30 coaches online • Server time: 12:34
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
pythrr



Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Apr 30, 2016 - 20:51 Reply with quote Back to top

DarthPhysicist wrote:
pythrr wrote:

as is said, ALL SKILL UPS should be random. embrace the CHAOS>


I get thick skull, I kill jack.


it's called darwinism

_________________
Image
Image
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Apr 30, 2016 - 23:09 Reply with quote Back to top

dode74 wrote:
I think it'd be a short term league nerf as progress in leagues is partly alongside team age, but would make little difference in TV-matched MM (or exceptionally long leagues) where you could simply recycle undesirable mutations. Is short term leagues where the issue lies?


Well, for a start it seems strongly anti-fluff that Chaos coaches can pick every single mutation 'a la carte'. Imo, more randomness would be more fluffy and would also be more interesting, because coaches would have to manage the mutations. I don't think it would be as clear-cut in longer-term leagues/MM as you suggest. Say a coach rolls extra arms on a Nurgle Warrior that already has tentacles and dodge. The extra arms might not be particularly useful on that player; however, he already has a couple of other useful skill-ups that aren't so easy to replace. So, do you drop him, or don't you? Plus, recycling players takes time and effort.

I'm not saying Chaos coaches should never be able to choose a mutation, just not every time (i.e. perhaps just on doubles).

______________________________________

Ragnar saunters through the door of the Mutation Boutique and takes a seat in the waiting area, his hooves clopping loudly on the polished marble floor. He picks up a copy of Blitzers Digest and flicks through the pages as he waits to be seen.

Several minutes later, a well-dressed man sporting a white suit, pink bow-tie and monocle approaches and hands Ragnar a laminated menu.

"Welcome, Sir, how good it is to see you again!", he says. "What can we do for you today?"

Ragnar puts on his spectacles and peruses the menu for a few moments. Then he turns it towards the assistant and taps a hairy finger on one of the options.

"Rrraaaaargghhh!" He bellows excitedly.

"Aah, Two Heads! Very good, Sir, very good! That will go nicely with the Big Hand that you purchased last time ..."

_________________
"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!!" Razz
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Apr 30, 2016 - 23:21 Reply with quote Back to top

Trouble with doubles is some only only get mutations on doubles anyway. I think having a seperate mutation table to roll on after the skill roll of you want to take a mutation would be better. With the mutations divded up and a couple of rolls that allow the coach to pick any mutation.

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Apr 30, 2016 - 23:22 Reply with quote Back to top

If people wanted to go down the mutatios more random route.

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
dode74



Joined: Aug 14, 2009

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 00:15 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly wrote:
Well, for a start it seems strongly anti-fluff that Chaos coaches can pick every single mutation 'a la carte'. Imo, more randomness would be more fluffy and would also be more interesting, because coaches would have to manage the mutations. I don't think it would be as clear-cut in longer-term leagues/MM as you suggest. Say a coach rolls extra arms on a Nurgle Warrior that already has tentacles and dodge. The extra arms might not be particularly useful on that player; however, he already has a couple of other useful skill-ups that aren't so easy to replace. So, do you drop him, or don't you? Plus, recycling players takes time and effort.
Time and effort are not a problem in long leagues and MM, which was the point I was making. As for the fluff argument, gameplay is more important and if the fluff adds nothing then it's achieving nothing.
Sure, some rolls might make for more interesting (which I am interpreting as "varied") players, but for MM in particular TV efficiency rules, which means there's little place for such players and they will be cut and recycled until the desired player is got. We see recycling all the time. Why would your Nurgle Warrior (from your example) have tents or dodge at all? It's not a great pick for an AG2 player on a team which relies on bash as a strategy. With that double claw would make more sense, particularly on a player who is hard to level anyway. Same for tents, really: why take the risk with a mutation roll when you could simply pick Block and wait for a timely double (with plenty of other skill options while you are waiting)? A NW rolling singles then doubles would go Block/Claw 90% of the time.
Quote:
I'm not saying Chaos coaches should never be able to choose a mutation, just not every time (i.e. perhaps just on doubles).
I get what you are saying. I just don't think it will achieve what you appear to want it to.
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 00:43 Reply with quote Back to top

If something takes time and effort, then (almost by definition) it is more difficult to achieve than something that doesn't. My point was that it wouldn't be as easy to spam claw around (I didn't say impossible).

I saw a Nurgle team on FUMBBL (can't remember which one) that had tentacles on several of the Warriors and it seemed very effective. I seem to recall they had a very good win/loss record (I think Blackbox). I've never played Nurgle myself, but I would think Dodge would be a pretty decent doubles pick for a player that is going to be taking a lot of hits, especially one with tentacles - could be a real pain with dodge and stand firm. Anyway, it was only an example - perhaps a better one might be a +ST warrior who then rolls Very Long Legs. Or a +AG beastman who rolls tentacles.

Also, I haven't proposed a specific mechanism for how random mutations would work (again, the doubles suggestion was just an off-the-cuff example). I actually think that something as simple as taking a random mutation any time and picking on a double would be inadequate. As you pointed out, coaches could just wait for a double and then pick claw anyway. I'm considering several ideas, but I'm leaning towards something where the coach would have to commit to taking a mutation before they roll to see if it is random or they can choose it. If the mutations are good enough (some might need to be buffed), then there might be an incentive to risk the randomness. You could also have different grades of randomness - one roll on the 'mutation table' might be: 'draw 3 random mutations and pick one from those'.

_________________
"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!!" Razz
DarthPhysicist



Joined: Jun 14, 2015

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 01:05 Reply with quote Back to top

Well here's some more food for thought. The slowing of the CPOMB beasts by this method "might" be enough to help injuries catch up a bit. So while it might not do what some would hope, it might have a side effect that is not being considered. That would be some interesting math, but might be too situational to predict accurately.

_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
Image
dode74



Joined: Aug 14, 2009

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 01:15 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly - I know you didn't say impossible. And I know it would be, on a per-player basis, more time-consuming. But MM is TV-matched: time is not an issue. You can simply keep at it until you get what you want.

Then there's the fact that claw isn't necessarily the issue here: make claw more difficult to get and what happens to the win rates of the teams most affected by claw? IF there's an issue then simply saying "it's claw" seems rather lazy (not that you necessarily have said as much, but I've not seen you say why you think mutations are the issue as opposed to, e.g., PO).

Quote:
I saw a Nurgle team on FUMBBL...
One swallow does not a summer make. And the dodge roll is only good if there are no better options on doubles and he already has skills which compliment it. If you're reliant on stat rolls to make the choice "difficult" then I think you're doomed to failure: AG beasts typically won't end up as CPOMBers, for example.

Of course there are lots of ways to do it. That's never been my point at all. Regardless of how you do restrict these things the fact is that it is easy enough to recycle players until you get whatever it is you do want, and recycling is common practice anyway on other teams: it would simply become common practice on these ones.
DarthPhysicist



Joined: Jun 14, 2015

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 01:17 Reply with quote Back to top

dode74 wrote:
One swallow does not a summer make.


Hey buddy... keep it clean...
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 01:53 Reply with quote Back to top

I got about halfway through writing a post in which the general theme was:

If you want to limit skill picks (eg. mutations), then I'd agree with Licker's proposals there, not a blanket system that utterly destroys other teams. (Although I'd rather not do it).

I agree with Dode that randomisation of mutation skills wouldn't really do anything to MM, and I think it would utterly destroy other parts of the game which really don't suffer from the same issues (refer to HM's post about over-arching methodology & TV here if necessary).

And then I would say if people want random skills, then let's do it. But you go full mino - everyone gets random stuff. Let's see your high elf blitzer take multiblock.


And then I realised I'd just managed to make a post where I agreed with Licker, Dode and Pythrr in one sitting...

_________________
Image


Last edited by ArrestedDevelopment on May 01, 2016 - 03:55; edited 2 times in total
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 02:34 Reply with quote Back to top

dode74 wrote:
Of course there are lots of ways to do it. That's never been my point at all. Regardless of how you do restrict these things the fact is that it is easy enough to recycle players until you get whatever it is you do want, and recycling is common practice anyway on other teams: it would simply become common practice on these ones.


Well, if it's so easy to recycle players until you get exactly what you want, why doesn't every elf team in MM have five +AG players, two +ST and a natural one-turner? I think DarthPhysicist makes a very good point that attrition is also a factor. Even in MM, you don't have unlimited time - sooner or later (most likely sooner) players you've already built will start dying.

Anyway, I think we're in danger of derailing this thread. I will put together a more detailed and specific proposal for how random mutations could work and post it in a separate thread (probably within the next week or two). Feel free to come and debate the details there (I'll even send you a PM if you like, to make sure you see it).

Just to address one specific thing you asked: why I think claw spam is an issue. #1 - the fact that the chaos teams can so easily spam claw on 4-5 players with normal skill rolls essentially makes AV9 somewhat redundant (even without MB,PO), which really screws over the teams that rely on it (anyone would think Orcs have become extinct since the introduction of CRP!). #2 - aren't Chaos teams supposed to involve some element of ... chaos (i.e. randomness)? Right now, they seem to be anything but chaotic - oh, there goes yet another cookie-cutter cpomb-spam team .. Imo, these teams should in some way be a) more varied and colorful, b) more challenging to manage. I find it hard to believe that whoever laid out this nice, varied selection of mutations would have intended for just one of them to be taken 90% of the time, compared with all the others. Sure, I don't have actual data on how frequently claw is taken, but I'd be very surprised if it wasn't >70% of mutation picks, especially on Chaos/Nurgle teams. I mean, surely you would have to agree that something seems a bit broken there, if that is the case?

_________________
"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!!" Razz
pythrr



Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 03:47 Reply with quote Back to top

DarthPhysicist wrote:
dode74 wrote:
One swallow does not a summer make.


Hey buddy... keep it clean...


makes my summer .... err, what are we talking about?

_________________
Image
Image
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 04:11 Reply with quote Back to top

DrDiscoStu wrote:
Well yeah, there should be a benefit to good team building, just like there is a benefit to good coaching


I don't think they should be equally beneficial. This means that too many matches are decided before any dice are rolled.

Good coaching should have the highest influence on a match outcome. Good team building needs to be beneficial, otherwise it's removing an integral part of the game. Also dice have a sway on things too.

DarthPhysicist wrote:
I dislike aging from a fluff perspective (as well as the mechanic, but I can live with it as just a rule definition that I must abide by).


Not that I can remember, but wasn't aging fluff driven? To show that players are aging as they progress through their career.

I think the mechanical influence (i.e. spreading spp around) was purely coincidental. I maybe wrong, but there's no way the mechanic would have had a large testing base to see its influence.

DarthPhysicist wrote:

Its Blood Bowl! What would the realistic life expectancy be in a world like Warhammer? These guys are facing death at 35 tops. How could they possibly ever get so old that they need to retire? Death and injury should be the only method of retirement! What pansy Ork is going to go to the old retirement village down in Florkida and put on white shoes, playing Mahjong on the weekend... PFFT!


With Warhammer your army is reset. In campaign modes you tend to recruit to your unit. So if you lose 8 bowmen, you hire 8 and they get uniforms.

Blood Bowl does revolve around money. Players are paid money (hence it getting harder to earn money as the team gets better). So that money must have a reason. As they get older and pick up more injuries (more with aging) I think there comes a time where they start dreaming of mahjong at the weekend.

Fluffwise there are a few tidbits about retiring and taking it easy. BB is like that though, it steals, borrows and changes things as it pleases. If Warhammer world suits it uses it. If real world situations are better again it'll use it.

Wreckage wrote:
Matthueycamo wrote:
Wreckage I think that depends on the enviroment. League any injury is negative rather than pointless because you don't pick your opponent or have TV based match making.


I'm sorry, I think that is a misconception that is a result of poor team building skills.


I don't know. I think it's case by case. You have to deal with the resources available and what your aim is. A lot of seasons you'll sit and build strength. However if you are pushing for a title or promotion and pick up a key injury that in a MM environment would mean retirement.......well League you may have to make do.

The best team managers in League aren't the same in MM. There are different concepts. ErikEkers for me will always be the best in League at building teams. Tomay is another.......though they tend not to last long.

DarthPhysicist wrote:
Maybe if when you leveled up, you were given the choice of a randomly determined mutation, or taking a regular skill, and on doubles, you could pick your mutation?


Mutations are different to skills. They can't really be treated the same. Mutations really are begging out for traits.
tussock



Joined: May 29, 2011

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 04:26 Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:
anyone would think Orcs have become extinct since the introduction of CRP!

There's heaps of Orc teams in the big tournies, huge ones at that, they just don't win as much as Nurgs. They're not as TV-efficient as Nurgs at the same basic game plan, requiring far more +stats and doubles to get things done.

As to random mutations, it's a bad idea, some teams get the right ones and everyone else sacks players over and over until they get the roll they wanted. Nothing changes, it's just a pain.

But you can say that mutations can't be spammed, limit one of each for each position type or something, leaves open player choices, lets the killer teams keep targeting key playmakers, and you'll probably face more Tents on ST 4 and 2-Heads Pestis and 4-armed Chaos Warriors.

And really, Dwarfs would probably start winning all the tournies again, and nobody wants that. Smile

_________________
ImageImage
dode74



Joined: Aug 14, 2009

Post   Posted: May 01, 2016 - 10:45 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly - there's a considerable difference in the odds required for +ST/+AG and doubles. That's why people don't recycle for them: 1 in 6 is reasonable over 3 or so rolls, whereas 1 in 36 is not.

As for your reasons:
1. Is spamming claw an issue? There are LOTS of orc and dorf teams around, (4th and 5th most played teams in B) so your objection rings a little hollow in the face of the facts.
2. Argument from fluff again.
I don't agree it is broken at all, even if it is by far the most picked mutation. All that would tell me is that the other mutations aren't as universally useful as claw, just like most general skills aren't as useful as block, or agi skills as useful as dodge.
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