83 coaches online • Server time: 21:02
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Custom pitch for Hom...goto Post Worst Positional in ...goto Post The URN - SWL vs WIL
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic

Joined: Aug 08, 2022

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 19:01 Reply with quote Back to top

Teambuilding or armybuilding is one of my favorite aspects of any tabletop game, and it's very fun to plan out which skills you want on your players and see your team grow in proficiency.

However, it feels like a double edged sword sometimes because your opponents also grow proportionally to yourself, at 20k/40k per primary/secondary skill. Does this not screw over many teams?
For example, by the time you get Block on most/all your Lizardmen Saurus, or Chaos Chosen, or Orc BigUns... a Dwarf team already has just as much Guard as you have Block and is nearly unstoppable in the bash game. Amazons also quickly build to 4x Guard pieces at <1100k. Elves and other agile teams have multiple players with Blodge - which now require you to tech in some Tackle - but when you get a Tackle or two this gives your opponents another few skills to combat you in other ways, and you waste those skill ups entirely vs teams without any dodge.

I feel like it strips the fun out of giving random linemen skills. Perhaps I can give an Orc Lineman Strip Ball and Pro, but unless he actually gets that opportunity to strip a ball and make a big impact on the game, its as if I wasted the TV that could have been better used on others - even if one of those skills are random and only cost 10k.

I feel like this also leads to over-developed ball carriers and under-developed everyone else since your Sure Hands piece is going to be the one scoring in most situations and building that SPP.

I suppose it's only fair to keep game balance, but it feels like a progression system where every time you gain 10% extra damage, the enemies gain 10-15% extra health, making the damage boost negligible.

Do you think I'm overstating how much of a problem this is?
Which teams do you think are the biggest winners/losers of this dynamic?
Which teams benefit most at which TV?
Is there a way to abuse this system, building and keeping a specific team at a specific TV where they are proportionally more powerful than others?

Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 19:29 Reply with quote Back to top

In NBFL, the average team is 2500 tv. The debate over the tv meta is very large, and many teams do better or worse at different tv's.

However, the inherent power of block means that, for me, it is still the best skill by a large margin. This means that <1100 tv is quite a bit more unbalanced overall than say, 1300 where most teams start to come into their own. There are always (in the current game design) teams that are weaker or stronger, no matter what tv you play at, but the system SEEMS to be aimed for the closest thing to balance (meaning, everyone is competitive) in the 1300-1600 range.

Joined: Sep 17, 2019

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 20:00 Reply with quote Back to top

I think I'm echoing above really. There is old 2016/CRP data that shows how certain races win rates change hugely with TV. In 2020 we may never see that as explicitly as redraft should keep teams closer in value (the big difference now is the ultra low 'Morg' teams like Snotlings and Ogres that we haven't really seen before).
At a very simple level I don't think Blood Bowl was every meant to be balanced entirely. There will always been teams harder to play/win with, and some that are easier. Personally I like that, it adds another level of challenge and self-development as a coach

Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 21:58 Reply with quote Back to top

Blood bowl was never going to be completely balanced but it seems that under this ruleset, they just quit on higher TV.
Even lower TV seems less balanced that before.

Star Only Roster - Testing

Joined: Nov 28, 2005

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 22:06 Reply with quote Back to top

Bring back TR and LRB4 and all will be happy.

Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies.

Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Aug 19, 2022 - 22:15 Reply with quote Back to top

If your Orcs have problems with Dwarfs at low TV, it's not the Orcs or the Dwarfs or the meta. It's either the coaching or Nuffle. I'd take two Block Big 'Uns over two Guard Dwarfs in a scuffle, any day, and Orc Blitzers are hands-down superior in number and quality.

Knowing the meta is an important part of team design. If you suspect you'll hit a sour spot at some point, and winning is all for you, maybe you wanna pick harder in those matches and not put the team into the Blackbox mix until you're back on your feet.

Focus not on things you can't control, like bad dice, but instead on things under your power, like how far you flip the table.

Joined: Jun 03, 2018

Post   Posted: Sep 12, 2022 - 21:24 Reply with quote Back to top

ST4 coaches complaining about Dwarf Guard and Elf Dodge again. What else is new.

Joined: Apr 22, 2020

Post   Posted: Sep 12, 2022 - 21:43 Reply with quote Back to top

I think that a thing to keep in mind is that one tackle is enough to counter a bunch of dodgers.
In other words, we shouldn't just look at "wide" progression, that is the amount of skills. There's also player specialization. Some teams are going at wide progression (like dwarfs or Khemri), but others excel at player specilization (most elves), and some teams can do both (humans).

With that taken into account: yes, amazons can get 4 guards fast and easily. But in the meantime, most teams can just get one tackle (or even a mighty blow/tackle) and they have a counter.

Of course it doesn't make all teams equal, but it's not as simple as "some teams start ahead of the others". Some teams lose the advantage they had early on, other gain new assets. Back when BB2016 was the main edition I made some graphs showing how different teams have different progression curves depending on TV (it shows WR at different TV).


I started doing it for BB2020 but sadly the website where I gathered the data has been down for some time, but even if it's different, the general idea is the same. Not all teams benefit in the same way from higher TV - or even benefit at all from it. And of course it depends on the environment, quality of coaches etc. Vampire stend to have a very high WR at high TV not just because they become better, but also because only dedicated vampire coaches keep playing them for that long. Similarly, stunties were probably much worse at higher tv, but because they are played by absolute madmen, they still get stable winrates.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic