Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
 Posted:
Aug 06, 2019 - 18:12 |
 
|
| ph0enyx13 wrote: | | This is a one-off extra payment that does not affect the Cost column of your team roster. |
Quite the opposite, its a seasonal payment if you choose to keep the player, which means it comes out of your total amount preparing for the upcoming season. Which means you will have to use money you would otherwise use on TV.
So it doesn't count as TV per say, but it comes out of your total amount, effectively lowering your TV by the same amount. |
|
|
ph0enyx13
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2019 - 17:56 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | ph0enyx13 wrote: | | Garion wrote: | | Balle2000 wrote: | | ph0enyx13 wrote: | | In NAF tournaments, Lizardmen have the 3rd highest win rate. The new MVP rules more than make up for the seasons/wants to retire rules. |
The rules aren't really made for the resurrection format though. |
Not sure that's true. There have been a number of people involved in designing the rules since the lrbs started and even to this day that are heavily involved in the resurrection tourney scene.
I would agree if you said it's not the primary design goal but I am sure it is a secondary consideration when making roster changes. Players like hefty or ooligan for example are perfect for that scene but add little to nothing in scheduled leagues for example. |
What makes hefties and ooligans good for res but bad outside of res? |
well I could talk for a long long time about the pros and cons. I know its a long post but I really tried to keep it as brief as possible...
Hefties - have P access, which is nonsensical, but makes them much more useful in res tournaments. It means you can trim your TV and have leader skill on a single roll. A rr would normally cost 60TV, but now you get an av7 fling with fend and a RR for 70k. So you can easily take 1 without it impacting your resurrection style fling line up (obviously these things vary depending on the tournament Comp) but it would be something like this -
2 Treemen
9 Halfling
1 Hefty with leader
1 Re-roll
Total 610k
Deeproot 300
Chef 100
so that's 1010k and then you can look at swapping flings for catchers, and adding additional skills, adding apo till you get up to the what ever the tournaments starting roster cost is. So lets just use the World Cup rules in this instance for arguments sake -
1,250,000 gold pieces to spend for halflings
so 1,100,000 gold pieces must be spend before doing skills.
2 Treemen = 240
1 Deeproot = 300
1 Catchers = 50
1 Hefty = 50
8 flings = 240
1 apo = 50
1 Re-roll = 60
1 chef = 100
1100 which then means we have 150k to spend on skills before out first game, or a bigger bench. if you like
20k on leader
50k +ag on Catcher (50k in world cup rules)
80k still to spend on what ever, cba to think about it, but you get the idea.
(also I am not saying this is the best starting roster for flings in the world cup rules, its just an example)
The point here is the bolted on P access is really only there to get leader, and adding a RR and saving you TV here is much more useful in this setting where your team is healed after every game.
Basically you can do the same with Ooligan in a Goblin team, playing him for one purpose only to get the increase fame Ooligan supplies.
Now if you are playing in a league with goblins and flings, both hefties and Ooligan aren't worth bothering with (assuming you are trying to be the most competitive you can be with these races in a TV efficiency methodology). Hefties I think a case can be made for taking one (as a leader caddy, though I'm still not convinced) with flings, but Ooligan especially is nothing but pure TV bloat. In a scheduled league you do not know what your oppositions TV is going to be and you need to keep your team really trim in order to get Bribes with goblins, and Chef (plus a star player hopefully) with halflings. Any unwanted TV increase decrease the likelihood of you getting the inducements you want. This ^ (among other reasons) is why I wanted Master Chef to be a permanent inclusion in a fling roster with a specified TV cost associated instead of an inducement only, and also why I wanted Secret Weapon rolls back in the game instead of the auto sending off for weapons. Because neither of these things were addressed in the 2016 edition of blood bowl the "TV gaming" and extreme min maxing with these races is still the optimal way to play them (from a hyper competitive point of view), instead of team building in a more natural way. |
I just thought, another example of this is down costing human catchers to 60k means you can take 2 catchers (or 1 catcher and 2 throwers) on a 1100k roster when you would be 10k short before.
So for the actual rosters there were 3 NAF changes (human catcher, hefty, and ooligan) and 3 non NAF changes (chaos pact orc, doom diver, hafling catcher |
|
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2019 - 18:34 |
|
What do you mean by naf and non naf changes? You can use doom diver, halfling catcher etc in NAF sanctioned tournaments.
Weeping Blade for Gutters is another minor change. |
_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.” |
|
ph0enyx13
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2019 - 19:04 |
|
| garyt1 wrote: | What do you mean by naf and non naf changes? You can use doom diver, halfling catcher etc in NAF sanctioned tournaments.
Weeping Blade for Gutters is another minor change. |
Changes that matter for NAF tv 1100 tournaments more than they matter in leagues |
|
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2019 - 19:23 |
|
Maybe. New, fairly cheap, players comes in handy in any format. |
_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.” |
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 03:54 |
|
| Nelphine wrote: | However, I think this whole rule still encourages keeping legends and rookies; in particular, keeping 1 legend killer and 1 legend baller, and then having a team full of rookies, has been shown to be very very effective in box.
But, it's also been shown to be a very negative gameplay experience for other players. So I don't think this rule is actually particularly good in any kind of perpetual league. |
Give or take for the experience, the thing is fumbbl isn't really a perpetual "league", because the same teams explicitly are forbidden from regualarly each other all the time.
Actual league play, if you build a team with a legend baller and killer and a bunch of rookies, you'd end up playing either similar teams or up 200+ TV against teams full of Guard and MB that tear up your rookies and then get a shot at your legends.
Like, if ... certain min-max teams in blackbox, had to play against teams of equal age instead of equal TV, that would not be an ideal build at all. That would be perpetual league.
You might recall a coach of such a team having a thread locked for complaining about having to play against big teams, just recently.
--
What we have here in the R/B divisions is TV-matching. As a result, some coaches trim very good old teams to minimal TV so they can pick on minimally developed young teams almost all the time.
That is nothing like the suggested league play. At all. A "perpetual league" under BB16 would be something like ...
Say, a moving TV limit, always considers your last 15 games (or whatever suits), and to ready your team each time you have to fit it within the current TV limit. Players roll for WTR every 15 games. Ignored while locked in any tournament, maybe add bonuses for number of rounds completed, whatever.
Then everyone runs hardcore minmax teams eventually, dropping rerolls sometimes, constantly cutting injuries, seriously considering the immediate utility of doubles and stats, and eventually retiring legends because they're just too old.
Completely throw out TV matching, use young team protection, and then everyone plays everyone because they're all in the same boat.
That's a perpetual open BB16 league.  |
_________________
  |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 05:30 |
|
Right but, if you have a choice between 5 players with block, or one player with block/dodge/ss/sure hands/big hand; or one player with block/tackle/mb/claw/frenzy, in either case the single player is simply better.
So you don't actually need legends per se; you simply need all your spp packed into only a few players. And then, you just make sure that when you're getting close to an age you might want to retire, you build a second one, and stuff all your spp onto that one.
So we're not talking about someone paying 200k to keep their legend around, and therefore having 10 less skills than their opponent and getting swamped with that extra guard. We're talking about ideal teams having all the spp packed into as few players as possible to get skill stacks, but still having just as many skills, and so just clawmbing all that guard turn after turn.
Even if you aren't preying on new teams, that's still what you're going for. You're not playing up a huge pile - if your opponents have higher tv, then you do too because you're not paying for extra age, so you have, say, 3 of those killers and the baller. And then a pile of rookies.
I don't think that's behaviour we want to encourage. It already happens, and it's already bad enough - why do we want to make it worse? 'oh, my elf catcher who has 145 spp wants to retire? he doesn't have a stat, goodbye'
This rule encourages retiring healthy players, just so we can skill stack the most perfect tv efficient player. That's not something I want to encourage. And worse, it will be done in a way that can be repeated so that you can train the replacement in the season or two before the current one retires so your team never lacks for such a player, which means it's going force coaches to find the 'perfect' team, and if something magical like +Str or +Agi or an extra re-roll doesn't fit that, they won't be used. That's not something I want to encourage either.
Yes, I know, it also allows for retiring injuries and replacing them, it allows for teams to stay near each other, it allows a great many things that are very good; it tries to ensure you don't end up facing a 6 clawmb legend nurgle team, and it ensures other such negative extreme growth don't occur; but the longer it lasts, the more it will enforce cutthroat tv efficiency. And the most tv efficient players on the site are disliked, both by new players who don't really know any better, and by people who actually face them around 1400 tv as well. And, even if we aren't your definition of a perpetual league, we are still probably the longest lasting 'leagues' in existence - so it will enforce the most extreme tv efficiency. |
|
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 07:44 |
|
Nelphine, we're doing this in SWL here. People are playing these rules in tabletop all over the place. What you're expecting is not happening. For logical reasons.
--
Players want to retire at random. You can't really plan it. You just have to have replacements, get into cycling similar players, where there's always some coming up so you can retire players. People don't generally sack superstars, they just play at lower TV.
--
Like, if you want to pick at smallkosp, those legends have usually played hundreds of games each, that is a strait up massive cost in BB16, absolutely not an efficient team in a league. They get cycled, that team would have a new elf, and probably some rerolls, and probably not sack the bigs quite so often because competitiveness is tough up there.
| Quote: | | This rule encourages retiring healthy players, just so we can skill stack the most perfect tv efficient player. That's not something I want to encourage. |
As against what? Like, Malmir's DE? With the nine ST/AG stat freaks that are mostly superstars and legends? Baza's Lizards with the six ST stat freaks that are mostly legends? Like, 99% of us will never have those teams, never. It's rubbish, I like the majors and I like those coaches, I like playing them, but the teams are ridiculous and it is almost impossible to build something that competes with them without ... you know ...
Picking, relentlessly, in R.
Churning players, relentlessly, for stats.
Immediately binning injuries on everything but the best, of course.
Never playing anything that can hurt them, outside majors.
And just spending thousands of hours on the project.
Yes, there would be very good players in teams anyway, some of whom would have grown that way quickly enough to not yet want to retire.
But you're talking like everyone will be smallkosp, while as of today smallkosp would be on ~180k of WTR for 15-game rolling seasons, assume replacement Leader.
But at 1320 TV? Today he'll draw the worst teams coming out of rookie protection sitting at ~1300, instead of ... like 15-game season is about 1820 TV. He'd have room for more, and not taking it is just inducements, rather than facing young teams all the time.
So that team doesn't make sense in 15-game seasons because it doesn't beat ordinary teams sitting at 1820 TV if that's what the scheduler always throws at it, he'd just get smashed. And everyone's team would be nearly that big because that's just how much seasons that long give you.
Like, probably he'd run Necro or Lizards or Chorfs instead, they're good around there. Yes, with legends, but ones who get retired and replaced way more regularly, and in a beefy team that competes with like teams instead of min-maxing around hunting new squads who can't have players like that yet.
--
Come on man, it's not more smallkosp, it's the end of them. Yes, you might get 1620 TV teams playing with a couple middle aged legends, but they're still playing against 1720 TV teams with one, or 1820 TV teams who have their skills somewhat more spread out because players just don't live that long without costing a lot extra.
Edit: TVs, forgot Fan Factor is free.  |
_________________
|
|
Joost
Joined: Mar 17, 2014
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 08:09 |
|
| garyt1 wrote: | | MattDakka wrote: |
Anyway, even with Claw+MB only, AV 9 players are not so immune to injuries.
Play Lizardmen at high TV in the Box and you will find it out. |
Yeah at high Tv there is either clawmb opponents or agile leaping sackers tormenting skinks. |
I think this is correct. Over 2000TV the ClawMB teams will bring you down a notch fairly quickly. |
|
|
Rawlf
Joined: Jul 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 12:06 |
|
And still Lizardmen have won the last major, the CoS. Playing against leaping sackers in the finals and claw+MB in the semi. CoS IX and VIII before were won by different Lizardmen, too. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 13:04 |
|
| ph0enyx13 wrote: |
Changes that matter for NAF tv 1100 tournaments more than they matter in leagues |
I would be wary of separating out any changes in that manner simply because how big an impact any one change has on a roster is completely dependent on the coach using it.
eg. Hefty and Orc are noticeable changes in any environment simply by adding +AV positionals to a roster, nevermind the hefty possibly being a leader. The doom diver has also had a relatively decent impact in NAF. |
_________________
 |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 13, 2019 - 13:26 |
|
Well, as I said to the last person I've had this discussion with, I've been out for 6 years. So I'm rather late to the discussion.
I personally don't think any TT league is ever going to push the system. Is swl big enough? Hard to say. My guess is you'd need thousands of coaches, in the same way that crp needed thousands of coaches to break; but once it broke, too many people followed.
Obviously though you have more experience than I do. You could very well be right.
On a personal side, I'd miss crazy legends. |
|
|
ph0enyx13
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2019 - 20:44 |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2019 - 20:59 |
|
hrmm worried about this one |
_________________
 |
|
Throweck
Joined: Feb 23, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 29, 2019 - 21:22 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
