Jose_Gorinyo
Joined: Jul 02, 2012
|
 Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:35 |
 
|
So I was thinking with all the inevitable rage on the BB2 forums about claw pomb killing their pixels and off on a flight of fancy I pondered about ways of changing the casualty tables in some way to slightly benefit agility teams *survival* at high TV in an open league format. I'm posting it here to save from dealing with the mechanics being hugely misunderstood by utter noobs or having the thread spammed by tears (I'm not as noob at the game as my fumbbl profile suggests btw although certainly not as experienced as some of you other guys).
Waffle: As it currently works, the injury rolls indirectly favour higher AV teams because of mighty blow - you're more likely to have your injury roll manipulated because they have more chance of breaking armour without modification. That's absolutely fine and a part of the tactics of attrition for an individual game (summed up: it's the bash playstyle to remove your opposition from the pitch, it's well balanced already). But at higher TVs, the chances of MB (ofc with its partners in crime PO and claw) becomes almost guaranteed as each team tries to remove the other teams stars to achieve pitch dominance and so the casualty rate and in turn death rate climbs for lower AV teams. This is of course still fine on a match by match basis.
Where this isn't necessarily balanced is in open leagues where there's two effects in play, firstly a low AV team has a not insignificant chance of being pummeled back to a state of no return if they get nuffle's disfavour early in a match. Secondly a bash team that avoids other bash teams can fire and hire perpetually for optimal improvement rolls being fairly immune to attrition of the death variety.
My suggestion: Use AV as a (mild) modifier on the casualty table as follows
After rolling the D68:
AV5, roll 3D6, each 6+ subtracts 10 from the casualty result
AV6, roll 2D6, "
AV7, roll a D6, "
AV8, no change.
AV9, roll a D6, each 1 rolled adds 10 to the casualty result
AV10, roll 2D6, "
How it pans out: Instead of a base death chance of 1/6 = 16.7%, each player has a slightly different chance of visiting the grim reaper on the casualty table based on their AV as follows:
AV10-22.2%, AV9-19.4%, AV8-16.7%, AV7-13.9%, AV6*-11.5%, AV5*-9.6%
*It also very marginally affects perm results for AV5 and 6 and MNG for AV5
Fluff reason: The bigger they are, the harder they fall, the apothecary couldn't get that mangled metal off your players body in time to give him the kiss of life or one of those inadvised shoulder spikes ended up burying itself in the player's own head as he hit the ground - conversely maybe those feeble snotlings are making a habit of playing dead and hiding in the BH bin after taking a slight knock rather than wanting to come back on as a recovered KO for the next drive... (I think there's a lot of possibility here if people are really bothered about it)
Things I thought of:
* 6+ was pulled from nowhere in particular, as was AV8 for the middle ground, shifting these values around (or even making it a 2D6 roll of X+ for each modifier) is of course an option if it's currently too strong/not strong enough of an affect.
* As a side effect it's mildly reducing the chances of permanent injuries for AV6 as well as permanent and MNG effects for AV5 but it's pretty marginal (and my head hurts already from working out death probabilities).
* Further to above, -AV injuries in an extreme case can end up with a snotling on AV3 where he becomes very difficult to actually kill (6%) - although he's gonna be getting wiped off the pitch every drive pretty fast so it won't matter to your opponent at all.
* Unfortunately it makes a +AV stat increase even less desirable
* Considering the negative effects of +AV improvements and -AV injuries, it might be best to use the player's base AV rather than how it currently is.
* Yes it increases attrition for most bash teams, that's my intention. Instead of TV trimming manually (and having the choice to do so), this mechanic will help do it for you.
* Sorry treemen 
Things I didn't think of:
?
TLDR : A suggestion for OPEN LEAGUE formats where players with higher AV have a higher chance of death than ones with lower AV whilst the actual game to game mechanics of removing players from a pitch is completely unaffected.
Comment, discuss, tell me I'm an idiot, suggest your own tweaks or ideas...whatever  |
Last edited by Jose_Gorinyo on %b %07, %2015 - %00:%Oct; edited 2 times in total |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:39 |
|
Hehe, poor treemen, have to just give them regen 
I don't mind this suggestion, but it is a bit complicated to implement.
Also, is this original AV or modified AV? |
|
|
Jose_Gorinyo
Joined: Jul 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:45 |
|
I think there's a case for both original or modified, the major drawback in my mind for modified would be that it makes +AV even less favourable an option for a stat increase but I do kind of like the idea of an AV3 invincible snotling that just won't die but spends his whole life in the injury bin.
As for complicated, I think it just seems that way because I've had to explain it as deeply as possible for forum dissection - it's basically just roll an extra bunch of dice  |
|
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:52 |
|
A simpler way to achieve most of your goal is to make a roll on the Casualty Table only on NATURAL 10-12. If you roll a modified 10 or higher (after Stunty, Niggle, MB, and/or DP), it's auto-BH. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:55 |
|
It's not complicated to understand, it seems complicated to implement. Well I'm thinking of it as an alternate rule.
If it were just how it worked it's not an issue, but I think you agree that it's not likely to be adopted anyway
I've thought there should be some additional chance for armored players to take CAS, but I don't think that should apply to naturally high AV (like trees or trolls).
Again, that requires an additional field (armored(#)) and then some thought on what the penalty should be, and at some point you're just kind of redoing the entire injury mechanic so it would be better to scrap it entirely and come up with something completely new rather than band aid on fixes.
Still, thanks for presenting this I do find it interesting, even if I don't know that I'd like to actually see it in practice |
|
|
Jose_Gorinyo
Joined: Jul 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 00:57 |
|
| fidius wrote: | | A simpler way to achieve most of your goal is to make a roll on the Casualty Table only on NATURAL 10-12. If you roll a modified 10 or higher (after Stunty, Niggle, MB, and/or DP), it's auto-BH. |
That does reduce attrition for the lower AV guys, but it doesn't increase the attrition on bash. Maybe that's all that's needed?
It's a very nice and elegant alternative option (and I facepalmed at the simplicity) |
|
|
Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 01:01 |
|
you had me at "waffle" |
_________________
Join the SWL
Get your team bios here!
Putting the romantic in necromantic since 2010 |
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 01:05 |
|
Simpler change for similar effect, albeit not killing the big teams quicker.
You only roll the casualty chart on unmodified 10+ injury rolls, Niggles and MB and PO and Claw all have a maximum of Badly Hurt, just like the Stunty modifier already does.
You could even write it into the injury chart for your local league.
If you want particular teams to have higher death rates, hand out Decay on the ones that need it. Obviously not Treemen. I doubt Nurgle really need it either, depending on what you do for the bank. |
_________________
 |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 04:05 |
|
One thing you have to bear in mind is that things are kept simple because of the TT game and fluidity.
GW games used to be much more complex, however across the board they slimmed things down and sped up play.
There are a lot of improvements we could make by making things a bit more complex, that actually wouldn't affect us at all (due to being handled by the client).
However it's key that we stay on the same page as TT, so anything that slows down TT play is probably a no go.
If there was one area I'd like to make a bit more complex is throwing and catching. And try and move them away or partly away from the AG stat, like they were before. This would make ag3 thrower/catchers less redundent than they are now. However as I said, complicating things is a bit of a no no. |
|
|
Jose_Gorinyo
Joined: Jul 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 04:38 |
|
This is really definitely not intended for small league or even TT play even though it's not actually that complicated and wouldn't really slow things down since it's only one extra dice roll and only when you get a CAS.
Simpler explanation of the process:
After rolling D68
-Count the difference from AV8 and roll that many dice
-Count the number of good/bad dice (1s or 6s)
-Modify the your D68 result by 10x that number up for AV>8 or down for AV<8
TBH thinking about it further and about how few AV10 players there are and the potentially undesired effects on AV6 and below you could simplify it further and just have:
After rolling D68:
-If AV is greater than 8, roll a D6. On a roll of 1, add 10 to the CAS result
-If AV is 8, take the CAS result as normal
-If AV is less than 8, roll a D6. On a roll of 6 subtract 10 from the CAS result
My idea above just has a bit more granularity but maybe the simpler version works better and could also be more easily tweaked (changing to 5+ or 4+ or whatever).
Anyway as I say it's an idea for the kind of matchmaking environments you see in cyanide's games I just was loathe to post it on their forums (at least initially) because a good 90% of new players on there wouldn't really understand the difference it makes and/or would just hijack the thread to moan about meeting claw pomb for the first time and not knowing how to counter it.
It's already been great feedback and eye opening to see fidius/tussocks suggestion for a simpler albeit less comprehensive fix. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 05:41 |
|
Yeah but what I am saying is this:
I kind of agree, I'd like to see this sort of thing implemented as it's a shame we have a lot of non perfect simplified things that would be far more accurate and no slower for us.
However unless this is a house rule for you, it's going to be a bit of a moot point.
1. Cyanide aren't going to code it for you, which means you'd need it to be an added extra on a java client, which then is too complicated for use it would get.
2. It's not going to be added to an open gaming environment because of the need to stay on the same ruleset UNLESS it was imperative to change.
3. The official rules won't be changed and TTers I think would be anti the idea.
4. If you make the cas table a little bit more accurate but complex, then there are many areas that could be improved. Then the game loses the fluidity.
So, it's difficult to see where you could use it or it would get used. Don't get me wrong though, I like this sort of discussion and beneficial ideas of changes to the rules. Just as long as you're aware of where and how this rule could be implemented. |
|
|
huff
Joined: Dec 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 05:59 |
|
It's not the casualty table, it's the percentage rate of casualties that's the problem... But that horse is elmers so whatevs.
As above, I'm a fan of ideas and such but over the top rules is what we got away from with CRP, and they got that part right for the most part imo. |
|
|
Tomay
Joined: Apr 26, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 07:35 |
|
The problem isn't with player longevity, in my opinion that is better than ever and super easy to manage - the problem is that clawpomb can make games boring by clearin the pitch so consistently (Kos, bhs, etc). The players are generally fine especially nowadays without ageing, dp spam and inducements. |
_________________
Join now and "Create a Legend" |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 08:41 |
|
just make claw a doubles only skill
problem solved |
_________________
 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 07, 2015 - 08:42 |
|
| Tomay wrote: | | The problem isn't with player longevity, in my opinion that is better than ever and super easy to manage - the problem is that clawpomb can make games boring by clearin the pitch so consistently (Kos, bhs, etc). The players are generally fine especially nowadays without ageing, dp spam and inducements. |
Yes , this ^
The attrition in crp is fine on the whole, but the po problem makes too many games very dicey affairs. Drives are decided in 2 or 3 turns too often. Pile on needs nerfed and dp and surfing need to be buffed. I guess this is old ground now though.
What interests me is you say the cyanide forums are going nuts over cpomb, is this new bb2 threads about cpomb and could you pm me a link please. Thanks. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
BB2020 - Kick team m...
Search
