63 coaches online • Server time: 18:17
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Dark Elf runners yay...goto Post 4th normal skill on ...goto Post HUBBA Post-Season 15...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 00:54 Reply with quote Back to top

licker wrote:
That feels like a lot of 'what ifs' to me.

But hopefully you can get your hands on the global data, I admit, I only have my own data to base my opinion off of (and some additional from a couple other elf coaches I follow, but I haven't looked at all their matches, just the ones I watched).

Still, I'm really not sure why the defense would be any different up 1-0 on turn 2/3/4/... as opposed to tied 0-0 on turn 1. Indeed if you are ahead you can likely play more passively if you think it possible to deny the score, if tied you may feel the need to play more aggressively to actually steal the ball.

It's all dependent on the in game situations of course, but logic will still suggest that you should have more options with a lead than without. Assuming you are playing to win (and not assuming overtime as a possibility though I haven't decided how overtime affects it, don't think it does too much).


There's a lot of what ifs because I'm trying to cover a lot of bases that would undermine your hypothesis somewhat if true.

I have some alternative ideas why a hypothetical 6 turn defense up 1-0 is different than a potential 8 turn 0-0 defense but it falls squarely on cognitive mechanisms of the coaches. Even if a coach shouldn't treat the situations differently (and you apparently don't, which hey, that might be part of the difference we're seeing here) I think two things come into play:

1. You get greedy going for the 2-0 and put yourself in a brittle position that increases the probability of ceding a score. Why would someone get greedy? Well they play Skaven, there's always that Wink.

Because 2 scores are better than 1. Pursuing that score at all costs while eroding your fallback positions and allowing hard to crack breakaways asserting unassailable position. Because you imagine the 1-1 scenario kicking off at the half and don't like it. It's probably an evaluation error that puts a way greater value on being up 2-0 than being up 1-0 or being tied 1-1 as way more awful than being up 2-0 or 1-0 is awesome.

In fact, I could imagine making your defense worse by the prospect of going into half with a tie every time that prospect of a tie becomes closer to reality simply by taking more and more longshots on the ball as opposed to being patient, not over committing and waiting for the right moments and distracting the opponent with other threats.

2. The opposing team has an objective to simply match your score before the half ends, whenever that is. You're not playing against a normal offense that wants to take their time, rough you up, prevent TZs and hits on the BC and minimize your chances at reprisal, you're playing against a driven offense that probably has a less dynamic gameplan with the willingness to take larger risks to score the closer it is to halftime.

Sometimes you win on that variance of risk taking by the opponent, sometimes it's merely a 3+ handoff and 2+ GFI to tie it up in turn 8. Sometimes the opponent simply can't carry the load of a 'taking care of business, must score' drive because of their team (like dorfs or khemri or undead). Sometimes they don't have the experience of where they should be on the field a turn or two in advance to increase their odds in that must score situation and the drive dies somewhere around midfield. The overall point is that you're playing defense against an offense that doesn't have the same exact considerations or risk profile at that point in time as they do in a 0-0 situation with a hypothetical 8 turns to get it in and you get got in the process.

What I'm getting at is that some of the stuff you take for granted in the conservative risk appetite of the opposing coach are pared back when it's crunch time for them and in a game where 3+s and 2+s aren't terrible odds if the payoff is a TD. It's not so much that your defense changes here, rather, the offense does and sometimes you get got by it.

Inversely when you kick off first, you can pretty much guess that most of the risk loading will be on the back end of the drive, if things ever get that hairy while the opponent does their best to just manage the situation, advance the ball safely, and not make big mistakes or roll into turnovers all while squeezing you like a zit. You pick and probe until you have your shots and sometimes you just make it such a hellish slog down the pitch that in the waning moments they have to take the risks they've been avoiding all half and you win that half when they fail them.

In summary it feels like its sometimes harder to stop an offense from scoring in "must score" mode with enough turns to score than it is to stop an offense in "don't do stupid things to give the game away" mode with a maximum of 8 turns to do so, irrespective of where your talents lie as a coach. Sometimes its easier to stop a team in "must score" mode because the team and the coach don't have the chops to play that way but they do have the chops to not give the game away if they expect and hope to use their full 8 turns on offense.


Of course this raises a corollary question which is - do you play offense differently with 8 turns to go 0-0 than you do 6 turns down 1-0?
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 04:17 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
I toss a real coin, see if it's Heads or Tails, then I choose the same in the client.
That way I don't have to decide. Smile



I pick heads if my team has more heads.
I pick tails if my team has more tails.


So if I had Skaven or Lizards VS any other races I am probably taking Tails.
If I have more players than my opponent does I take Heads.

If things are complicated I just pick one... and it always seems like the wrong one.

Like Orcs vs Humans it is probably more likely the Orcs have more tails than the Humans do... but maybe not.
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 04:45 Reply with quote Back to top

When I 1st started out here on FUMBBL I just F'd around for a bit and then I started to read all of the "Conventional Wisdom" of FUMBBL. And I have playtested damn near every single philosophy here (including some insane ones I made up with varying degrees of success).
What you learn from reading the "Conventional Wisdom" is what to expect from most players. Because most players end up choosing to follow that "wisdom".
In my opinion you should follow that "wisdom" for a while and see how it gets you BEAT. Because every possible strategy has it's failings. See what gets you BEAT doing the "conventional wisdom" and use that knowledge to turn the tables on future opponents.

Fact is, the "conventional wisdom" says KICK with Elves... but nothing works every time.
So you have to also, after being the guy who KICKS every time... you gotta switch it up and Receive.
You have to know how to go against the convention... if only because you are going to lose the Coin Flip 50% of the time and some amount of that time you are going to get stuck Receiving (possibly stuck Receiving by an opponent who thinks he is putting you in a disadvantage).

Regardless of which way you think is best to play you have to figure around 50% of the time that you won't get to choose which way to play. And somewhere under 50% of the time you will get stuck playing the other way.
RedDevilCG



Joined: Jan 09, 2010

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 06:45 Reply with quote Back to top

Since we're talking about kicking first, why not include the variable of "where" you kick (assuming you have the kick skill).

Where I kick depends on the player skills I'm facing, but on average I kick far against low AG or slow teams, and short against high AG or fast teams.

How someone kicks, whether first or second, can also muddy the stats.
The_Murker



Joined: Jan 30, 2011

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 07:07 Reply with quote Back to top

I find that kicking deep against a slow team just makes it that much harder to force them to score. And forcing any team to score is a significant portion of the "Kick first" strategy, imo. I kick deep if it's turn 6+, otherwise.. always bet on BLITZ.

Just yesterday I caught a lucky BLITZ ball near the LoS in a position I could not defend, in a situation where I was outgunned. The first thing I did was run that ball back to my own goal line, so that when things surly went pear-shaped, which they did, that juicy TD was just too tempting for the enemy not to take. The result.. rather than wasting the BLITZ catch and giving the ball back to the grinders at mid-field, the opposition took its touchdown on turn 4, and I had 4 to score myself.

_________________
Image
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia!
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 12:54 Reply with quote Back to top

Depends #thread

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
Bullroarer4



Joined: Oct 22, 2012

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 14:32 Reply with quote Back to top

mrt1212 wrote:
licker wrote:
YES.

Kicking is for chumps.


Chumps who might in fact be good at the game. But we won't explore a world that isn't oriented solely around licker's beliefs.


Twisted Evil not at all how you play vs my dorfs.

_________________
Tenacious doesn't begin to describe me. Never give up, never surrender Smile
mrt1212



Joined: Feb 26, 2013

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 19:49 Reply with quote Back to top

The impetus is on you to get a win Wink
Catalyst32



Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 20:24 Reply with quote Back to top

So... NOBODY has accepted my CHALLENGE???

Cowards!!! COWARDS ALL!!!

(Maybe that will get a few fresh fishies on the hook.)
DarthPhysicist



Joined: Jun 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 21:32 Reply with quote Back to top

to the original question, yes, it's overrated.

_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Nov 18, 2017 - 22:14 Reply with quote Back to top

Sp00keh wrote:
I always click heads
I choose Tails if I'm playing Lizards or Skaven! Wink
DarthPhysicist



Joined: Jun 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 19, 2017 - 13:54 Reply with quote Back to top

If you are likely to lose your 3 guys on the LOS in the first turn, you aren't exactly defending with an 11 men team are you?

_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 19, 2017 - 13:59 Reply with quote Back to top

Without Piling On losing 3 guys (non Stunty) on the LOS in the first turn is not likely.

_________________
Please vote the Diving Catch and Break Tackle/Diving Tackle bug reports, thanks!
DarthPhysicist



Joined: Jun 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 19, 2017 - 14:26 Reply with quote Back to top

How about even 1? Is that really better? I'd rather hit first 4 times any day. Usually you can pop a couple.

_________________
Using derivative humor since 2005.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 19, 2017 - 14:37 Reply with quote Back to top

You should consider other elements too, like Blitz!, Perfect Defence, Pitch Invasion and the Weather.
For example if I have an agile team, a bench (and/or a one turner) and I'm playing vs Khemri with the rain I could choose to kick deep (with a Kicker) and try to exploit the known pick up weakness of that team.
If I have Lizardmen, it's raining and my opponent is Wood Elves I prefer to kick.
There are many variables to take into account and getting 4 hits is not guaranteed due to some Kick Off events.

_________________
Please vote the Diving Catch and Break Tackle/Diving Tackle bug reports, thanks!
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
Powered by PNphpBB2 1.2 © 2003 PNphpBB Group
Credits