| Poll |
| Do you vote for a progression or non progession tournament for International Smackdown? |
| Progression |
|
36% |
[ 31 ] |
| Non Progression |
|
44% |
[ 38 ] |
| Pink Furry Crocodiles!!!!! |
|
19% |
[ 17 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 86 |
|
DropDeadFred
Joined: Mar 05, 2004
|
 Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 21:28 |
 
|
| Macavity wrote: | | I'm still largely in favour of Pink Furry Crocodiles, but Canada will win, regardless. |
pointless post 796 |
_________________
Sk8bcn is unhappy with my sig so i have changed it to this |
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 21:31 |
|
| DropDeadFred wrote: | | Macavity wrote: | | I'm still largely in favour of Pink Furry Crocodiles, but Canada will win, regardless. |
pointless post 796 |
Now you just aren't making sense. Either all my posts are pointless, and you should note them each, or some have a point, and should not be counted in the total. Please be thorough in your attempt to irritate me into eliminating my spamming habits  |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Darkwolf
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 21:40 |
|
I like Jan's idea too, Howver I am for progression TEAM CANADA I's strategy is too ground and pound all other countries into submission. |
_________________
Check out the latest Darkwolf "***Did you know?" in his bio! Each month, a new Darkwolf factoid!
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=coachinfo&coach=768 |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 22:11 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | The counter arguement that progression distorts a tourney and doesnt allow true ability to out is, frankly, piffle.
If your team wins but gets wrecked, THATS YOUR FAULT. You picked the race, the team and the tactics, all are factors in the 'skill' of BB. teams progress at different rates, have different durability and different costs, you maybe ought to have thought of that when you drew up the team, not moan about it now. |
This is not a valid argument. True, some races are far better than others if we all play at TR100 with no progression. But EXACTLY THE SAME goes if you play with normal progression: Orcs, Chaos Dorfs, Dorfs and Khemri all rule in the long run. So this argument invalidates my point of view as well as yours, i.e. it invalidates none.
I think that this Tourneament (assuming it will be as cool as it seems atm) will be quite a "long" one. I have not a great experience in tournaments, but I know the greatest issue is the lack of reliability: most of the times tourneaments are just killed by a great amount of dropping coaches.
TR100 *helps* to keep the interest high (cause you always have a competitive roster of the same level of your opponent), so it *should* lower the chance of people leaving after a REAL bad game. (not that I or my team would do that, anyway). This is a big, real big help in the success of this initiative.
The rest of your post (the part I didn't quote) has a point. I love the randomness in BB, and I must admit you have your reasons. Even if I am still for a non progressive system.
I guess it's all about different point of views, God bless different opinions! |
_________________
 |
|
vanGorn
Joined: Feb 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 22:27 |
|
@PurpleChest: perhaps you have specialized on high av teams too much, to enjoy non progression. |
_________________
Gimme a pint of fungus beer!
Then we will climb the ladder.
 |
|
DropDeadFred
Joined: Mar 05, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 22:27 |
|
im going on what people want and polls dont lie |
_________________
Sk8bcn is unhappy with my sig so i have changed it to this |
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
Janmattys: Agreed, and appologies for the angry tone, unmeant. friendly discussion as always.
vangorn:
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=76262
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=67068
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=97413
I can play either i like to think. though i have favoured races, as most coaches do. And its true i do dislike elfbowl. Also I used to AD&D as a paladin and hence cannot play undead teams (note to paranoid american mothers: IT DOES effect your kids) but it isnt that that bothers me.
In non progression you are foolish to play races other than woodies, pro elves, norse, amazon and humans. Orcs, dark elves, dwarves and high elves have some chance, but all others are pretty much redundant. The idea of endless repetative games against immortal teams of the same few races doesnt appeal to me on any level. The added pointlessness of not even having the post game to fear/desire/play just makes the while enterprise unnapealing to me.
I still think a single race will remove the contradictions in the non progression arguement, then you could really claim it is a truely even test.
Why not humans only? if its to be reduced to so few races anyway, why not go the whole way and balance out all differences.
Oh and DDF, polls do lie if you ask the questions right?
Clasic example used in teaching polling methods:
A: Do you want a strong defense against aggression and a free country?
B: Do you want to give up our Nuclear weapons while other still have theirs?
A: Do you agree with destroying innocent civilions in their millions, in screaming agony by use of mass destruction weaponry?
B: Do you belive that we, and through our example and political pressure, should seek a nuclear free world?
Same question, if asked to general public can get large majorities in favour of either keeping or loosing nuclkear weaponry.
Its all in the question. The poll states negatives for progression (team death) but none for non progression.
That said, i do not question the result, as we must assume the public will choose to see through such devices, in spite fo the evidence that they dont. |
|
|
Jinxed
Joined: Jul 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 29, 2005 - 23:47 |
|
Both systems have their good and bad sides.
I tend to like progression slightly more but maybe there is a way to weed out the worst excesses of poor dice? How about making stat increases illegal? (treat those as regular skill rolls) After all; +AG or +ST means a lot, especially early on.
In the end I'll play either system. |
_________________
Nuffle sucks |
|
BunnyPuncher
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 00:01 |
|
I hate the non-progression idea...
I'll have to reconsider my orc team's lineup as it's built right now for progression.
Bummer. |
_________________
|
|
Woodpecker
Joined: Apr 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 00:25 |
|
Okay, I'm a bit cunfused. How do you have Non-Progression? Do you make a new team every game, or not log into fumbbl to play, and just submit the result in a thread? |
|
|
DreadClaw
Joined: Nov 17, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 01:36 |
|
I was wondering, why not ask only the players that MATTER (in edition THOSE THAT PLAY THE DAMN THING) (captains+teammates) tally up those votes, and then decide. I see most (posting) team members voting for progression... |
_________________
Death be not proud. Though Some have called thee Mighty and Dreadful Thou art not so. |
|
_ERA_
Joined: Jun 18, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 02:14 |
|
NPD vs. PLD Both is what ya'll should have. BB is survival management in majority of time. you could handicap it and for fun to see if the rookie( or keep title game progression) team could win Vs. the PD champion. I would play NP. |
|
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 02:15 |
|
To rephrase the previous post and discussion:
DreadClaw and DropDeadFred discuss non-progression. In the end, not getting anywhere in their argument, they decide to toss a coin for it. DreadClaw choose Heads so DropDeadFred is left with Tails.
The coin tumbles up into the air, spins, lands - and comes up Tails.
DreadClaw looks disappointed and turns to DropDeadFred. "Best out of three?"
I have no qualms with asking just the players, though. |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
thesquig
Joined: Apr 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 02:17 |
|
| DreadClaw wrote: | | I was wondering, why not ask only the players that MATTER (in edition THOSE THAT PLAY THE DAMN THING) (captains+teammates) tally up those votes, and then decide. I see most (posting) team members voting for progression... |
I agree with this. Any old Bob, Dick or Harry could vote in this...and tell their friends to also. I know that DDF likes the non progression idea but a bit of democracy wouldnt hurt. |
_________________
Nuffle Sucks!!!
|
|
Brad
Joined: May 16, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2005 - 03:47 |
|
Let us not forget This is a <B>Team </B> Event.
Progression actually alows teamwork, because each captain will need to decide what ratio of Smash vs Dash Teams to field.
Dwarf, CD, Chaos, KH countries will rack up huge casualty counts, but never progress as they will all go down rather quickly.
By the same token though, Welf, Delf, Skaven, Zon makeups will probably outscore all comers for the first few, but there would be nothing left after the initial rounds.
Progresion allows the captains to build a team of teams, that can hopefully rack up enough points to progress, whilst having an enforcer team or two to cripple the opponents.
No Progression means no teamwork at all, just 4 coaches playing 4 coaches under a common banner. |
_________________
He who dies with the most toys.... Is still dead |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
