koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 16:14 |
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 16:20 |
|
JimmyFantastic wrote: | I often sack healthy players in league. Min-max to the max! |
Me too, but mostly to get an inducement i want/need for the next match. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 16:20 |
|
Lets hypothetically assume 2 team builds.
1. Taking all doubles, all stat increases, spend all the money available on extra bodies and rerolls.
2. Maximize the value for buck, thus not accepting all stats, doubles, usually don't buy 16th player just because the money is available, etc.
Lets assume for the sake of comparison that Team build No1 produces the same power with 1500TV, as the Team build No2 at 1350 TV. The gap might be bigger, or smaller depending on the rosters, but for the sake of calculation lets take those hypotethical number.
Lets see what happens in League and in Blackbox. League gives an opponent based on schedule, while blackbox gives you based on TV. Furthermore lets assume, that there are only 2 type of team management in those groups, so you either face team build No1, or No2.
- League: If you run team build No1, and you are scheduled against team build No1, then it is a "fair" match. If you face the other team build, then you expect to lose, as the efficiency at the pitch is the same, but there are 150 TV worth of inducement. If you run a team build No2, then the other way around.
- Blackbox: Whatever team build you run, will be your opponent, with a few exception of strange draws, where the matchmaker has little choice but pair different team builds. But generally if you run team build no1, then you face team build no1, and if you run No2, then you face No2.
Ok, I fully agree that there are teams with different age, race, sweet spots, so you wont run it "fair and straight" at blackbox. But I believe this exercise shows that league is at least as prone to TV as blackbox is. |
_________________
|
|
undume
Joined: Feb 04, 2014
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 16:42 |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 16:51 |
|
koadah wrote: |
The question was What is min/maxing. Min/maxing is not blood bowl specific. |
Good thing this is in Off-Topic I guess.
|
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 17:05 |
|
|
Wizfall
Joined: Dec 09, 2011
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 17:55 |
|
To give you concrete exemple, in pratice the most curent or extreme case of minmaxing i noticed :
1-firing skilled healthy player
- Big guys/werevolves that does not roll a double early on.
- Zombies/skellies/some linemen getting more than one skills without rolling doubble
-lizards firing skinks to concentrate all their skills on Saurus (and some even consider it normal, liz being in the Top 2/3 races in B or R in win% make them already hardly competitive hehe)
-firing a blocker dwarf/runner dwarf once he get his third skill if no double
-firing a Black Ork getting his third skill (yep i notice a coach that did that) or orc lineman getting more than one skill
-firing amazons blitzers once the team get some blodger linewomen (20k less expensive) to only have linewomen after (a true classic).
2-abusing the power of the blodge or CPOMB combo and firing everything else (rerolls included) |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 18:08 |
|
koadah wrote: | JimmyFantastic wrote: | I often sack healthy players in league. Min-max to the max! |
I don't. But if it seems like the best strategy... |
If you play Khemri firing a couple of skilled skeletons in order to avoid a Wizard may be a good strategy.
The Wizard is one of the most gamebreaking inducements for some match-ups. |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 18:32 |
|
koadah wrote: | licker wrote: | koadah wrote: |
The question was What is min/maxing. Min/maxing is not blood bowl specific. |
Good thing this is in Off-Topic I guess.
|
I don't really see what blathering on about what the BBRC intended, desinged for or tested for has to do with it.
Min/maxing is still min/maxing. |
So if it's just general curiosity about the term and not how it's linked to Blood Bowl, it shouldn't be in the Tactics & Strategy forum should it? |
_________________ Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
akaRenton
Joined: Apr 15, 2008
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 18:39 |
|
After about the first 4 or 5 responses this thread was redundant.
There are lots of old threads on the subject, and lots of takes on it. Search for them and you'll quickly wish you hadn't asked
Just don't asked about CPOMB ;D |
_________________ Dirty Cranberries - All zombie funtimes
Fumbbl Image Library - Free images to make logos, player bio pics etc |
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 18:51 |
|
When most people talk about minmaxing, they refer to a murderous team at a low TV by picking only effective skills, taking few if any rerolls, and skipping positionals. It works especially well in the blackbox, where the opponent can't look at a team and say "that's just bovine excrement", and choose not to play it.
Examples of this include teams with 1 or 2 highly specialized killers, but a team value of 1000 (zons or pact).
Or durable teams with clawpombers and little else at TV 1200-1400 (0-1 bull cdorf, necro with lucky rolls, underworld)
To a lesser extent, any effective TV management can be considered some form of minmaxing. Having only 11 players, not taking +AG on an AG5 player (elves), not taking +ST on any kind of player, choosing normal skills on doubles rolls (chaos), not taking some/all positionals (any team with throwers or big guys) can all somewhat fall under that header. Even just taking only block, Mb and guard on a team could be an example of minmaxing. |
_________________ Content: Twitch / Youtube ; Updates: Facebook / Twitter
(because big banners are compensating) |
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 19:10 |
|
Min-maxxing is a derogatory term which is often mistakenly applied too broadly.
There is a significant difference between smart TV optimization and gratuitous min-maxxing.
Examples of smart TV management would include:
a) Not buying 8 rerolls and 16 players
b) Not keeping expensive, badly injured players who are no longer effective for their cost
c) Considering the value of more expensive upgrades to players (stats, doubles) before taking them
d) Considering the value of additional, more expensive positional players versus a cheaper lineman
e) Not buying inefficient team assets such as cheerleaders and assistant coaches
Examples of gratuitous min-maxxing might include:
a) Building a team out of exclusively linemen designed to face rookie 1000tv teams, to gain unfair advantage
b) Deliberately keeping your TV low, while incorporating abilities into your team normally seen on much higher tv squads (Clawpomb, Leap/Strip Ball, Blodge, excessive mighty blow)
c) Firing healthy players who skill, so as not to take on additional TV cost
Most good coaches walk the line between the two, and where that line sits is up to individual interpretation. I recently fired a Block/Break Tackle/Guard/Grab treeman who I felt wasn't performing in relation to his cost. To some, this is min-maxxing. To others, it is TV management. To me, it's something to be avoided, but is okay to do on rare or extreme occasions. I've probably fired less than ten healthy players in all my games on fumbbl. Usually this is a bloated big guy or expensive thrower on a team that has lost most of the rest of its star players. Sometimes, I do it to get rid of a player that is too effective, and makes players not want to play the team.
My belief is that occasionally firing the odd expensive player, or being aware that your team performs better in certain TV ranges is smart play. Again, others disagree, and it is really only at the extreme ends of the spectrum that you find universal agreement of where the line is. |
|
|
selfy_74
Joined: Sep 03, 2010
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 19:15 |
|
With all due respect that ain't even the right minimax innit? To be fair to you though it went right over my head after the first sentence. |
_________________
Selfy_74: Verified Stunty Leeg Master
|
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 19:29 |
|
Also bear in mind that minmaxing is perhaps a not particularly enjoyable way to approach the game for many (but some). It is really getting focussed on team build details of efficiency rather than thinking of interesting skill combos or fun background. But of course it makes sense not to go excessive on having lots of rrs you may not use, multi-injured players and lots of rarely used skills. People take it to varying extremes.
Being careful of value makes sense but some seem obsessed by it. Do what you enjoy. |
_________________ “A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.” |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
  Posted:
May 30, 2015 - 19:54 |
|
It's not really even about being obsessed by 'value', it's that the current rules reward it far too heavily.
Especially in terms of teams which sweet spot to abuse less developed sides.
Min/Maxing isn't about not taking bad skills, or playing with injured players. That's just being intelligent. Min maxing is using the match making systems to take advantage of the fact that you can artificially lower your TV in a manner which would not be advantageous in a league setting (well most league settings).
Firing zombies or rotters isn't min maxing. Firing the occasional healthy unskilled player to play with inducements isn't min maxing. Keeping a team with dozens of games in the 1000-1200 range probably is though.
But this is really only an issue for R, and B to a lesser extent, so I don't even know why anyone cares. |
|
|
|
| |