| Poll |
| Is CLAWPOMB really a problem? |
| Yes, absolutley |
|
55% |
[ 464 ] |
| No, Chaos Dwarfs Disagree |
|
20% |
[ 174 ] |
| Still Haven't Decided |
|
8% |
[ 75 ] |
| Pie! |
|
15% |
[ 127 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 840 |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
 Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 00:54 |
 
|
It objectively does define the term balance as far as BB is concerned. There is no other definition. Other games are balanced in different ways.
"Common sense" isn't common and is rarely sensible. If you're making statements about the numbers (and you were) then you really ought to back it up with some evidence. For clarity, I think they probably do better in matches where they get tiered lower than other teams, but without some data to back that up we can't say if it is significant or not.
There is a statistically significant correlation between win% in NAF games and games played by a race when looking at the non T3 races (since they are intentional outliers), but there is no such significant correlation in B or OCC (there is a weak positive correlation), and a weak negative correlation in the FOL data.
Thing is, so what? A wider CI bracket is not something you can simply ignore if you want to make inferences about the data: it is a fact you have to deal with, and if that fact states that you cannot conclude that the win% is outside the bracket to the desired confidence interval then that's what the data says.
For reference, the 2015 data from the NAF puts Chaos' mean at 46.23 with 995 games played, so the 95CI range is 43.13 - 49.33. Combining this with the 2013-14 data gives a mean of 44.88 with 2793 games played, making the 95CI range 43.03 - 46.72.
Either way, I don't think either of us think Chaos is a problem in NAF tournaments! |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 01:02 |
|
This development of outsourcing matters like team development into the CPOMB thread proofs what I always suspected:
Every single problem in the whole of CRP is related CPOMB.
Also dode: You realize that in all non-progressive NAF tournaments the acquisition of CPOMB is impossible, right? It's in a way already self managed to avoid the issue that arises from the combo. |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 01:09 |
|
Wreckage - of course. That's one reason I was wondering why plasmoid brought it up tbh - my "so what?" question - it comes across as him simply wanting to ignore the confidence interval. |
|
|
DarthPhysicist
Joined: Jun 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 02:21 |
|
I actually think what offends most people about CPOMB and Chaos is the cookie cutter nature of it. It's an offense to creativity more than anything. If it were really OP it would show in the stats and it doesn't. It's not like everyone and their dog doesn't play Chaos! PO is the more debilitating skill of the trinity and its widely available to teams. No one ever seems to address the fact that AV7 turns claw into bloat... |
_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
 |
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 02:59 |
|
@DarthPhysicist: I agree and I'm sure I've said it before in this thread. It's not about being overpowered or attrition statistics. It's about it being boring and reducing the tactical intrigue of the game.
Unfortunately, boredom isn't captured in Dode's flawless statistics, so it can't exist. Sorry! 
| dode74 wrote: | | It objectively does define the term balance as far as BB is concerned. There is no other definition. |
Unless we make another one. It's not the only definition that could possibly exist. I mean, if we're having a hypothetical discussion about possible ways to develop the BB ruleset, why should we handcuff ourselves to whatever set of design criteria the previous designers used? If we can hypothetically criticize, tear up and re-write the rules, then surely we can do the same with the balance criteria. Why should anything be off limits?
If we can imagine changing the rules, we can imagine changing the 'rules for making the rules'. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 03:08 |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 03:13 |
|
Another point I'd like to make Dode: your apparent position that 'the balance criteria laid out by the BBRC being met equals nothing is objectively wrong with the game' is easily defeated by a counterexample.
Let's say I rewrite the rules so that every game of Blood Bowl is decided by a simple coin toss to see who wins. That would be perfectly balanced according to the BBRC's criteria, so clearly there can't be anything 'objectively' wrong with it .. sounds like a great game! |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
DarthPhysicist
Joined: Jun 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 03:18 |
|
Personally I like the game as is and take a "if it aint broke don't fix it" approach. BB takes a long time to really play well and tinkering with the rules puts off players, especially if it ruins your favorite team. I'll never forgive GW for what they've done to Imperial Guard over the years. $1000s and all I've got is a crap army that takes forever to paint... |
_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 03:40 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | Another point I'd like to make Dode: your apparent position that 'the balance criteria laid out by the BBRC being met equals nothing is objectively wrong with the game' is easily defeated by a counterexample.
Let's say I rewrite the rules so that every game of Blood Bowl is decided by a simple coin toss to see who wins. That would be perfectly balanced according to the BBRC's criteria, so clearly there can't be anything 'objectively' wrong with it .. sounds like a great game! |
No, sounds like TV++!
 |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 03:47 |
|
| licker wrote: | No, sounds like TV++!
|
 I think we've inadvertently uncovered his masterplan! |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 05:53 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | Let's say I rewrite the rules so that every game of Blood Bowl is decided by a simple coin toss to see who wins. That would be perfectly balanced according to the BBRC's criteria, so clearly there can't be anything 'objectively' wrong with it .. sounds like a great game! |
Except that there's no skill anymore in the game.
A simple criteria for balance would be that more than one strategy can win the game. If a strategy wins over and over again it becomes optimal and the game becomes boring.
That's not a lot to ask: even rock-paper-scisors has three.
The only "objective" definitions I know are mere conventions and have little to do with fairness and fun. |
|
|
Matthueycamo
Joined: May 16, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 07:45 |
|
| licker wrote: | | JellyBelly wrote: | Another point I'd like to make Dode: your apparent position that 'the balance criteria laid out by the BBRC being met equals nothing is objectively wrong with the game' is easily defeated by a counterexample.
Let's say I rewrite the rules so that every game of Blood Bowl is decided by a simple coin toss to see who wins. That would be perfectly balanced according to the BBRC's criteria, so clearly there can't be anything 'objectively' wrong with it .. sounds like a great game! |
No, sounds like TV++!
|
 |
_________________
DLE College 7s |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 08:15 |
|
JellyBelly - "boredom" can be measured by people stopping playing the game. If people are still playing a game they are bored with we can only conclude they want to be bored.
You, me, or anyone else outside GW (and then the BBRC) don't get to make another definition of balance because it's not our remit to do so. That's down to the game designer and the game designer alone.
Your "counterexample" is a red herring. The BBRC didn't turn the game into a coin toss and, if they did, the game wouldn't be said to be unbalanced but might, if people stopped playing, be considered a failure because people don't like it. Not liking it is fine, but that doesn't make it broken: it's merely a matter of preference.
Can we pick a thread please? I don't mind which one, but having the same discussion in two threads is timeconsuming. I suggest this one is probably the better one to go for though. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 08:40 |
|
| DarthPhysicist wrote: | | If it were really OP it would show in the stats and it doesn't. I |
What are you talking about? It gets constantly so hard in your face whereever you look at stats it's obnoxious. The latest example is probably the recent major winners thread and you just can't help to think: Come on it can't be that bad, but then it is. Don't buy Dodes weird logic just because he is making random unfounded claims based on dubious data only he has even seen. |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 03, 2016 - 08:59 |
|
The B data is there for everyone on the FUMBBL API (summarised on koadah's stats pages), the NAF data is available on the NAF website, I've published the FOL data previously and the OCC data was available on BBManager before that site went down (I have summaries of that data only now). If you've not bothered to look at the data that's your problem, but you don't get to dismiss it as "only he has ever seen" when other people including Plasmoid, koadah and voodoomike have all seen it, and there are certainly others who have too. The claims are not random or unfounded, nor is the data dubious, and your unfounded (and falsifiable) assertion that it is shows how desperate you are becoming to make your "point".
"Majors winners" is a subset of the overall stats and is skewed by coach skill, which can only really be controlled for by having large sample sizes. If the race was unbalanced (as defined by the BBRC) it would show up in the data. It doesn't, so it's not. |
|
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
