FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

Joined: Feb 16, 2004

Posted: Nov 28, 2018 - 19:32

Khaltan, most blocks TAKEN are 2d...but most available blocks are not, unless you have bash superiority, which elves tend to lack.

less than 2d, a lot of coaches get cold feet and won't even try...in which case, the chance of breaking the assassin's armor is 0%. Your statistics fail to take psychology into its equation, and thus reality and the stats are different.

here's my past players
https://fumbbl.com/p/team?op=pastplayers&team_id=652495

haven't done the hard numbers, but just eye balling it...my assassins aren't retiring faster than my 8av linos. Kind of looks the opposite.

bloodbowl is only 50% statistics and tactics...the other 50% is psychology. When you only focus on half the game, it's easy to get inaccurate predictions.

As for the specific case of blitzing into a cage for the ballcarrier...that's an outlier situation compared to most blocks. Furthermore, when comparing two things, you have to keep all other parameters the same, changing only one thing. All the risk involved with dodging/leaping into a cage...a traditional blocker would have to do the same thing, thus factors out and no longer in the equation for comparison.

Additionally, keep in mind an assassin can elect to block instead of stab, so in the rare situations where just downing a foe is paramount (such as sacking a ball carrier) an assassin can switch mode of attack and gains all the advantages of blocking in that rare situation.

Fact still remains, my assassins are the least marked players during the game for a reason
(and thus endure longer than statistics predict)...

stab >>> block.

_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz

Khaltan

Joined: Jun 22, 2011

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 17:00

Arktoris wrote:

Khaltan, most blocks TAKEN are 2d...but most available blocks are not, unless you have bash superiority, which elves tend to lack.

Not really true I think You can usually engeneers 2d blocks, by moving "lose players around, pushing opposing player out of the way with other blocks etc. This of cause becomes more dificult against teams with lots of guards, but those often have good armour and Assassains are very poor against high armour teams.

Arktoris wrote:

less than 2d, a lot of coaches get cold feet and won't even try...in which case, the chance of breaking the assassin's armor is 0%. Your statistics fail to take psychology into its equation, and thus reality and the stats are different.
here's my past players
https://fumbbl.com/p/team?op=pastplayers&team_id=652495

haven't done the hard numbers, but just eye balling it...my assassins aren't retiring faster than my 8av linos. Kind of looks the opposite.

bloodbowl is only 50% statistics and tactics...the other 50% is psychology. When you only focus on half the game, it's easy to get inaccurate predictions.

That's not a meaningfull statistic. You're linemen are being placed on the LOS on defence as fooder, Assassins aren't. Also if you're placing one player to shield another, you'd place the lineman to protect the assassin, not the other way around. You might also be more likely to use Apothecarry on them than the less expensive linemen. If you put them less at risc they'll live longer, but they're 50 % more likely to have their armour broken when tested, and stab doesn't push so an attmpted stap leave the assassin more exposed to counterattack than an attempted block.

AS for the psychology if it isn't backed up by the logic of the game, that's basically gampling on the other player to make mistakes which could happen, but isn't a good strategy IMO

Arktoris wrote:

As for the specific case of blitzing into a cage for the ballcarrier...that's an outlier situation compared to most blocks. Furthermore, when comparing two things, you have to keep all other parameters the same, changing only one thing. All the risk involved with dodging/leaping into a cage...a traditional blocker would have to do the same thing, thus factors out and no longer in the equation for comparison.

WE should only hold other things equal if they are. in this case they're not. Blitzers and WE simply have more movement so they need GFIs less. the higher Ag is less of a certainty, but you can lok at the tam you've linked. You've got one dead assassin with +ag, but you've got 21 current or retired other elves with +ag. Therefore the leaping and dodging risk are not likely to be equivelant.

Arktoris wrote:

Additionally, keep in mind an assassin can elect to block instead of stab, so in the rare situations where just downing a foe is paramount (such as sacking a ball carrier) an assassin can switch mode of attack and gains all the advantages of blocking in that rare situation.

I don't agree that downing being paramouns is rare, it's extremely common and when you need cas a MB blitzer is frequently better. Sure you can block instead, but the option is very expensive. It cost you 1 point of av and 20 K in price increase compared with a lineman (though you get shadowing on top, which is better on a blitzer with higher movement, but still has some value).

Arktoris wrote:

Fact still remains, my assassins are the least marked players during the game for a reason
(and thus endure longer than statistics predict)...

stab >>> block.

Their survival is as likely to be the result of your actions as your opponents fear, and even if I was to agree that stab is better than block (which I don't though it does have some value against low armour opponents) you pay an extremenly steep price for it on an assassin. perhaps 40 Ks worth. If I was gaurentied only over to play woodies and amazons, but I maintain that their moderate utility agains such teams is masively outweighed by their almost total uselesness against a chaos, dwarf, orc or similar team.

Kzarik

Joined: Sep 25, 2016

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 17:12

Only thing I know for sure is that they are being spelled incorrectly Shocked

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 19:38

Quote:

bloodbowl is only 50% statistics and tactics...the other 50% is psychology. When you only focus on half the game, it's easy to get inaccurate predictions.

That's a...different way of looking at it. I don't even understand what you mean by psychology if you're assigning a 50% weight to it. What is that inclusive of?

FWIW I try not to put much weight into the emotional/mental state of the coach since I can't actually observe their body language and demeanor. The only thing I can observe is their tactics and the moves they make and all I have is my ability to respond in kind.

I am curious though what you mean by psychology though.

gamelsetlmatch

Joined: Mar 05, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 19:46

If your assasin (player) can leap in a cage, and you're not just doing it every possible chance ..that's psychological warfare ..for example

_________________
Stargate!

“In our play we reveal what kind of people we are.”

Arktoris

Joined: Feb 16, 2004

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 19:50

If you think what you wrote is accurate Khaltan, then I can offer you the same opportunity to put that hypothesis to the test.

Korando's elite Eleven vs Loths forsaken. Two dark elf teams, roughly same TV, one with assassins, one without.

how about it? This Saturday (since our TZ are different)? PM a time if yes.

mrt1212, it's the "intangibles" of bloodbowl. Sort of like a complex number. there's a real portion and an imaginary portion (i= sqrt of -1). Think of psychology as the i portion of the complex number.

It's the backstory / painting of figurines, to coach's reaction to events, his priorities and decision making process. The coach is 50% of the team.

_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 19:53

That didn't clear it up for me at all. Can you list some examples?

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 19:59

gamelsetlmatch wrote:

If your assasin (player) can leap in a cage, and you're not just doing it every possible chance ..that's psychological warfare ..for example

I don't see how that's decipherable from tactical push and pull. Like, setting up the potential to do cage leaps can be accounted for by the opposing coach tactically. I'm still not quite grasping how the threat of doing something falls out of tactical engagement I guess?

GAZZATROT

Joined: Apr 26, 2009

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 20:26

I always struggle with these threads when it gets to the algebra stage.

_________________
Forever fearless, sometimes stupid.

gamelsetlmatch

Joined: Mar 05, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 21:00

mrt1212 wrote:

gamelsetlmatch wrote:

If your assasin (player) can leap in a cage, and you're not just doing it every possible chance ..that's psychological warfare ..for example

I don't see how that's decipherable from tactical push and pull. Like, setting up the potential to do cage leaps can be accounted for by the opposing coach tactically. I'm still not quite grasping how the threat of doing something falls out of tactical engagement I guess?

Combo cage break with elf net and then start surfing and/or fouling snd doing them randomly ..its a bit hard for the opposing coach to account for all of that
So, you cause them to overthink things, which causes them to do more rolls than normal which gives you an immeasurable %
..make more sense?

_________________
Stargate!

“In our play we reveal what kind of people we are.”

thoralf

Joined: Mar 06, 2008

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 21:11

fidius wrote:

Dark Elves currently have 6 blitzer-types, and frankly way too many positionals (I believe Mouse would call them "over-described"). With all positionals they hit 8x MV7 players. Bringing Assassins up to MV7 would mean 10x MV7. Now you're encroaching on Wood Elf/Skaven-type speed. I'd rather think of Darks as slower and bashier (dirtier too but that's hard to implement with only 2 fouling skills in the game). Anyway -- plenty of reasons to reduce Blitzers to 2 imo.

I disagree. Too much positionals don't work. Many DE coaches don't hire runners. My 2500 TV NBFL team has problem fitting a second witch, and I don't have any assassin.

A 7MA assassin would mainly add variety, IMO. While the Rule of Five is too frugal for my taste, I doubt a Rule of Eight works long term. Three of the four DE positionals have 7AV.

_________________
There is always Sneaky Git.

Last edited by thoralf on Nov 29, 2018; edited 3 times in total

mrt1212

Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 22:08

gamelsetlmatch wrote:

mrt1212 wrote:

gamelsetlmatch wrote:

If your assasin (player) can leap in a cage, and you're not just doing it every possible chance ..that's psychological warfare ..for example

I don't see how that's decipherable from tactical push and pull. Like, setting up the potential to do cage leaps can be accounted for by the opposing coach tactically. I'm still not quite grasping how the threat of doing something falls out of tactical engagement I guess?

Combo cage break with elf net and then start surfing and/or fouling snd doing them randomly ..its a bit hard for the opposing coach to account for all of that
So, you cause them to overthink things, which causes them to do more rolls than normal which gives you an immeasurable %
..make more sense?

I'm slightly less confused but I don't know if I just have a mental block towards thinking overwhelming the opposition simultaneously is distinctly psychology rather than tactical. Like, i look at overwhelming the opposition with surfs, marks, fouls etc etc as a tactical move that you do for a specific purpose whether to limit advancement, force rolls when they're down to 0 Team Rerolls, etc etc. I don't know how planting seeds of doubt actually works because I just don't view the game that way.

There are usually 3-4 possible overarching strategic moves, myriad tactics to accomplish those possibilities and then the execution of those tactics and adapting to the situation after each action taken. For me, the question of 'what is the opposing coach trying to do?' or 'is this a feint?' or 'How do I get a bead on what this guy is willing to do?' just doesn't weigh on me. There are possibilities to take and I usually try my best to account for most of them and let the dice validate or invalidate the choice.

I mean, I just assume everyone I play is at least as good if not better than me until proven otherwise and that making risky moves is perfectly acceptable in the game. I never get rankled by things that are unlikely to work doing so nor things that should work that do not.

I feel like this is how the conversation is going

"I'm playing all these mind games with other coaches"
"You are? I thought you were just a little more risk hungry than other coaches, I didn't realize you thought you were trying to get an edge through being unpredictable and making coaches second guess themselves."

Ultimately, it's just hard for me to see how psychology is half the game or how you get that much mileage out of trying to make the opponent flinch through mind games the better your opponent is.

Example: If I base the opposing coach's BC with blodge, SS, DT I do so based on the viability of the coach escaping it in dice terms - probability to block with tackle, probability of the dice hitting, etc etc. The turning the screws is almost purely numerical rather than psychological.

"I do this because the dice needed to overcome it are in the 55% ballpark and will likely consume the blitz" rather than I do this because it might cause a mistake somewhere." Like, I can't assume the opposing coach will ever make a mistake or fail critical rolls and I don't plan around blunders happening for the opponent. I can only influence the dice they may roll and the areas they can move to.

Like, I can see arguments for psychology being more important in games where there is always imperfect information (like hold em poker and the psychology of bluffing and the token information conveyed by betting) or where other elements of skill are so closely aligned and the game so thoroughly explored that risk/reward intuition and tactical soundness is relatively muted between opponents. Even with chess though I think a lot more of that is in the aggregate meta gaming rather than trying to gain an psychological edge by swapping X piece for Y piece like the recent championship where Magnus offered a draw in a strong position in the last match to force the tiebreaker where he is more dominant than his peers - Blitz Chess.

delusional

Joined: Jan 18, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 23:14

thoralf wrote:

fidius wrote:

Dark Elves currently have 6 blitzer-types, and frankly way too many positionals (I believe Mouse would call them "over-described"). With all positionals they hit 8x MV7 players. Bringing Assassins up to MV7 would mean 10x MV7. Now you're encroaching on Wood Elf/Skaven-type speed. I'd rather think of Darks as slower and bashier (dirtier too but that's hard to implement with only 2 fouling skills in the game). Anyway -- plenty of reasons to reduce Blitzers to 2 imo.

I disagree. Too much positionals don't work. Many DE coaches don't hire runners. My 2500 TV NBFL team has problem fitting a second witch, and I don't have any assassin.

A 7MA assassin would mainly add variety, IMO. While the Rule of Five is too frugal for my taste, I doubt a Rule of Eight works long term. Three of the four DE positionals have 7AV.

I think over described, marks Dark elves perfectly.

Adding runners and Assassins was too much. I mean it's not a great problem for the DE team, but it does lead to these players getting picked behind blitzers if ever.

... In fact I thought the purpose of buying a runner was to get 6spp for Leader.

Last edited by delusional on Nov 30, 2018; edited 1 time in total

delusional

Joined: Jan 18, 2013

Posted: Nov 29, 2018 - 23:16

gamelsetlmatch wrote:

If your assasin (player) can leap in a cage, and you're not just doing it every possible chance ..that's psychological warfare ..for example

I don't see how that's decipherable from tactical push and pull. Like, setting up the potential to do cage leaps can be accounted for by the opposing coach tactically. I'm still not quite grasping how the threat of doing something falls out of tactical engagement I guess?[/quote]
Combo cage break with elf net and then start surfing and/or fouling snd doing them randomly ..its a bit hard for the opposing coach to account for all of that
So, you cause them to overthink things, which causes them to do more rolls than normal which gives you an immeasurable %
..make more sense?[/quote]

I think you hit on the one circumstance where the Assassin could be more useful.
So you stab inside a cage, You have an Armor role and that's it. Ball carrier is usually av7 (woohoo) or av8.

If you block, you probably have a 2d block dice against you(although your guard blitzers can sneak in, I am not imaging your going to get it down to 1d easily).
With a usual sacker who has 2 of wressle/strip ball/tackle/jugs and a little luck the ball will go free.

So block seems better.

but if their ball carrier has the usual blodge and maybe dumpoff/FA/fend or similar. I could see how stab would be useful.

Khaltan

Joined: Jun 22, 2011

Posted: Dec 01, 2018 - 21:18

So I took Arktoris up on his offer of a match, this has just ended and I'm happy to say that the match(here) conclusively proved that rolling casualties on fully 50% of succesful armour breaks without having mighty blow is a superior strategy to using assassins. In other words Nuffle doesn't think you should be fielding assassins either.

Last edited by Khaltan on Dec 01, 2018; edited 2 times in total