MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 13:09 |
 
|
Even if the rules are not designed for Fumbbl, a system pricing random skills half value has the potential to create unbalances, especially if the teams benefitting the most from it, such as Amazons and Norse, are already strong ones. That's not a problem of Fumbbl, it's a problem of the ruleset. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 13:42 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | Even if the rules are not designed for Fumbbl, a system pricing random skills half value has the potential to create unbalances, especially if the teams benefitting the most from it, such as Amazons and Norse, are already strong ones. That's not a problem of Fumbbl, it's a problem of the ruleset. |
But I suspect that it is not a big problem considering the other imbalances.
You have to take a chance to gain an advantage. Even if you fire the player with a duff skill to save TV, you have lost ground in the arms race.
I also doubt that seasons were intended to be 15 games long.
I assume that seasons were designed for leagues where teams all start the season at the same time.
Amazons & Norse are rosters. If you think that they are a problem, you can change them. |
_________________
20 Year Anniversary! - 2016 Nostalgia Bowl - Weds 23rd April! -- All Star Bowl - Always recruiting! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 14:06 |
|
If you fire a Zombie with a bad random skill you lose nothing, that's not really taking a chance. It's potential benefit/0 risk, rather than potential benefit/risk. If you get a bad random skill on an expensive player and you have to fire him then yes, you've lost something in the league's race.
I think as well that Seasons should be shorter.
About Amazons & Norse: of course, but I'm talking about the official ruleset we must stick to in Competitive division. If I could play my own ruleset I would not be here talking about the official ruleset. |
|
|
MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 14:16 |
|
you can play with your own ruleset.
I just guess none wants to play with that ? |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 14:18 |
|
The client should be modified to play with my own ruleset, so it's not possible. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 14:29 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | If you fire a Zombie with a bad random skill you lose nothing, that's not really taking a chance. It's potential benefit/0 risk, rather than potential benefit/risk. If you get a bad random skill on an expensive player and you have to fire him then yes, you've lost something in the league's race. |
Though, that may be an issue with giving away too much gold.
| MattDakka wrote: |
I think as well that Seasons should be shorter.
About Amazons & Norse: of course, but I'm talking about the official ruleset we must stick to in Competitive division. If I could play my own ruleset I would not be here talking about the official ruleset. |
Sticking to the official ruleset when it doesn't suit your league is the problem IMO.
Though, I can see that there are reasons for sticking with it.
I wouldn't be moaning so much if I didn't want to come back to the "main" divisions at some point. 
That seems like a long way away right now though.
No one is complaining to me about amazons & norse. Amazons do look quite nasty to me and norse have an even better win%.
But how much of that is down to the league.
How do they do in season 2+? |
_________________
20 Year Anniversary! - 2016 Nostalgia Bowl - Weds 23rd April! -- All Star Bowl - Always recruiting! |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 14:55 |
|
| koadah wrote: | We have had rookie protection in the past and I don't know why it was removed.
Maybe it was restricting too many games. |
No it's still there, in that season1 teams can't face season2+ teams, which I think is how it used to work?
| koadah wrote: | | S2+ is being actively discouraged. Seasons, BBT, IDT all act against S2+. |
I think 'actively discouraged' is a bit strong. Recent IDT discussion was in favour of allowing teams to continue IDT attempts after their first season, partly because BBT is already for first season teams
But yea, I find there's not much drive to play s2+ really unless you're trying to build a tourney team |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:02 |
|
| koadah wrote: | Amazons do look quite nasty to me and norse have an even better win%.
But how much of that is down to the league.
How do they do in season 2+? |
Ehh, less oppressive but still strong
The same old problem remains of, their advantage at low TV is the Block spam or Dodge spam, and once opponents grow they'll get Block of their own or Tackle, and that takes a bit of the power away
Also opponent is more likely to have dirty player, and bench so they're willing to use it, and more mighty blow
However, they are better at scaling than before the roster updates, because they have players who are worth developing: blockers, blitzers, valks, ulfs
Also it's good to fill out the bench a bit to mitigate the bad armour |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:08 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | | koadah wrote: | We have had rookie protection in the past and I don't know why it was removed.
Maybe it was restricting too many games. |
No it's still there, in that season1 teams can't face season2+ teams, which I think is how it used to work? |
IIRC teams with 1-3 games couldn't play teams with more than 3 games. I think that Matt was proposing something along those lines.
| Sp00keh wrote: |
| koadah wrote: | | S2+ is being actively discouraged. Seasons, BBT, IDT all act against S2+. |
I think 'actively discouraged' is a bit strong. Recent IDT discussion was in favour of allowing teams to continue IDT runs in their second season, specifically because BBT is already for first season teams |
Certainly "strong" but in practical terms true I think.
So, we might get S2+ IDT due to a bug?
No S2+ BBT.
Forced to redraft after playing in a Major. Even if your team has only played one game of the season.
Honestly, I'm not feeling very welcome.  |
_________________
20 Year Anniversary! - 2016 Nostalgia Bowl - Weds 23rd April! -- All Star Bowl - Always recruiting! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:33 |
|
| koadah wrote: |
IIRC teams with 1-3 games couldn't play teams with more than 3 games. I think that Matt was proposing something along those lines.
|
I just suggested to make brackets of games played and use them, if possible, to pair Season 2+ teams.
My brackets would be something like:
- Season 2+ teams with 0-4 games paired with Season 2+ teams with 0-4 games;
- Season 2+ teams with 5-9 games paired with Season 2+ teams with 5-9 games;
- Season 2+ teams with 10-14 games paired with Season 2+ teams with 10-14 games;
or
- Season 2+ teams with 0-7 games paired with Season 2+ teams with 0-7 games;
- Season 2+ teams with 8-14 games paired with Season 2+ teams with 8-14 games.
Two brackets seems to me more reasonable, considering the number of users.
Season 1 teams generally don't face big number of games difference, because many people activate Season 1 teams and the pairings are generally closer (both in terms of TV and teams' age). |
Last edited by MattDakka on Apr 13, 2025; edited 1 time in total |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:37 |
|
1-3 games - I thought it was 15 games for old rookie protection?
The forced redraft is a bit rough if you weren't expecting it, I didn't have any built teams for the last major, entered with mediocre amazons at S2 G6, bounced out by Joost amazons round1 and then forced redraft, damn 
But in future I'll have more time to prep teams and get them to G15
Also it can extend your season past 15 games, you'd get 15 + however many rounds you survive, so entering tourneys is a benefit really as you'd have longer duration between redrafts
Actually! that amazon team isn't redrafted, they're in End of Season and I can play Brawls with them until G15, to avoid early redraft cut
So yea, forced redraft could be a bit rough but it is avoidable |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:45 |
|
@Matt doing brackets like 0-7, 8-15 etc means you're preventing G7 team from playing G8 team
So instead, a gap-cap like, 'within X number of games played this season'
I'm not particularly in favour or against this idea, but I think if it was implemented, it'd be better as a cap, rather than fixed brackets |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:46 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
Season 1 teams generally don't face big number of games difference, because many people activate Season 1 teams and the pairings are generally closer (both in terms of TV and teams' age). |
Though, doesn't that tail off as the BBT season winds down.
I suspect that towards the end of the season there will be a lot of 10+ game teams rushing to complete their runs. |
_________________
20 Year Anniversary! - 2016 Nostalgia Bowl - Weds 23rd April! -- All Star Bowl - Always recruiting! |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Apr 13, 2025 - 15:50 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | @Matt doing brackets like 0-7, 8-15 etc means you're preventing G7 team from playing G8 team
|
Notice that I wrote: "if possible". If it's not possible to pair by brackets, then the match-up happens anyway.
My idea is pairing by close TVs and brackets if possible.
If pairing by TVs and brackets is not possible, then pair by TVs only.
If you prefer by X games difference and not brackets, it could be changed with: max 7 games difference, if possible.
| koadah wrote: |
Though, doesn't that tail off as the BBT season winds down.
I suspect that towards the end of the season there will be a lot of 10+ game teams rushing to complete their runs. |
If there are lots of 10+ game teams in theory they should get paired each other.
Well, there could be a max 7-games-difference pairing criterion, if possible, for Season 1 teams as well. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Team Strength - Rebo...
Search
