Talk Fantasy Football

I certainly wouldn't rule out our looking in to that. (If you're volunteering...)

Shteve0 wrote:

Darkson wrote:If only that many people were interested in NAF elections.

You won't get any disagreement from me (or any of us, I suspect) on that front. Probably needs another thread through rather than derailing this one.

Oh, I had no interest in discussing it further (in this thread or elsewhere), nor did I intend for it to be taken as such, I was just making an observation.

Shteve0 wrote:Whatball - your percentages are out (multiplied by 100 it seems). Would you be able to repost a collected version? Otherwise send over your email address and I'll invite you to our dropbox folder

Sorry if I am being obtuse, not sure which percentages you mean and how they are out. Send me a PM, we can discuss. I did this up very quick in Excel, I could very well have goofed something.

WhatBall wrote:

Shteve0 wrote:Whatball - your percentages are out (multiplied by 100 it seems). Would you be able to repost a collected version? Otherwise send over your email address and I'll invite you to our dropbox folder

Sorry if I am being obtuse, not sure which percentages you mean and how they are out. Send me a PM, we can discuss. I did this up very quick in Excel, I could very well have goofed something.

Lol, I've just realised that it's not that at all. It's number followed by percentage. Derp. Apologies.

Ok, here is another tally of the percentage of players by each platform. The previous pie chart is a little hard to read, because it is based off of combinations of platforms people use. This is a lot more straight forward. It is a count of every instance of every platform (as best I could with cleaning some odd write-ins). It is based on 2803 respondents, I think one was blank, hence not 2804.

Notes:
- The heavy hitter is definitely BB Chaos+ editions.
- Apparently 16% play on a tablet, I am not sure what game is on tablet? Does BB:CE run on tablet? This one has me dumbstruck.
- Almost 16% have the console version, sympathies.
- 11% for FUMBBL, again have to caveat as a write-in. Not too bad considering the retro (low-res) graphics are not everyone's cup o' chai.
- 8ish% don't play online. Come join the fun!
- BB2 is only 1.2%, but due to the timing of the release and the survey, I would guess this number would be MUCH higher if you redid it in 6-12 months. Would be interesting to see if it is adopted widely, and if people leave BB:CE or play both.
- 150% more people play Java BBowl than PbEM apparently. Go Harvestmouse!

Enjoy.

Yes, CE is on tablet.

Ok, I can't help myself. We all know BB is about pie, so here is another pie for you.

BB is definitely an aging community. Looks like there was a little surge, I guess when BB:CE was released, 3-5 years ago. Overall though, people are still coming to the game it seems. I expect BB2 will see another bump in the numbers.

WhatBall wrote:We all know BB is about pie, so here is another pie for you.

Ha.

More people playing javabowl than PBeM! I wonder who the other 5 JB players are?

The differences between TT and Online are minimal. As I see it the differences are:

Stuff that is automated online is not on TT. So why online players would like more complex rules in some scenarios that the client handles on TT it's cumbersome and problematic.

Coding. Something that is easy to do on TT, isn't necessarily easy to code in an online format. Or.......possibly in future we could have optional rules that are a bit of fun, but wouldn't necessarily be easy or worth coding for a client.

An example of this is that I'd love to use an illusionist in BB. Placing players on the pitch that aren't actually real. Very easy on TT, very difficult in a client.

The big difference in BB though is 'out of game' procedures. This is to say what affects a team before and after a match. Where shortish Leagues, Perpetual Leagues, Open and scheduled perpetual and resurrection differ vastly, but are the same once the teams enter the pitch.

This for me is where the focus should be. Having clear objectives for each format and possibly having different recommendations for match making, handicapping and skill pricing. All formats would benefit from not being shackled to each other in the out of game sequences.

You could have a subaru Imprezza that could do all the jobs.

Or you could have a Porsche Spyder, a Land Rover, an Aston Martin Rapide S and a Citreon Grand C4 which all do a specific job better than the Imprezza.

I think WBs last Pie is rather telling. 60% 10 years or more. It suggests to me 2 things or 1 of 2 things.

1. The promotion of the game isn't what it was. Even with Cyanide's online BB game. This is to say we have an aging community. Sure players are picking up the game, but those that continue are generally those that have been playing a long time.

Why? My conclusion is the fluff/background. It's that, that hooked us or another GW game that hooked us and kept us. Where we are now, we don't have the pictures, the stories, the background and we're relying on the game as a mechanical thing in general. This only has appeal as long as you're happy with the mechanics over another games mechanics. Once you get bored of the mechanics, there isn't the background/fluff/GW awesome world to keep you. It's just another game.

2. That those that care about the game and realise this survey is potentially important are those that have been here a long, intend to be here a long time and care what happens in the future. If you've been playing a shorter time, you probably don't know or intend to invest your whole life into it and don't care so much about the survey.

My 2 cents anyway.

I agree with you most of the way, but it's far too soon to say whether or not the players that joined in the last three to five years will remain with us in five more or not. It's also too simplistic to ascribe the reasons some of us got involved to everyone without confirming that assumption - it's entirely plausible that a great many people bought the online game in a sale because it looked like a fun version of gridiron, for example. Hopefully that's where the hobby themed preference style questions will come in handy. Against time since first played? Maybe the format questions?

Note that BB:LE sold an estimated 500k copies. Given this massive, massive influx of (presumably) new players, and that it's an ongoing franchise, the assertion that the game is undepromoted is going to need some supporting evidence. I wonder if the 60% figure is more a symptom of the engagement levels with a NAF survey? Certainly it's becoming quickly apparent that BB2 coaches ascribe some very negative connotations to the name "NAF", thanks no doubt to the reputation for poor sportsmanship and noob farming their "NAF Official" [sic] league is fast gaining.

Where I'll totally agree with you is that League/Tournament/Online distinctions are actually somewhat artificial; Resurrection/Structured Progression/Perpetual Matchmaking are probably more appropriate dividers between the formats, each of which has concerns and appeals that differ from the others.

2 points. Firstly, all my views are for sure pure conjecture.

The second isn't under promotion as such, however there isn't the 'full product' with the computer game. The full product being the universe it's set in and the hobbying/fantasy universe side. So it's competing as 'just another computer game' vs it's PC and console competitors. This means a large part of what makes GW games great is missing with the online environment for new coaches.

More conjecture. I think you're more likely to stay in the hobby, if you paint and/or convert your figures and make extras for the team. More pride, more of a connection and if you put in the time you'll find it more rewarding.

So with that........it'll be interesting to see what would/will happen if FUMBBL does go fully custom with custom icons. I know for myself making icons has totally replaced the wish to paint figures, which I really enjoyed doing for many years.

Regash wrote:

sann0638 wrote:

WhatBall wrote:What I am saying is, worry about growing the community as an inclusive whole, not about getting people to jump from online to TT or vice versa.

Bingo. This has been my overarching mission for a while.

This sounds a bit odd to me, to be honest.

I am no NAF member any more and I haven't been for a long while now.
Why? Because I don't like the very competetive environment of a tournament and I saw no other reason in a membership other than sanctioned tournaments.

Anyway, this just sounded like if your only concern is keeping membership high, no worries about where those members come from.
Does that also mean, we haveto expect sanctioned online tournaments? And if so, will all available teams be allowed to play in such tournaments?
But wouldn't that mean to allow all these teams to be played in TT tournaments as well?
So we will let Cyanide make the rules, no matter what? What about FUMBBL and those inofficial rosters there?

I'm a bit worried that this mash-up of all these different directions people will be coming from, with all these different views on rules and rosters, will be more of a problem than being a step in building a community.

Just seen this. And as shteve0 says, so cause to be alarmed. I'm just trying to bring the various communities together.

Well, but that doesn't make me worry less.
Not even a tiny bit.

Well, that's a shame. You're worried about new races being added? Rule changes? The end of the world?

sann0638 wrote:You're worried about new races being added? Rule changes? The end of the world?

Exactly that, in that specific order.
Since I'm not a NAF member and I don't attend tournaments, I basically should give zero f*cks about it.
But still I'm concerned that meeting new people means playing against new people using completely different rules than I do.

That is also why I deny to buy BB2.