Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
 Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:11 |
 
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | | So I prefer to just try and get good at the game as is and put up with it. |
I think by simply being here on this site, the vast majority of us have made the decision to live with the ruleset already. The real question is, how many people are NOT here, because of the ruleset? I'm sure there are plenty of people have picked up bloodbowl, either through Cyanide or by stumbling on this site... and been put off by game imbalance and "unfair" rules. Killstack has the double hit of being both (arguably) unfair and generally not fun to play. It also is a wildly random mechanic.
This is a triple no-no of game design. An imbalance exists, it's really random, and it's no fun. It's gonna cost the game players, and I think there's quite a bit of evidence that it has. |
Last edited by Rat_Salat on %b %23, %2015 - %03:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:18 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | You'll never have one ruleset that works well for all the different ways that people play the game. |
Why? I've never heard anyone complain about a game being too well balanced. |
And where is this balanced ruleset going to come from? are you going to pull it out of your behind?
Whatever 'good' ideas you come up with a lot of people
will demand the opposite.
Go ahead. Find a ruleset that works for 24 races, over all the TV ranges, over all the TV mismatches, over progression leagues, res tournaments, ranked, Box and all.
I'd love to see it.
| Rat_Salat wrote: |
| koadah wrote: | | What other people like or don't like doesn't matter if they don't play in your league. |
This is the "let the modders sort it out" argument from god knows how many game balance threads all over the internet. It's a bad argument there, and it's a bad argument here. |
I'm all for changing the rules. But whatever you do I'll probably want still tweak them to what I want if I can.
The Commissioner's word is law and the Commissioner here says we stick so we stick. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:31 |
|
| koadah wrote: | And where is this balanced ruleset going to come from? are you going to pull it out of your behind?
Whatever 'good' ideas you come up with a lot of people
will demand the opposite.
Go ahead. Find a ruleset that works for 24 races, over all the TV ranges, over all the TV mismatches, over progression leagues, res tournaments, ranked, Box and all.
I'd love to see it. |
Balanced games exist. Starcraft is the classic example. DOTA2 is pretty amazing considering we're talking about a pool of 100 heroes. Counterstrike. Street Fighter 2.
These are also generally thought of as some of the best multiplayer games in history. Mainly, this is because of exceptional game balance combined with fun mechanics. Blood Bowl probably won't ever get there, most obviously because nobody is even trying.
Do I have all the answers? No, and I have no practical experience in game design, so I think it's safe to say I wouldn't do a very good job. That doesn't stop me from observing that there's been a piss-poor job done at balancing this particular game, which to get the thread back on topic... is why myself and many others don't play box. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:47 |
|
Rat, those games are categorically dissimilar from BB in so many ways, the most important of which is the owner doesn't give a hoot and seemingly never has despite the ease of entry to the game and potential entry into the GW universe. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:50 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | [
Balanced games exist. DOTA2 is pretty amazing considering we're talking about a pool of 100 heroes.
These are also generally thought of as some of the best multiplayer games in history. Mainly, this is because of exceptional game balance combined with fun mechanics. Blood Bowl probably won't ever get there, most obviously because nobody is even trying.
|
I agree with you about the great unbalance of BB, and I'd like an evolving game rather than this crappy CRP we are stuck with.
You talk about Dota 2, well, you are comparing a computer game with millions of players and millions of dollars behind, an e-sport, to a boardgame created for fun and giggles (and to sell miniatures, of course) played by a small community, in which the luck factor may greatly affect a match.
Dota 2 has lot of patches and the metagame is ever evolving, moreover in captains mode you can ban some heroes if they are unbalanced.
Nothing of this can happen with BB, a different game, with a different player-base and different mindset.
GW doesn't care about it and the community doesn't want to change things because: "CRP sucks but it's an official ruleset". |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %23, %2015 - %03:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 03:50 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | | koadah wrote: | And where is this balanced ruleset going to come from? are you going to pull it out of your behind?
Whatever 'good' ideas you come up with a lot of people
will demand the opposite.
Go ahead. Find a ruleset that works for 24 races, over all the TV ranges, over all the TV mismatches, over progression leagues, res tournaments, ranked, Box and all.
I'd love to see it. |
Balanced games exist. Starcraft is the classic example. DOTA2 is pretty amazing considering we're talking about a pool of 100 heroes. Counterstrike. Street Fighter 2.
These are also generally thought of as some of the best multiplayer games in history. Mainly, this is because of exceptional game balance combined with fun mechanics. Blood Bowl probably won't ever get there, most obviously because nobody is even trying.
Do I have all the answers? No, and I have no practical experience in game design, so I think it's safe to say I wouldn't do a very good job. That doesn't stop me from observing that there's been a piss-poor job done at balancing this particular game, which to get the thread back on topic... is why myself and many others don't play box. |
I don't play DOTA or StarCraft but in terms of win/loss in the Box how good are chaos?
in terms of 'Balance' chaos 'ain't all that'.
People don't like the game play and don't like their pixels dying.
Dang! Even over 1600 they ain't all that.
That is not a 'balance' problem. If the bash doesn't work early they may destroy your team in the end. But not necessarily early enough to do better than a tie. Which is what started this thread.
I'm all for nerfs as you may have guessed. But as long as the Box is doing decent business and people whine about 'being official' who's gonna change it? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:00 |
|
| koadah wrote: |
People don't like the game play and don't like their pixels dying.
|
People don't like to waste 1 hour locked in hopeless matches/matches decided too much by CAS rolls, and to face over and over again the same kind of team and build.
I personally don't care about my pixels, but I do care about having entertaining matches. |
|
|
LucaAnt
Joined: Apr 24, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:08 |
|
We should create a DOTA 2 FUMBBL team  |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:12 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | I don't play DOTA or StarCraft but in terms of win/loss in the Box how good are chaos? |
I'm not going to get into a debate about killstack here koadah. If after reading thread after thread about it does not convince you, we simply disagree. I will say that high-tv Chaos may be the most prolific example, but probably not the strongest one. Nurgle, for example have inherent anti-elf and anti-bash abilities that arguably make them a much stronger team at the Majors level. The Chaos Dwarf and Chaos Pact rosters are better suited for mid-tv sweetspotting due to their economical players, and necro/skaven have shown that you don't need to spam clawpomb for it to have a massive impact.
One of the most important aspects of game balance is that you always balance games for the best players, not for the average joe. Looking at overall winning percentages can give a very distorted view of what is, and what is not balanced, as mediocre players may not be able to execute dominant strategies properly. Games between experts are the best gauge of balance, because theoretically they eliminate most play errors that can skew data.
Probably the best way to judge how balanced or unbalanced a mechanic is, is to look at the winning percentages of expert players playing AGAINST such a tactic. In this situation, I would put forward the hypothesis that expert players have a statistically significant lower winning percentage against killstack teams, mainly due to the increased random element that those teams introduce. My own anecdotal experience supports this theory, and I would expect many players, expert and otherwise, might agree.
| mrt1212 wrote: | | Rat, those games are categorically dissimilar from BB in so many ways, the most important of which is the owner doesn't give a hoot and seemingly never has despite the ease of entry to the game and potential entry into the GW universe. |
I concede your second point, but I'll challenge the first. Those games are categorically dissimilar from BB, but they are also categorically dissimilar from each other. Starcraft is a RTS, Counterstrike is a FPS, DOTA2 is a MOBA, and Street Fighter 2 is a arcade fighting game. Very different games with very different mechanics, all balanced in different ways, but in the end, all are great multiplayer games, in large part due to their exceptional game balance. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:13 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | koadah wrote: |
People don't like the game play and don't like their pixels dying.
|
People don't like to waste 1 hour locked in hopeless matches/matches decided too much by CAS rolls, and to face over and over again the same kind of team and build.
I personally don't care about my pixels, but I do care about having entertaining matches. |
Which is pretty much what I meant by "don't like the game play".
But really the 'over and over again' is a Box issue. I still say change the rules but Box is always going to have issues that other formats do not have.
You say that you don't care about your pixels. But if your teams keep getting beaten down then again we are talking about less diversity at higher TV. The people who really don't care are having a fine time because they're OK with sticking to lower TV. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Dunenzed
Joined: Oct 28, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:13 |
|
Back to the original question, I beleive you choose the level of difficulty associated with your games in both R and B, but in vastly different ways.
In R you must actively vet the match up, ensuring that you get a game against someone of appropriate skill, team build and race, with an appropriate TV difference to offer you a challenging and interesting game. For those that can't be bothered checking the details of the proposed match up, or fall prey to their own biases and weaknesses when selecting an opponent, R won't deliver challenging and interesting games. Even with these inputs, your game might not be fun and tactical because of dice.
In B you only control what you play. The choices you make in race selection and team build are what determine if you are likely to have a challenging and interesting game or not. If you are a strong coach, playing a tier 1 race with a power build is going to give you easier games than if you choose a tier 2 or 3 team with a suboptimal build. Dice and the scheduler might combine to undermine your choices here.
One method is outwardly focused, while the other requires self reflection. But whichever way you go an absence of personal responsibility is detrimental to both divisions. |
_________________
Join the Human League Premiership! |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:28 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | I agree with you about the great unbalance of BB, and I'd like an evolving game rather than this crappy CRP we are stuck with.
You talk about Dota 2, well, you are comparing a computer game with millions of players and millions of dollars behind, an e-sport, to a boardgame created for fun and giggles (and to sell miniatures, of course) played by a small community, in which the luck factor may greatly affect a match. |
Firstly, I think we can all concede that luck will remain to be a large factor in blood bowl, due to its roots as a tabletop dice rolling miniatures game. Blood Bowl is more poker than chess... but as in poker, an expert will almost always beat a rookie. Play errors at high levels are often game-changing. Great players understand odds and minimize luck. Great players understand that 5+ dodges happen a third of the time, and either attack with or defend against it accordingly.
To your point about Blood Bowl's budget... Counterstrike is a fan mod. There are dozens of examples of indy and freeware games which are well balanced and fun. Gameplay isn't expensive, 3D graphics are. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:31 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: |
I'm not going to get into a debate about killstack here koadah. If after reading thread after thread about it does not convince you, we simply disagree. |
Why would you argue with me about the kill stack? Just read my Sig.
| Rat_Salat wrote: |
Games between experts are the best gauge of balance, |
Ah, well there we could maybe find an argument. I'm not one of the best. Most of us who play are not the best by definition.
Why should I care what is best for the best 5-10% of coaches when most of the games are played by the 'average' 60% of coaches.
I missed coach skill off my list of types/level of play but maybe it should be there.
I'm not sure if you are missing my point. Read my sig. I'm all for changing the rules. But I just don't believe that you can do a god job across all the formats.
You mention StarCraft & DOTA. Well, I bet that they cheat. Are all the calculations visible? I'm sure that it is easier for them to slow things down or speed things up etc behind the scenes to get their balance. Blood bowl is all out in the open. We can all do the maths to figure out the most efficient team. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:34 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Rat_Salat wrote: |
Games between experts are the best gauge of balance, |
Ah, well there we could maybe find an argument. I'm not one of the best. Most of us who play are not the best by definition.
Why should I care what is best for the best 5-10% of coaches when most of the games are played by the 'average' 60% of coaches. |
I did answer this question in the original post, but here it is again for you.
Looking at overall winning percentages can give a very distorted view of what is, and what is not balanced, as mediocre players may not be able to execute dominant strategies properly. Games between experts are the best gauge of balance, because theoretically they eliminate most play errors that can skew data.
Here is a really good series about balancing games, if you are interested. Some exerpts:
The worst thing you can have in a competitive multiplayer game is a dominant move (or weapon, character, unit, whatever). I don’t mean a move that is merely good, I mean a move that is strictly better than any other you could do, so its very existence reduces the strategy of the game. A dominant move also probably has no real counter, so even if the opponent knows you will do it, there’s not a lot they can do.
The Yomi Layer concept is a reminder that moves need to have counters. If you know what the opponent will do, you should generally have some way of dealing with that. As you go through development of a game, ask yourself if various gameplay situations you find yourself in support Yomi Layer 3 thinking. If they don’t there might be a dominant move in there somewhere, which is bad.
While a checkmate situation is maybe ok, you should try to avoid game designs that allow for long lame-duck endings. Both Chess and StarCraft have this undesirable property, and it just means that players often concede the game before the actual end. Those games also show that it’s not the worst thing in the world to have lame-duck endings (because Chess and StarCraft are still good games), but you should still avoid them as a designer if at all possible. |
Last edited by Rat_Salat on %b %23, %2015 - %04:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 04:45 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | | Great players understand odds and minimize luck. Great players understand that 5+ dodges happen a third of the time, and either attack with or defend against it accordingly. |
Sure, I didn't say that ALL games are decided by luck, but some of them can be decided by luck.
Not all dice rolls in BB can be controlled, for example Kick Off events, weather rolls, CAS rolls can be wildly random.
Even if you plan ahead something can go wrong in the worst moment, or you can face a bad coach that keeps on trying very unlikely actions until he's successful.
The fact that BB is a board game doesn't mean the luck factor couldn't be reduced (different dice system, more modifiers, less gamebreaking Kick Off events etc.)
| Rat_Salat wrote: |
To your point about Blood Bowl's budget... Counterstrike is a fan mod. There are dozens of examples of indy and freeware games which are well balanced and fun. Gameplay isn't expensive, 3D graphics are. |
If a game is popular and competitive enough it may become an e-sport, at that point it's in the interest of its owner to balance it very well, Blood Bowl doesn't draw enough attention for this to happen.
Counterstrike started as a free mod of Half-Life, but CS:GO (the current CS people play) is an e-sport and again there is some money behind it, it's a free-to-play game with a store selling weapons' skin.
For sure BB could be better balanced, but the GW doesn't care about it, nor does its playerbase. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %23, %2015 - %04:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
