PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
 Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 19:04 |
 
|
I think your example of comparing the Beast to the Human Blitzer is a little off. It is not exactly apples to apples.
It should look more like this.
Beastman: B,T,MB,G = 130 TV...4 skills
Human Blitzer: (B),T,MB,G, +ST = 200 TV ... 3 Skills + Stat
So IMO the example is more apples to apples because both of them serve the same purpose with those skill ups, bash. The human is 70TV higher and requires a +ST skill up to be as effective or achieve parity with the beastman on the blitz move...ST4 on a blitz.
Now you could say the blitzer is better because he does have a natural ST4 which has a lot more value than horns, I do not disagree on that.
BUT in the comparison above that +ST is actually worth 70TV compared to the beastman when it comes to discussing the blitz. Or you could flip it and say the beastman should be -70TV under the human because he does not have +ST and losing all the other benefits +ST gives him that horns does not. |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 19:13 |
|
| oryx wrote: |
Why indeed didn't they give nurgle pestigor linos? =D because they're positional grade! |
Not quite True, Nurgle teams used to have beastmen linos too. That only changed in this edition, and they were the worst team in lrb4 imo. I suspect the main reason was because by adding regen to the player and the increased player cost it made them too expensive to be a lineman.
In LRB4 when they didnt have regen and no Apo was allowed they were soooooo bad. So adding Regen to the beastmen made perfect sense but then they needed to make weaker linemen to make the team function and so that a starting roster was affordable.
Also rookie Chaos and rookie Nurgle are two of the worst teams in the game at rookie level. Their win percentage only gets respectable once they reach high TV.
This is purely a kill stack problem as well as the others I mentioned on my OP. |
_________________
 |
|
Sockboy
Joined: Nov 25, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 20:22 |
|
I'm curious as to why no one has mentioned the system that was used here on FUMBBL during the Skijunkie client? As I recall points (TR or the FUMBBL version of it) were awarded based on the "power" of the combination of skills that player had. E.g. it cost more to get Piling On for a player who already had Mighty Blow (say 30 TV) than on a player with only Block (only 20TV). The exact numbers I can't remember but that was the principle as I remember it. You would still see the Kill stack, but probably not spammed quite as often, since it'd be more expensive and thus not worth taking on 4 or 5 (or 11) players.
This system "penalised" the power builds and encouraged more variety of choice when skilling up. I always thought this was an excellent system, since skills like Kick or Pass Block are much more attractive when they costs less than Block or Guard. It made skill selection a bit less automatic than I feel LRB5 is. We all recognise that there are distinct tiers to the various skills (though we might not all agree on which tier each skill lies) so it seems odd that they are all valued exactly the same. The current system means some skills are exceedingly rare, which feels like a waste to me. Why have all these rules when they're basically never used?
Do I just have rose tinted glasses on? I never got to very high TV/TR so maybe there was a problem with the old system that I'm not aware of? I'd be interested in hearing the views of those who have experience with both systems, especially anyone who remembers how the old system was implemented/developed. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 20:29 |
|
Yes TS (which is what you are refering to) was better than any system before. However this was a Fumbbl construct only. TR was the official LRB4 meansurement of team strength and how handicaps were worked out. TS was just used by Fumbbl for tournements, for black box match making and for getting fair games in ranked.
It was also the most complex of all the systems to date so would never in a million years get a look in if new rules were created as the BBRC moved firmly in a simlifying the game as much as possible direction.
here is the formula - http://fumbbl.com/help:Strength
however TS could also be exploited... if a dwarf got -ag for example their Ts would decrease which would not matter at all to your team and at the same time allow you to play weaker teams. IIRC this was the only flaw with it though and one that could have been solved fairly easily. |
_________________
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 20:51 |
|
If memory serves me right TS went away not because it was good/bad/indifferent. It went away when Christer decided that new client/FFB and new rule book, CRP. Lets roll with it straight out of the rule book and not worry about re implementing a TS system.
Now once again relying on memory here. The argument was that TV is superior to TR and that the addition of J-men and so forth would render TS meaningless and not needed. Those guys won the argument and here we are today.
IMO TS for me was a meaningless construct. Now that being said for the Box it was a huge issue...really huge. So instead of using TS and reintroducing it Christer elected to use straight up TV because of the above mentioned arguments pro/con. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 20:59 |
|
TS would be far far less successful if used in CRP because of how much people minimise their TV and how much of an advantage can be gained from certain inducements if gamed properly.
A Ts system would never work unless inducements were based on TS rather than Tv. But Christer has always wanted to stay away from house rules. So this would be a no go. In LRB4 TS did not effect the games in anyway, just which games you played, so it was still using LRB4 rules and not house ruled. The TS forumla was just for match making. |
_________________
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 21:09 |
|
TV matching is a house rule. |
|
|
Sockboy
Joined: Nov 25, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 21:09 |
|
Thanks for the link Garion, I had a quick poke around to see if I could find it, but looking in the LRB4 archives didn't occur to me for some reason. Quoting from that link (emphasis mine)
"LRB 4 Team Rating (TR) is a good measure of a team's long-term capabilities, and is thus important for determining winnings, handicaps, etc. However, it is not always a good indicator of how strong a team will be in its next game, since it does not take into account injuries (both permanent and MNG), very poor or very good skill combinations (and stat bonuses), concentration of SPPs on one player, money in the treasury, etc."
Ok, while some of that is no longer true with the TV system, the bolded part still seems relevant. Is it worth opening a discussion on maybe implementing something like this again for LRB5? or is that just too big a can of worms? I assume most of the discussion about the two systems was carried out before "large scale" implementation of LRB5. We've collectively got a lot of experience with the current system, maybe we can better assess the pros/cons now?
At worst something like this could always sit alongside TV in the same way it used to alongside TR. and those, who like Painstate think it's meaningless can continue to ignore it. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 21:11 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | The TS forumla was just for match making. |
Take that a step further..it was only used for the Box scheduler. Ranked showed TS but it had 0 impact on arranging a match, as in it did not dictate if a match would happen or not.
The argument that TV and TS would not work together. Well I would say that depends on the masses. The issue would then be a debate on switching the box scheduler back to a TS match up system and TV is rendered void on the match up.
TV still has its place BUT now is not considered when the scheduler matches by a TS formula.
The debate would rage far and wide on how bad do you hose CPOMB and so forth on the TS scale. A lot of other "new" issues that CRP introduced would be heavily discussed, such as min/max and so forth.
For those who love a forum meltdown and flame war this would be epic. Re- Introduce TS as the main driver for Box scheduler match ups.
Heck re introduce it and only Box Div teams have the new TS system rating system on their team. Since that is the only place it matters in the big picture. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 21:20 |
|
You could always do something crazy like match by performance... |
|
|
spubbbba
Joined: Jul 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 21:36 |
|
| dode74 wrote: | | You could always do something crazy like match by performance... |
It was tried in [B] under lrb4 and was very unpopular since coaches felt they were being punished for winning.
I've always liked the idea of using 5k costs for both players and skills to rebalance things a little.
Plus giving different costs for skills, so things like block, dodge, guard, MB, PO and Claw would be 30K whilst diving catch, NoS or Vll would be 10K. I'd even bring in some skill packs so for 20K you could get catch and passblock as 1 choice (assuming you had agility access). |
_________________
British or British based and looking to join a League?
Then check out theWhite Isle Fringe |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 22:39 |
|
| Quote: | | It was tried in [B] under lrb4 and was very unpopular since coaches felt they were being punished for winning. |
It happens in just about every real competitive event the world over. Sure, you're being punished if you think that you should go into a game with a better than even chance of winning. If you want a fair and competitive match, though, and one which is fun for both sides... |
|
|
spubbbba
Joined: Jul 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 22:53 |
|
| dode74 wrote: | | It happens in just about every real competitive event the world over. Sure, you're being punished if you think that you should go into a game with a better than even chance of winning. If you want a fair and competitive match, though, and one which is fun for both sides... |
Not really, in fact a lot of competitions have seeding so the best teams/players avoid each other in early knock out rounds. It's pretty rare the the underdog gets a bonus to help them win like the inducement system in Bloodbowl.
The issue wasn't that good coaches would get matched vs each other but that teams with good records would get matched against much stronger opposition. This was worse in lrb4 since the handicaps were random and often not an adequate substitute, also the overdog might be bigger due to cash reserve and could hire stars or wizards themselves. |
_________________
British or British based and looking to join a League?
Then check out theWhite Isle Fringe |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 23:03 |
|
Now that this has morphed into a discussion of the distinction between winning ability and TV... I'd submit that an age factor (or possibly something geared around the two highest-rank players on the team) would be really helpful. Inducements are okay at equalizing TV gaps between teams of comparable experience (they don't fill the gap, but they help): teams of comparable TV but very different experience level, it's like teams at different tiers: the only equalizers are coaching and Nuffle. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 23:17 |
|
| dode74 wrote: | | Quote: | | It was tried in [B] under lrb4 and was very unpopular since coaches felt they were being punished for winning. |
It happens in just about every real competitive event the world over. Sure, you're being punished if you think that you should go into a game with a better than even chance of winning. If you want a fair and competitive match, though, and one which is fun for both sides... |
Yeah. If we get drawn against Real Madrid we get to hire Messi, Van Persie & a few others for free to make up the numbers.
The opposing teams get to keep adding more and more galcticos until Real Madrid have an average record. Pretty much on par with Crystal Palace who would get Messi every week.
You wouldn't be propsing TV++ would you?  |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
