Honestly, I think you and I are saying the same thing mostly.
Since I'm not a native English speaker, sometimes I miss some more subtle content. But after the explanation (thank you for that) - yes, I think we say mostly the same.
Why even bother leveling a team if i know the system will do all the work to make me competetive with zero effort?
Here I have to defend TV+:
That's not exactly the outcome of creating balanced matches. Yes, TV+ tries to match you against equally well performing teams - but it's your duty to prove that it's wrong. As long as you win, you go up in rank. After a few wins you will compete against the best coaches of BB. If you defeat them, you go up in rank and go on against the best. If you lose you lose your rank and your next opponents will be easier to defeat. So on the long term your team will end up between top coaches and average coaches.
If you lose some matches against average teams/coaches, you will be matched against bad coaches. If you play well enogh to defeat bad coaches/teams but lose against average coaches/teams, your team will end ranked between those two groups.
No, it's not just "50-50" every match, flip a coin ten times and look on which rank you will end the season.
If one match really was 50-50, and you think you lost because of bad luck, your next match will be against an easier opponent - so you get a chance to prove that against those opponents you actually have a more than 50% winning chance. MM says "you look like an average coach - I will match you with one". Now it's your turn to prove MM wrong and defeat every opponent until MM says "ok, you're one of the best coaches".
The ranking mechanic trys to create 50-50 matches. Your skill determines on which rank and against which opponents you really have 50-50 chance. If it's against the best coaches of BB, than you will be ranked as one of these coaches.
Play against those guys with "30-10-2" winning distribution and you will realize, that they did not get these results out of luck.
And to be clear, I do disagree with your version of fair matches. Fairness comes from being equally skilled, not from trying to adjust the game so poor players and good players are evenly matched.
I think the best way of balancing BB without taking the fun out of it is by telling the coaches who ask for more balancing:
"Chose whatever team you want, play it the way you want and skill it the way you want - if you think there is any strategy that is overpowerd, use that strategy and try to become a champion by exploiting it. You won't - so shut up about balancing problems. This game is equally unfair to all of us."
If you managed to level your team up to TV 2000 your team is better than a new team at TV 1000. So what? Bayern Munich is better than 1860 Munich. The New England Patriots are better than the Cleveland Browns.
If you play World of Warcraft your Level-1-character is worse than a Level-50-character. If you don't like that - level up.
Optimizing matchmaking an/or making 100% "fair" inducements means that you won't have the "Bayern", "1860", "Patriots" and "Browns" of BloodBowl anymore, no more Ag5 High Elf Thrower "Tom Brady" - just a bunch of miniatures ready for balanced matches.
I love to see my flings lose most of there matches, but once in a while defeating the "Patriots". I enjoy imbalancing especially against my team. If love good underdog stories. And if someone doesn't like that he's free to play any other race and strategy he thinks is positively imbalanced.
For me the most interesting thing in BB is not "chess with dice" but the team management and role playing aspects.
Even for more experienced coaches who learned to deal with bad luck and dying players this does not go away completely.
If I roll a double6 and my player gets strength I want to think "Yay, I love this guy!" and not just "Ok, interesting... but my next opponent will get a fair inducement - so this player won't increase my chance of winning." If my St+ player dies I want to think "Oh no, such a tragic - Nuffle hates me" and not "who cares - TV++ balances every match perfectly, so my next match will be exactly as difficult. No matter if that guy lives or dies."
When I started with tabletop there where no journeymen. After a match where your elves got completely destroyed by a bashing team, all your next game was about, was surviving, waiting for your players to recover and earning some money - and most of these matches were an extremely thrilling experience.
(some were frustrating as hell, so maybe it was a good thing to include journeymen)
That's what BB is about for me. Like in real sports you have to deal with whatever you face. Legends are born when underdogs win - so you need underdog situations. Players get famous because they are outstanding, so you need some random elements for their evolution. And every good story has a beginning, a climax and an END - so players need to get be able to get worse and/or die, to end their story.
100% balancing, no permanent injuries and non-random evolution would destroy all those aspects. Yes, it woul be a fairer competition - but before reducing CCL to a "chess with dice" tournament, please start another competition for those of us who actually enjoy blood bowl for what makes it special: It creates legendary stories.
May your St5 wardancers die on a gfi in turn 16 - and never come back...!
(...as long as you don't face Undead)
Seriously, please get a dictionary and read what the word "lie" means.
Nobody in this thread lied about anything. There are just different opinions. Some of them are justified by statistical samples and some of them are "justified" by nothing else than a guy who writes "I know the truth - stop lying" again and again.
But since we don't know how good a coach @crazyguy_co is, maybe his perception is true (for his situation) and shows a smaller but existing problem:
If he is a bad to average coach who loses many games while slowly gaining SPP, he is more likely to play against other teams who are bad coached while slowly gaining SPP. Since "only bashing" is a strategy that rarely makes you win the game but high armour + SPP for casualties increases your TV, maybe he actually enters a TV+ area with a significant amount of badly-played chaos and nurgle teams. They can't impove from there, because they lose all the time but don't get worse since their TVs still slowly inrease.
And since crazyguys teams get bashed all the time because he doesn't know any strategies to compete against that, every time one of his teams enters the "chaos TV+ zone", his TV+ wouldn't get high enough to let those opponents behind.
Would that be possible?
Is it possible to get data of the team distributions in specific TV+ ranges?
Interesting read guys, but I feel like this is an issue of if you don't like it play elsewhere, there are plenty of private leagues around where you can play and not have face the challenges that playing in a public league present, but you choose to play in champs.
+1 to that:
I dominated the private league I played in, in BB1 with lizards - but after a few wins in BB2-CCL the match maker started to match me against teams of some of the best coaches and I had a number of losses that I was not used to. I also got my team beaten up by orcs, dwarves, chaos and nurgle harder than I had seen it since my tabletop starts with wood elves about 10-15 years ago.
But what the hell did I expect? Getting matched against elves coached by newbs all the time? This is an open championship - THE open championship. Fight whatever you face and try to become a better coach or go join a private league with whatever special rules you like.
I know those all-bashing coaches who could not even play a decent ball-handling strategy if you tied the ball to their players' hands but instead take every possible block they see. But those Top 20 coaches I faced in CCL hurt my team + won the games whereas those 'don't care about winning' coaches most of the time not only mean an easy win but most often also are much easier to handle in the bashing game if you know your basic tactics with your own squishy agility team.
@crazyguy_co Maybe there even is some statistical bias where in specific times for specific TVs you face significantly more bashing teams than everyone else. You have the data available. Look for that, show it to us. Up until then, all I hear is "booooh, fake news!" complaints and conspiracy theories without any evidence.
In Champion Ladder VII go to Race Wins, filter for Race = Chaos and you'll see they have played 2784 matches. Do the same for Nurgle and it's 2915. So a total of 5699 matches.
What you also see is that Chaos won only 46% of their matches - Nurgle 47% (with draws counted as "half wins"); for me this means they a bad choice to play with and give me an advantage to play against.
Yes, you can say "Winning is not worth it, if CPOMBs kill your team" but I would say "Surviving is not worth it, if I don't win my games".
So, the real problem is all those ag4 elves who don't take a fair fight but take the ball and score. Seriously it's totally unfair and you play against those at least in ... 90% of every game. Every other number is a lie!!11!!1!
You should have seen this coming. Additional to typical online game bashing and whining even as a tabletop game BB makes many of the players feel like every other team is overpowered, every other player has better luck and some strategies are so completely dominant that the whole game is completely unbalanced...
...and no matter of how many data proves the opposite you can't argue with that since BB is such a great game when it comes to creating a feeling that there is some kind of huge evil power who wants to see you suffer.
I believe you that you are facing CPOMB chaos all the time. I don't. I get kicked my ass by dwarves and orcs, too - and all these elves are running circles around me. Nuffle hates us all. He just has different kinds of hell for any of us.
If you can't find some humor and fun in this, BB isn't the right game for you.
"I'll survive CPOMB-CCL - or die trying." That's the spirit of a true BB coach ;).