| Poll |
| Season Redraft: |
| It is a Must. Should strictly follows BB2020 User Manual rules (15 games sharp etc..,) |
|
26% |
[ 34 ] |
| It is a Must. But not strictly following BB2020 Manual (f.i : after more than 15 games and/or different redraft rules... ) |
|
23% |
[ 30 ] |
| It is nice to have and can be implemented in several way. I am flexible. |
|
23% |
[ 31 ] |
| I don't like it, but I will accept to be done with one of the previous option |
|
5% |
[ 7 ] |
| I don't like at all and I think should NEVER be implemented in FUMBBL! |
|
12% |
[ 16 ] |
| Pie! |
|
9% |
[ 12 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 130 |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 14:19 |
 
|
What's wrong with me now? I just suggested a Season Re-Draft of 12 games rather than 15 backed up by a reason (debatable, but a reason nonetheless). I didn't invoke any MattDakka's fairness concept (which is not everchanging, by the way).
Just I expressed the concern that a 15-game Season could make stat freaks easier to get and keep, hence a 12-game Season suggestion.
I can play with either 15 or 12-game Season, just, with a 15-game Season, there will be more stat boosted players than with a 12-game Season. |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | What's wrong with me now? ....other stuff.... |
Nothing new. But you're an easily quoted example of having your own 'this is fair' moral judgement, surely you dont deny that? even if we disagree on its stability.
To expand, we ALL do, just you are very vocal about yours. And are easy to bait. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 17:18 |
|
Not in this thread. I just suggested a 12-game Season Re-Draft. No moral judgement about Season Re-Draft.
It wasn't me talking about the "spirit of the game". |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %18, %2023 - %18:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
The_Great_Gobbo
Joined: Aug 04, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 17:29 |
|
Someone answer me this: Why limit our freedom of coaches to build whatever team we want however we want? All games in C are voluntary, see an opponent you don't like? Don't play them! You can have as many teams of any race as you want so build a high AND a low TV human team for example and find suitable opponents accordingly.
WHY ARE MY CHOICES BEING LIMITED?
Seasons are totally unnessesary and a terrible idea, scrap the implementation totally. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 17:32 |
|
Christer wants to stick to official rules.
Season Re-Draft is a core part of the official rules (playing without Re-Draft and being able to pick stats would lead to highly optimized, super high TV teams).
Therefore Christer will implement the Season Re-Draft, not because he wants to spoil the fun of people, but because there is need to have some TV trimming and Season Re-Draft is the official way to do it.
Read his blog:
https://fumbbl.com/p/blog&c=Christer&id=23178
I quote just some sentences, feel free to browse other Christer's blogs, anyway:
"In BB2016, seasons are a relatively important aspect of the game. We've not implemented it because it's a big change to do in the middle of a ruleset. However, teams are quite significantly bloated in terms of TV which is not very friendly for new coaches, and makes it harder to find games for those teams in general. Seasons are an integral and important way to limit the TV of teams.
With BB2020, I think the season rules are, on a high level, unchanged. Re-drafting is still a thing but there has been a few modifications to it. There's an optional gold cap set to a pretty aggressive level making re-drafting very high TV teams complicated.
Now, to go with this, other changes in the rules make it even more important. On a whole, player attrition is significantly reduced (fewer deaths, and an ability to heal injuries during the re-drafting process). We're looking at a ruleset where TV would balloon even more, and on top of that you'll be able to build your players the way you want by picking skills (even the double equivalents now called "secondary skills"). This would lead to highly optimized, super high TV teams and worsen the problem as a whole."
Personally, I don't like Season Re-Draft either, but it's an official rule and, although not the best way to achieve team balance in my own humble opinion, it's a way to trim the teams nonetheless.
If the alternative is playing without Season Re-Draft and facing 1900 TV killer teams and/or stat freaks well, then it's better, in my opinion, to have the Season Re-Draft. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %18, %2023 - %19:%May; edited 9 times in total |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 17:45 |
|
Agree with all those reasons there from Christer, but it seems like average TV is now way lower than it was
Previously I was playing mostly at 1600-1800, but now mostly at 1100-1200
I think partly this is, inducements are way stronger than they've ever been. Being overdog used to be a huge advantage
Megastars getting the chop does lower this, though.
Partly it's also, excess useless gold being used to churn players looking for good random skillups means you grow slower
And not having D3 MVP selection means you can't funnel SPP as much
I think also average SPP gain from CAS is now lower too
So teams grow slower. But, the ceiling for growth is theoretically higher |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 17:53 |
|
Well, I think that we could try the Season Re-Draft before complaining (without expecting too much from it, on the other hand) and that, since Christer & staff have to work to implement it, it's not kind to complain about it. If Christer wants to implement it he has good reasons to do it. I'm sure that, if there was a better official way to trim the teams, he would implement it.
For sure Season Re-Draft will not be liked by high TV lovers, I understand that, but we should blame BB2020 rules.
About this:
| The_Great_Gobbo wrote: | | Someone answer me this: Why limit our freedom of coaches to build whatever team we want however we want? All games in C are voluntary, see an opponent you don't like? Don't play them! |
The reasons are:
not all the games in C are voluntary.
Games found via the Box scheduler are arranged without knowing the next opponent/team in advance.
Therefore, if somebody decided to build, for instance, a super high TV team (or several high, mid-high TV teams) he could activate them and be paired with a guy not liking big TV gaps playing with a low TV team.
On Gamefinder you can turn down/accept game offers, in the Box you can't.
Moreover, for the Box to work well, it's better to have all the teams in it close in TV, rather than with huge TV differences, because that helps to increase the number of draws and generally speaking reduces the chances of big TV gaps which are perceived by people like not fair and that could drive them off the Box, again, reducing the number of games played.
If you like high TV teams then you should play them in League division with a no Re-Draft option. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %18, %2023 - %22:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
Joost
Joined: Mar 17, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 19:27 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | What's wrong with me now? I just suggested a Season Re-Draft of 12 games rather than 15 backed up by a reason (debatable, but a reason nonetheless). I didn't invoke any MattDakka's fairness concept (which is not everchanging, by the way).
Just I expressed the concern that a 15-game Season could make stat freaks easier to get and keep, hence a 12-game Season suggestion.
I can play with either 15 or 12-game Season, just, with a 15-game Season, there will be more stat boosted players than with a 12-game Season. |
Nothing wrong here Matt, so far i see reasonable contributions only  |
|
|
RDaneel
Joined: Feb 24, 2023
|
 Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 22:51 |
|
| Nelphine wrote: | | Redraft, due to agent fees, will heavily favor teams which can redraft onlyv1 or 2 players - you'll redraft a legend ball carrier, and a legend killer. The rest of the team will be rookies. This will heavily favor teams who have strong rookies - which are the tier 1 teams. |
| PurpleChest wrote: |
dorfs need a wall of guard, with each guard costing 20k agents fees, despite dwarf seeming good value, they will be hurt by having a wall of guardless beards and coaches will try to find ways around that.
|
These a couple of key points raised by Nelphine and PurpleChest which makle me thinking the following: Will redraft (option 1) favour even more Tiers1 min-maxed teams?
If yes then goodbye Blood-Bowl variety?
Let's take the UW if you can carry three legendary players for three seasons
- a Gutter: Block, Two Heads, Big Hand, Side Step, Horns, Tackle (205k)
- a Blitzer: Mighty Blow, Claws, Tackle, Horns, Juggernaut (190k)
- a Thrower: Leader, Block, Two Heads, On the Ball ( 165k)
you can afford the luxury of starting your season with three legends and a ton of Snots and still play just paying +20kx3 agent fee... not a big deal!
Do we want this? All people will search min.max and play Tiers1 only
If we want to mitigate this min-max extremism some possible solutions (I mention them since I voted for solution 2)
- Agent's fees proportional to the level of the player you want to keep: paying 20k for a Dwarf Blocker with ONE guard and the same 20k for a Legend Gutter Block, Two Heads, Big Hand, Side Step, Horns, Tackle (205k) seems strange to me: do we want to say that each additional skill costs, say, 5k more in agent fees?
12 or 15 games is not the problem for me. The problem is: do we want to continue to incentivise the min-max or not? And if not, how to mitigate it?
It is evident from what I write that I am not a min-max fanatic.
I don't find anything exceptional about scoring with a Two Heads Gutter that does a series of 2+2+2+ dodges the last turn even if their team is remained with 3 players..
I have a horror of Gutter Runner Block, Two Heads, Big Hand, Side Step, Horns, Tackle as well as Blitzer Orcs: Sure Hands, Dodge, +MA, +MA, Break Tackle, Side Step and I believe that sooner or later this abuse must be curbed, just as it has been decided to ban from Competitive MegaStars (Bomber Dribblesnot and Morg 'n' Thorg) sooner or later we will have to face the problem of normalising this extreme min-.max
In the upcoming Blood Bowl finals in Alicante we will not see minmax. Ask me the question and give yourself the answer!
The design of the redraft is left to the freedom of choice of the League Commissioner. I therefore appeal to Christer and ask him what he thinks about this, whether he plans to introduce something like a progressive agent's fee linked to player experience and/or some other way to reduce the min-max... or not... and if anyone else feels the same way as I do because clearly if I'm the only one who sees this problem then so be it: I'll adapt and pie! 
what do you think? |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 23:13 |
|
If you don't like BB2020 minmax then you should have seen the CRP minmax, with low TV teams such as Chaos Dwarfs without Bull Centaurs or Chaos Pact with 0 rrs, 1 Leader, 1-2 Cpomb Legend killers, 1 Legend ball carrier, the rest unskilled players, some of them Loners.
Not saying that minmax is good, just that in the past rulesets it was worse.
As an aside, rookie team protection was added due to the low TV minmax in CRP.
About the 20k Agent Fee and Legend players: you should consider that a player will not become a Legend in just 1 Season*, so, before getting 6 level ups his cost will increase more than just +20k.
Assuming an average of 3 SPPs per game, in Season 1 a player should get 1-2 stat boosts and/or 3-4 skills, in Season 2 other 1-2 stat boosts and/or 3 skills (and +40k Agent Fee). I guess at least 2-3 Seasons are required to build a Legend (disclaimer: assuming you don't play farming games), so in the end he should cost at least either +40 or +60k Agent Fee + his cost + skills/stats. And this only if we are trying to keep a single Legend. In UW case, for example, you could want to keep the Gutter Runner and the Blitzer. If you keep 2 players it's already +40k Agent Fee post Season 1, after 2 Seasons it's +80k.
Unless you build a Legend just by taking only random skills, but then he won't be a good Legend.
*15-game Season. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %19, %2023 - %00:%May; edited 12 times in total |
|
Garion26
Joined: Nov 28, 2021
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 23:27 |
|
| The_Great_Gobbo wrote: | Someone answer me this: Why limit our freedom of coaches to build whatever team we want however we want? All games in C are voluntary, see an opponent you don't like? Don't play them! You can have as many teams of any race as you want so build a high AND a low TV human team for example and find suitable opponents accordingly.
WHY ARE MY CHOICES BEING LIMITED?
Seasons are totally unnessesary and a terrible idea, scrap the implementation totally. |
TLDR: in BB 22020 TV no longer is a good representation of the effectiveness of a team. In an infinite online environment (which the rules weren't designed for) you can generate severe mismatch issues for a system where TV is used to generate matches.
As Matt points out many games are in Black Box and even in C picker situations you may not realize that the opponents TV is not a fair representation of their teams effectiveness.
As I and others have pointed out in this thread - BB 2020 rules allows you to get a better player then their TV cost through two mechanisms.
1) Saving for plus movement which is undercosted in an environment where a player may have 100+ games to get those high SPP low TV cost upgrades.
2) Random skills have a lower TV cost to balance their risk in a typical tabletop league environment (6-20 games) in an infinite game online environment (100+ games) their risk is mitigated by cycling players.
End result - two teams of the same race may have the same TV but drastically different levels of competitiveness. This wouldn't usually happen in the tabletop environment for which the rules were written but the oddities of an online enviroment create those situations.
If I have a choice I will not accept games against an opponent with many more games then I have had, even (especially) if our TV is similar. As others have pointed out having a big TV difference is somewhat less of a problem in BB 2020 then it was in the past due to better inducements.
In BB2020 a big gap in games played between two teams can be (not always) be a sign of a mismatch even if the TV is the same. This creates the same feel bad moments that a big TV difference has historically caused in C. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 23:53 |
|
Can we all accept the idea that the entire premise, rule or idea behind redraft is to make it easier to run a 8-10 coach table top league in England,Germany or Italy easier to control at the end of season so as to not run off half the league because of TV inbalance?
Thus making this sad comish having to find 4-6 new coaches with rookie teams to get fed to the meat grinder next season and hope to God they show up for their 3 game?
Redraft is a rule for the pub comish to keep his paltry 8 coach league up and running with out massive turnover because of high TV teams vs Low Tv teams.
can we at least agree to the main reason the idea of a redraft even started? |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2023 - 23:56 |
|
Maybe with Season Re-Draft they wanted to make a poor man's team manager simulator, who knows. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 19, 2023 - 00:05 |
|
[quote="Garion26"]
TLDR: in BB 22020 TV no longer is a good representation of the effectiveness of a team. In an infinite online environment (which the rules weren't designed for) you can generate severe mismatch issues for a system where TV is used to generate matches.
I find this very funny that the response to the one coach on FUMBBL who plays a Goblin team with only Goblins is some how creating a mismatch.
Just my thoughts which I found funny. Not saying what Garion had to say in the big context is right or wrong. just that very specific retort. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
Garion26
Joined: Nov 28, 2021
|
| Posted:
May 19, 2023 - 00:29 |
|
[quote="PainState"]| Garion26 wrote: |
TLDR: in BB 22020 TV no longer is a good representation of the effectiveness of a team. In an infinite online environment (which the rules weren't designed for) you can generate severe mismatch issues for a system where TV is used to generate matches.
I find this very funny that the response to the one coach on FUMBBL who plays a Goblin team with only Goblins is some how creating a mismatch.
Just my thoughts which I found funny. Not saying what Garion had to say in the big context is right or wrong. just that very specific retort. |
As a devoted goblin coach myself (tabletop more then FUMBBL) I of course salute the love of goblins and was talking about the general issue of why have redraft rather then the one coach on the site running an all goblin team.
Lets face it though most of those little buggers cycle themselves off the team one way or another in 15 games. Infinite games played to develop superstar goblins is probably not the issue at hand and really redrafting isn't going to change that. I can't believe anyone is going to have 10 really developed goblins you want to keep.
I can easily imagine might have 2-3 and 12-14 or so easily redrafted cannon fodder. Given that an all goblin team base cost is probably close to 700 you can afford 600-700 K of skills and redraft fees to get them all back. |
|
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
