't stick to the five teams per squad format, as you'd be left with all the matches being played in the 15 games Rookie protection bracket. You'll probably still want to start with new teams to level the playing field.

It's not easy to come up with a format that is more accessible for less active coaches, but still appealing. I'd probably throw a squad in anyway if the format were unchanged, but I couldn't hope to complete even half the matches. Might try to shoot for completing the 40 with one of the teams, compete for the racial lead. But anyway the competition is very tough, I have to say it's quite amazing what the top coaches have done. So for most it's going to be more about being part of it, than being actually able to compete.

I think a permanent record for the overall and racial winners on the coach profile would be very nice.
datom



Joined: Mar 22, 2017

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 11:22 Reply with quote Back to top

So first of all many thanks for all the hard work done (Christer of course, Koadah, Kondor, anyeone else I'm forgetting).

I think a half-season prize every six months is a good idea if codeable (a badge, trophy, FUMBBL prize would be cool) - . I can definitely see the argument for 100 games every six months but maybe 20 games per team is just a little too short.

But... more than anything, we have a format that works. Every change could spawn a 14-page thread about whether Slaan are Tier 2 or Tier 3, or whether High Elves are Tier 1.5, etc. Should tourney games count? Should we get a restart of one team? If so, which tiers? etc etc etc

So if there's broad consensus, changes are worth investigating, but broadly we have a structure that works and led to lots and lots of Box games getting played. I'm sure we could get a few more if we plugged it externally a bit (and happy to do a bit of this via cross-posting etc., and Throweck's great podcast could do a bit too).

_________________
Image
Image
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 11:26 Reply with quote Back to top

Requiring 200 games sounds like a lot. Especially if you are only expecting 20 to finish.

I'd prefer a more manageable schedule.

Are you still planning on doing Sprints?

_________________
Image
[SL] Rookie Rumble - Always recruiting - Brand new TV1000 teams only!
Christer



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 12:02
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Some ideas I've been thinking about:

Point Costs
Adjust point costs for races based on win ratios from the previous season. Someone suggested this in another thread, and it's an interesting concept that could be cool. I don't remember the exact specifics.

Allow for smaller squads
Maybe a fixed 3 team version in parallel (120 matches, or 2.3 per week), or come up with a progressive squad system where coaches can pick a single team to play with and then if they want to, one at a time to get to the full 5 teams. Maybe have the equivalent of 1.8 points per team you add, or fudge that somewhat to something like:
1 team - max 2 points
2 teams - max 3 points
3 teams - max 5 points
4 teams - max 7 points
5 teams - max 9 points
Possibly extending this up with the following:
6+ teams - max (floor(n*1.8 )) points

To discourage people from not adding another team if they do well, the system could maintain your smaller size squad points as well, so that people who do well can keep on pushing up in squad size.

Maybe require minimum of 30 games with all current teams on the squad before you can add another one.

Restarts
Maybe allow people to restart their squad. Perhaps limiting this to once or twice per coach, or some other limit to remove the ability to restart your squad until you have a good few starting games.
PurpleChest



Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 12:57 Reply with quote Back to top

I'm stupid, and I like things very very simple. Working out a budget for 9 points and 5 races made my brain hurt. More on top of that and I'm not sure I'd bother.

For my money, change the parameters, but not the beautiful simplicity.

_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor ulli
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone
pizzamogul



Joined: Jun 13, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 12:59 Reply with quote Back to top

What about having teams of coaches? Allow 2 to 5 coaches to band together to compete for the overall title with the team of coaches splitting up the 5 allowed blood bowl teams.

_________________
"Don't expect mercy."
-Woodstock
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:03
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

I'm not going to play enough games to compete in this, but I do like the idea of using it as a proving ground for Season rules.

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:24 Reply with quote Back to top

A version with 3 team squads sounds ideal. Maybe allow a team to count for both a three-team squad and a five-team squad.

I prefer the parallel championships to the progressive system.

_________________
Image
[SL] Rookie Rumble - Always recruiting - Brand new TV1000 teams only!
happygrue



Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:27 Reply with quote Back to top

Christer wrote:

Point Costs
Adjust point costs for races based on win ratios from the previous season. Someone suggested this in another thread, and it's an interesting concept that could be cool. I don't remember the exact specifics.


I proposed one way of doing that here:

Quote:
1) Mostly keep it exactly the same, as it does work.

2) Remove the tiers, but set all races at the *current* tier point cost.

3) Each new season, look back at which races completed 40 games (or made it past 30 or whatever threshold), and which races completed fewest games.

4) Add .2 points to the cost of each of the top third most played races, and subtract .2 from the cost of each of the bottom third (could mean races go negative).

Then if certain races (eg High Elves and Elven Union) get picked a lot, they are going to increase in cost for the next season. If they still get picked for season 2 they will go up in cost again for season 3. Other races (Pact, for example) are going to get cheaper until they start getting played more. Then we'll reach a balance over time and have a bit of ebb and flow. The different point values will also mean you will be faced with new team creation choices each season, which is another bonus, as there will never be "one or two best team combos".


I was thinking to try to keep it pretty simple, but there are other ways to handle such an idea as well.

I like having options to encourage more participation, but I also like how this really is a long slog where a huge focus is on team building, and I like the focus there. Walking the line between keeping it "big and epic" and allowing more participation is tricky.

I also agree with fxiii that the race leads at 2.5 are too good. Especially since people who have no intention of finishing can steal the race leads and play spoiler for those vying for the top spots... not that I am in any way bitter about exactly this scenario... Wink

I think I would remove points for race titles completely. This is about overall performance of 200 games, adding in some wonky stuff where someone can net 7.5 points by a hair and someone else gets nothing with the same number of games won is a bit dicey. I get that part of it is the meta on race selection, but as someone who holds a race title, I think luck plays a pretty big role on who exactly comes down with those extra points. I would suggest making them worth no points but give out an extra badge for the top 3 in each race. Or short of that, make them 1 point at most. Very Happy

Regardless, I'm looking forward to next season! I've never really enjoyed building stacked teams for majors, as much as I enjoy playing in them. But a real contest of long-term team building and many, many games played is a real treat! Very Happy

_________________
Come join us in #metabox, the Discord channel for HLP, ARR, and E.L.F. in the box!
Image
GAZZATROT



Joined: Apr 26, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:29 Reply with quote Back to top

I think it's an excellent tournament.

I joined it 10 weeks ago and am currently on 100 games played.... As such it does seem unlikely I'll finish it though.

That said, I feel the 5 teams quota is good and the 40 games per team is excellent.

Having 5 teams encourages great diversity in the box (a good thing).

I feel the 40 games is the right number because it allows real team progression and gives each squad the opportunity to get to high T.V. (a good thing for fluff).

If I had to propose a tweak to those numbers, I'd perhaps say 6 squads to play 30 games.... But I think 5 x 40 works very well.

I have suggested to Christer that he extend the current season (which he politely declined)... Either way I would suggest running season 2 from 1st January 2019 for the year for neatness.

Either way, great tournament.... I'm rushing to try and complete.... I like the idea of some permanent scoreboard.

Thank you Christer and anyone else involved. Smile

_________________
Forever fearless, sometimes stupid.
happygrue



Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:33 Reply with quote Back to top

PurpleChest wrote:
I'm stupid, and I like things very very simple.


Excellent point, PC! Wink One thing my idea above would add is decimal math... which doesn't bother many of us, but it doesn't look as clean as the original idea. One alternative way of getting around this kind of thing would be to keep exactly the same race tiers and points as season 1 and adding some bonus points for the races least played in the previous season.

So perhaps the top 8 teams played get no bonus points, the middle 8 get 1 bonus point and the bottom 8 get 2 bonus points, or something like that. That would provide a similar dynamic system... the downside is that it wouldn't be correcting itself long-term like my previous idea. If 2 points aren't enough to get people to play Pact, then they are still not going to be enough year after year, for example. Very Happy But anyway, it's a thought.

_________________
Come join us in #metabox, the Discord channel for HLP, ARR, and E.L.F. in the box!
Image


Last edited by happygrue on Aug 29, 2018 - 13:41; edited 1 time in total
Bendrig



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:34 Reply with quote Back to top

I feel like shortening the season isn't the way to go. As it is, having a late start, a long break or just not feeling it for a while isn't a huge deal. That might change with shorter seasons, even with less games to play.

Can't comment on most other suggestions, too much math hurts.
Verminardo



Joined: Sep 27, 2006

Post   Posted: Aug 29, 2018 - 13:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Just having a squad of 3 version along the squad of 5 version might already go a long way actually. A bit like WoW where all the raids have 10 and 25 versions.

Edit: And if someone gets really bored they can compete in both. Very Happy
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic