PDA

View Full Version : A tread as wanted by Auto



Deng Ham
09-02-2007, 16:12
This post is a response to the new rules.
I agree taht we shoud have friendly atmosphere in our games (and not JUST in the friendly games. But I think that it's harder to make that atmosphere when playing online that it is in RL. So therefore I woud like to post my views of what make a friendly game.

* Doing a chat along with the game. This can be on IRC or in the ingame window. But the later is easy to overlook coments due to all the other info. It may sound strange that I want a chat. But comenting on stuff in play all along make me relaxed. And I can signalize if I think it's frendly of unpleasant. If we don't chat along the game. Then when I need utter my frustration. It feel like whining. And that set a damper on the entire game.

* No unnecesary injuries. I know you can't controll the injury dice. But it's stuff like fouling for the sake of fouling. And blocking off pitch late in the game. Or other blockes clearly only made in order to score more SPP. I know I play a soft team, but still it gives me a fealing that whoever I play is out to get me. And mess up my team.

* And of course the tone in whtch stuff is typen during a chat. No personal attacks and so on.

Autobot HQ
09-02-2007, 16:39
As I play (played now I guess..) argueably the most hitty of all the teams out there, designed really to pummel the opposition, I can't control my inuries. Now, I'd like every block I throw to be BH, but in the end you're going to take damage against the NZQ. And damage is the only way those Dwarf Blockers are going to gain skills. Now, if I'm on the line on turn 8 and can block you again, I probably wont as I'd rather, shock horror, score and win the game. But until turn 8 or until you pressure the ball carrier or can worry me enough that I simply can't risk blocking you as it'll end the turn of the player who is looking to score that TD, I will still hit you. Not out of spite, but because I need experience too. I usually wont excessively beat people in the second half if I'm up 2-0 either, as it is wrapped up then, but if there is a chance of me not hitting you giving you an oppotunity to break free and stop me winning, believe me I'll slap you guys. Pray for BH :)

On the subject of fouling, again it depends. Ask Riddy, if you have players that are key to your team performance, I will keep kicking those players until they stay down. In some situations I'll pass up the chance to take down a ball carrying Saurus if I can slap that skink down, as if he stays down, that Ag1 Saurus is going to need alot of 6's next driver to even move the ball, and I can beat you off the ball then. Same goes for Wardancers, Werewolves, Guarding Blitzers, Witch Elves, Big Guys, and anything else that is on my threat list.

That said, if a human lineman is lying on the floor, I'm going to leave him lying on the floor. I wont risk losing players on a 6+/4+ unless I can remove an equal worth player, or greater worth player in regards to my sole dirty player.

On the topic of chatting, I'm a notorious chatter and assuming the game isn't a bad game (I don't mean not going my way, I mean a literal bad-sportsmanship-not-enjoying-you-as-a-coach game), I'll be laughing how my dwarves are (were) armed with mighty pillows of not-so-doom, and how you can't roll a one, and how stupid my troll is.

A-HQ

LordSnotball
09-02-2007, 19:00
Wrote this at work, but for some reason i couldnćt post on any forums today...

response to the various rule changes:

1) ff5 RRs:2

would make a more balanced team. dark elf teams have a more difficult choice tho,
A: ff5 rrs:2, no apothecary,
B: ff5, rrs:1, apothecary,
C: ff7, rrs:1, no apothecary, 30k in the bank

imo opinion only a FF5 team is feasible with DEs.

2) 1:3 ratio sounds ok as its a small group, but why don't u just seperate the group, and have 'competetive league leams' and 'free-style/instant tourney group'. in the second category ppl play whoever they want whenever they want, and as they aren't in the competitive league they can't compete so no1 cares who plays against whom. And the 1:3 rule will enable players with competitive league teams to have a variety of opponents and teams to play against. This will also enable players in a competitive league to play another match with a friend from the league without it interferring with their gameplay

3) i think the idea will result in favouritism. been playing in tourneys for 2 years and never seen a situation where the players cant figure it out for themselves. if u honestly can't (vampire failing OFAB and scoring which is against the rules), just go to a channel with nuffle and roll !d 6. on 1-3 the hosting player wins, and 4-6 the visiting player wins. end of story

4) having league teams and free play teams seperated would solve this prob imo...

-Snottie
ps. sorry for the long post :)
pps. in response to the no late foul and no late crowd pushing, i am against that. Its a choice to play like that. Let it be a conscious choice rather than a rule. the moment it becomes a rule ppl get upset... i'd propose recommending 'only tactical fouls and crowd pushes late in the game'. that covers it nicely i think

th0r
09-02-2007, 19:10
I disagree I start with 11 linemen , apoth, 2 rr and ff8 with Dark Elves. High ff is important with elves as is an apothecary.

As for crowd pushes and fouling heres the deal. I play High Elves. I'm not going to out hit most teams. Therefore my team has to be creative to get the necessary player out. This means fouling and crowd pushing. If I knew people were going to get upset about this sort of thing I would play Dwarves, cause IMO at higher TR Elves are very vulnerable. I mean Dwarves have tackle and block stock which discounts my 2 skill linemen.... I don't see the difference between a whole team having mighty blow and me fouling.

Deng Ham
09-02-2007, 19:30
Hoping to clear up missunderstandings. I don't mind fouls, croud push nor many blocks. But anything that have a biger chance of affecting the next match rather then the curent one. I consider bad sportsmanship.

I'm not against fouling. But a foul that does not have other puruse than injuring a player so it can play the NEXT game, I think is bad sportsmanship. And this type of fouls come in the last 4 turns. Far away from the action. In the same way that a crowd push in turn 7/2, In your half of the field when I'm controling the ball and is about to score. Does nothing to change the curent game. But can have a defestating effect on the next match.

th0r
09-02-2007, 19:32
Well you don't really control whither it's a bh or si. As long as the game is in the balance , I consider everything fair game.

LordSnotball
09-02-2007, 20:18
heh,

http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&op=view&id=882702

my DEs vs Khermi, took 7 casualties that match, ruined my team for the rest of the tourney but was one of the most fun matches i ever had...

-Snottie

Arkzein
09-02-2007, 21:10
2) and have 'competetive league leams' and 'free-style/instant tourney group'. in the second category ppl play whoever they want whenever they want,


This is what I strongly advocated in that monster post in the other thread as well, as is indeed the system we ran for years in my last RL league.

The Competitive League becomes just that, fair and compeitive, as you only play in league or Tournament games for team advancement so those who have more time to play friendlies inbetween league matches don't have an unfair advantage.

Yet if they do want to play more there are two options. Friendlies with league teams, for no SPP, cash etc. but to try tactics, or playing in the free play league which is basically what we have now with the odd tournament thrown in.

Only choice would be to to shift our current teams into the Compeitive league, and make new ones for free play, or leave our current teams as free play and make the new compeitive league will all new teams. (Given the number of long term members I'd wager the former is what most would advocate, but a poll would be interesting nonetheless)

In any case looking at the rule changes on FumBBL I'm left confused. It would seem the option above to change the rules to a compeitive league but leave our current teams has been taken. Only play the same team one in three, but non-league games must be no SPP friendlies? Why have the one in three rule of you can only play in the league round robin or tournaments anyway or am I reading it wrong?

I'll probably be happy enough with whatever is decided though. :)

th0r
09-02-2007, 21:22
Your right the rules that Auto made up don't make sense. This most likely is a result of not listening to anybody and just implementing random rules. If we are going to go this route I would say make new teams and use them for competition and use our current teams for fun games.

Autobot HQ
10-02-2007, 00:35
It's true, I'm ignoring you all...

..course I'm not, and it seems the rules haven't been made clear which is my fault. The league, as in the Warseer League itself, should only have one team. I can't see the rule that says you can't play any game with anyone else because you have a warseer team, I must of missed that bit.

I'm trying to organise a friendly relaxed atmosphere for the LEAGUE teams, as thats what I'm in charge of right? Those rules, whilst they DO still need editing it's why I asked people to open threads, help develop the single LEAGUE team people have in a fair, non cherry picking way. People are, have been and always will be free to make new teams and play with them write reports on those, and enjoy the whole Fumbbl experience. But somewhere I assumed that people wanted a single league with a single team. I thought with two divisions for both low ranking and high ranking teams, we encourage that. Evidently I was wrong.

I open the forum once again for people to rewrite a rule they think needs rewriting, or indeed write a whole new rule, and post it in this thread. Lets pool all of the collective wisdom and get this sorted over the next week. In the meantime I'll implement more random rules and get back to ignoring you all, yea?

A-HQ

Arkzein
10-02-2007, 01:32
I was going to suggest a poll, but too many options with so few of us could leave things far from definative with a wide spread. Agreed that perhaps if we lay out our thoughts once and for all in one place we could decide. In any case I'll put down the best option in my opinion (rather than running through a ton of options) as concisely as possible and if everyone does likewise perhaps we can get the number of choices down.

Two groups - The League and the Open Championship.

The Leauge

Divisions of 5-8 teams in a pyramidal system. Number of teams and how many games per week can be based on how long you want a Season to run for. (ie 5 teams, one per week, 1 month season. 8 teams, 2 per week, also one month etc.)

Note - With a cup running also 2 league games a week could mean 3 games total per week, might be too much for some? Conversely with one game a week and dumped out of the cup it could mean one game per week. Too few?


The League Cup - Runs alongside the main league, knockout with teams from every division.


Only games played in the League or League Cup count towards team advancement and SPP.


Start afresh with new teams. (Can be waived if agreed by most and just transfer our current teams) ~ Iffy on this one as being new I am, of course, biased.


Hence no advantage to those of us who simply have more time to play more games. True level playing field.


The Open Championship

As we have now. Play whoever you want as much as you want, as long as they are within the WBBL (Perhaps some limits such as not the same team one in 3 games).


Allows people who want to play more than their league and cup games to do so. As well as, perhaps, folk who can't keep up with the league schedule for a while to still have a few games.


Possibly allow more than one team? Two? Perhaps as a reward. Win a Title/Cup get another slot.


The Open Championshup Cup - Anyone can enter, but only with one team and said team cannot play any more friendlies until knocked out. (Hence a good reason to have 2 teams as the base, not allowing friendlies could defeat the purpose of allowing more games to be played. Could alternatively wave the no friendly rule, but then teams can skill up for their next game)



Thus we have a fair, structured newbie friendly league as well as a more relaxed one for playing games amongst ourselves. Plus three titles to win (and some divisional titles).

Would imagine you could have a season in 4, 6 or 8 weeks. Further rules, such as what to do for a no show, rule infractions and such can always be hashed out later.

In any case that's what I'd *like* to see. There's a lot more chat around but I agree with Auto, lets have everyone write down exactly what system they'd prefer and we can pick one or mesh a few together and come out with something. I'm sure most of us are happy enough now anyway and will be glad to just have it set, done and dusted and ready to move on with.

Jet
10-02-2007, 10:57
Time to launch into major posting once again.

Here's my quickly thought out proposal:

Since we can't seem to decide, lets make a system so that we don't have to. Say we have 17 teams like now; 9 go into an open round robin league, 8 go into the fixed round robin league. Hopefully we can sort out the numbers by having some volunteers move between the 2. I would aim for close to 2 games per week in the fixed round robin; teams in the open round robin would be encouraged to simply get their games played in say, the month.

The placings at the end of each league determine the first round games in the following Swiss tournament. For those who are unfamiliar with Swiss, rest assured it gives all players an equal number of games, and has generally produces fair matchups towards the end of the tournament.

Then furthermore I propose that the rankings from the Swiss either:-

- Determine the league groupings (heirarchical) for a set of promotion/relegation leagues for the next season after we have all agreed on the best league system(since we will have now seen how they pan out. At this point also, teams that have joined the league since the commencement of these competitions can into in the most junior league

- Or the rankings from the Swiss determine the seedings for a next knockout cup tournament. First game losers (note not first round losers to avoid non-players benefitting) will go into a separate knockout plate competition to give them games. With the current number of teams, this means one team can get a max of 4 games, while a minimum of 2; not too much difference.


These are of course quite loose proposals. I would suggest that if we were to decide on this systems, higher TR teams would hopefully wait until the lower teams fought their way up to a decent TR, say 130 or so, where they would at least be able to compete with the aid of handicaps.

Autobot HQ
10-02-2007, 13:30
You know what bothers me is the tone a couple of people have taken on this since the final. From the start I was told we were having one team, and The rules that I've presented make, assuming there is just one competative team, work. Multiple teams changes the entire thing, so saying I'm making up barmy rules is a *******' insult to me when I'm being told one thing and having to do another. I am happy, more than happy, to have seperate leagues with seperate teams for competativeness and fun, but I was told we'd have the Warseer League with the teams with background, not that I was designing a group for people to play multiple teams with the occassional tournament. Asking me one thing and demanding another in a mocking insulting tone cough*th0r*cough is just not on. Had to be said, sorry. And I hope everyone knows me enough by now to realise I'm not a sulky whiney person I've put effort into this, moreso than anyone, and want to see it work for the people that play it. Soon as I know what you actually want that is. On a side note, we had a poll a while back where people voted for just one team. So forgive me if I got confused and thought that actually meant you DID want one team. Silly me :rolleye:

So, back on topic, two seperate leagues, one for fun with our current teams, and one with new teams in competative play makes most sense I think if people want multiple teams. Arkzein: Dude, the pyramid system would work with if everyone has a new team, but how do we decide the initial rankings? Another tournament perhaps, I think this might be the best way, except there isn't a way on the fumbbl site for me to code in a pyramid league set-up. So tere would have to be a thread opened for that with everyone noted what they're in, which adds more paperwork (in essence), and ergo more complication in getting new people to join (who often view simple = best). I think in real life that pyramid system is so good I would use it in my own league (and probably will) but online where we're trying to recruit it may not be a physical posibilty. I would like to hear other peoples view on this. Also, a reward of another slot makes no sense unfortunately as you would have to play yourself at some point. Sorry.

A swiss round robin system is always a good system Jet, but some people don't like that set up and again I think possibly yet another thread opened explaining what it is for people who don't know, along with possibly a poll if they like it or not, may be a good way forward (don't forget the macavity option on the poll!)

I think if everyone should get it out now how many games they would want to/be able to play in a month/week. Some of us might not have essentially 4hrs to spare to play 3 games a week, so we need to work to our lowest denominator.

Think that bout covers me for the day - A rant, some notes and some acceptances. Please proceed to flame/insult/agree/whine/all of the above. I won't be in tonight as I'm going to the movies with my girl, so probably wont respond to any of the above 'till sunday.

Rgds, Stuart

Riddy
10-02-2007, 17:44
2 Teams, one new for the championship, but i am bias cos i'm getting fed up of playing with the lizards all the time, they advance too slow.

2 games a week is probably the best, since 1 is too few for a few people (myself included) but 3 possibly too many for people who have a 'real life' (myself included :p )

I like Jets idea of an open and a fixed round robin, this would benifit me greatly since some weeks i have time to play 3-5 games and others i struggle to find the time for one so if we were to go ahead with this sign me up for open.

I get the feeling alot of the problems are being caused by the great TR gap between the n00bs and the veterans and i reckon everyone should just scrap their team and start again with a fixed amount of games so everyone gets the same (although with a fixed round robin a no-show would effect team advancement.)

In the end i dont care, aslong as i still get to beat on Autobots team :p

tenpole
10-02-2007, 20:52
I will stick with one team, its hard enough for me to play with one team let alone the time to play with another warseer team.

Why not someone else offer to do this splinter group.

Autobot HQ
10-02-2007, 22:02
I have no problem setting the league up to cater for both types, I just need to know if that;s what people want - I already put the effort in, although I would just like to say that the Warseer News would mainly report on the competitive league as I just wouldn't have time to do both - The flak I've seemingly taken in the last 2 days is putting me off as it is lol!

;) Stuart ;)

tenpole
10-02-2007, 23:12
Its tough at the top.

LordSnotball
11-02-2007, 21:47
Arzkein: If we start off with new teams, and play a pyramidical layout, wont the teams winning end up with more spps and stronger teams? The result will be that after 1 tourney u'll be in exactly the same situation ur in right now.

My timetable can take 2 matches a month. If its too low, lemme know and i'll stick to the friendly group.

Anyway, i can understand problems related to tourney layout, but we seem to have more hassle about actually running the group... tbh its good coz it means that ppl are interested and care.

if u made changes and everyone just stopped playing, then u'd know that something was seriously wrong...

-Snottie

Arkzein
11-02-2007, 22:21
Arzkein: If we start off with new teams, and play a pyramidical layout, wont the teams winning end up with more spps and stronger teams? The result will be that after 1 tourney u'll be in exactly the same situation ur in right now.


Of course, though they will have achieved it through "fair" means was the main point. Strength of teams wasn't the issue, it was people with more time will always have stronger teams rather than, necessarily, more skill as they have time to play firendlies and pump the squads. Hence the set league and, now, suggested swiss style. ie everybody plays exactly the same number of games, if you have more SPP at the end of that it's because you played well rather than played more.

Newbie issue aside (who will of course have fewer games) it levels the playing field.