johan
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 12:54 |
 
|
| Eddy wrote: | | It's not about the win rating. It's about playing fair and interesting matches. |
And this is where we differ.
If the scheduler manages to set up matches where the win chance is balanced (either on a team level or a team+coach level, depending on what the scheduler is aiming for - right now it's team+coach), it's done a good job. If a balanced win chance isn't fair, what is?
I really don't think it's the job of the scheduler to provide anyone with recovery matches. If you want those, play Ranked. It's also asking a lot of the scheduler to interpret which matches will be interesting for you, or just how the levels of bashing will affect the match-up in any given situation.
That being said, it's quite possible that SillySod is right and the TS formula doesn't give a sufficiently large rebates to understrength teams: Having 9 Wood Elves (just to give an example) only gives you a 4% TS rebate. This would be easy to tweak. |
_________________
”It's very sad
To see the ancient and distinguished game that used to be
A model of decorum and tranquillity
Become like any other sport, a battleground...”
—Benny Andersson & Björn Ulvaeus, Chess |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 12:57 |
|
| johan wrote: | I always tend towards bashing teams - just look at the ranked ones. So that's nothing special for BlackBox. They fit my playstyle better, and I do significantly better with that kind of team. As can be seen from my repeated and sucky attempts at playing Dark Elves. 
Exactly. BlackBox cares about whether you're likely to win the match. It doesn't particularly care how much of a mauling you're likely to get. Do you think Black Box should schedule you for easier wins if you're likely to take a beating? (In a way, indirectly, it does, since mean casualties are taken into account for matchups, something that I personally dislike.)
And why should it? In Ranked, building huge, bloated teams is something you need for the tourneys. In BlackBox, size matters not. Wins do.
It does, indirectly. There is a TS multiplier that depends on your number of players present compared to the mean AV of the team. If you don't think that this TS calculation reflects the value of the number of players properly, then that's a (perceived) fault in the TS calculations
Again, isn't it completely natural that a Khemri or Halfling team would have significantly more players than you do at the same TS? Not only are your players inherently a lot better and more expensive, they're also likely to have accumulated more skills (Wood Elf linemen are kinda easier to train than Skeletons...)
And finally, perhaps some teams really aren't feasible for a harsh environment like BlackBox? Ideally, all would be equally feasible, but that's not the case in ranked either. A significant part of the races aren't very useful at high-end ranked play such as the Majors. Perhaps some races simply are pretty unoptimized in Black Box. That doesn't mean squishy teams should get special treatment, any more than Gobbos or Ogres get special bonuses in Ranked tourneys to make them competitive. Perhaps Black Box is simply their place to shine - there's no law of nature that says the Elf teams should be the best everywhere. |
Actually... wins don`t matter in the box. They give you nothing but a harder match next time. There isn`t even an imaginary number you could try to maximize for bragging rights. So forgive me... how are wins the only thing that matters in the box?
| johan wrote: | Matches should be balanced for chance of winning, not chance of getting bashed up. And with 6-1-2, you seem to be doing alright with the elves.
It's not really surprising that teams with expensive and well-skilled players will tend to have fewer of them in any match-up if the opponent has mostly skeletons. 9 elves vs 12 Khemri may not be nice, but it's not broken either.
Having fewer players do a better job with the ball is what elves are about. |
I agree that agility vs bashers is a long discussion. In a matchup of elves vs dwarves, the dwarves (most of the times) will be the one that do the hurting and the elves will be the one getting hurt. Now I would think that is an advantage for the guy playing dwarves. Now when it comes to winning in the same matchup, the dwarf coach insists, that he should have the same chance to win. So why does the bashier team get the advantage of hurting while not having the disadvantage of being more likely to lose the match?
Sure.. I understand the rationale, that in an open competitive environment people would focus on races that win the most a given TS because if you get hurt, you can play equally hurt teams. BlackBox is a different environment though.
Some honest questions:
Who enjoys being wiped off the pitch over maiming hostile pixels?
Who enjoys losing over winning?
Who enjoys playing at a TS disadvantage continuously?
Who enjoys starting a game seriously undermanned?
I`m not talking about surviving matches or winning them - I`m talking about enjoying a match. I can say, that I wouldn`t shout 'Here!' on any of those questions. And at the moment the current scheduler is handing out the 'enjoyable' matches to the heavy bashing mass MB, mass DP teams because they just are more likely to maim hostile pixels, get the TS advantage and start the game with a full squad while still having the 50% shot at winning.
| Calcium wrote: | Some coaches cry about teams/strength/DP's/blodge etc....
Some of us just throw teams in and play. I suppose it depends on how much you love your pixels. What you are doing, along with lots of other coaches on here, is trying to change the structure of the game to give yourself an edge. Well, guess what? The rules are set. And no amount of pointless debate in the forum is going to change that. Play in the box or don't. But very soon everyone is going to get tired of all these rehashed arguments from coaches that can't take a hit.
*The TS is a fumbbl/Christer invention. Not mine. I'd happily play without TS. And I'd also happily play ANY TR. |
I`d rather say you are trying to keep the edge we want to eliminate. At the moment the edge is clearly on high AV tough teams that can dish out the hurt. They get easier matches, they can build a more unique team and they get more games than before. Orcs and dorfs are the races for the pixel lovers. Just don`t get hurt.. I rather not win, but plz let me skill may black orc or let me get 2 more fouls in with my troll.
I people can - and probably will for the most part - join the side that has the edge. So now you have balance at the expense of diversity while Eddy just wants to add a better balance that encourages diversity. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 14:24 |
|
I have reached 5 games so far with pro elves.
What bugs me is the global BBR/BR rating per coach.
So far I played good teams. As I am at 4/0/1 and something like -10 in cas. That means that my BR is on a way up, my BBR down. Perfect, I will usually get a better variety of opponents and avoid team killers.
However, because there's a global BBR/BR system, I don't feel like:
-playing fun teams (vampires, gobbos...) because it could lower my BR thus modify my elves game choice.
-Playing strong teams as my BBR could go up.
Hence I kind of metagame by playing races with a certain profile. |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 14:37 |
|
You don`t avoid killer teams by having a low BBR. It just means that given equal BR, you get a TS advantage against a high BBR coach.
Low BBR doesn`t mean you are matched up against a low BBR coach, too. It just means you get a TS advantage when you meet a coach with a higher BBR. This TS advantage though will most likely be more than offset by your higher BR, if you continue winning. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 14:54 |
|
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 14:56 |
|
Thank you CircularLogic and SillySod for making the effort to understand what i meant.
Thank you johan and Calcium (in your latest post) for trying to discuss the matters instead of just dissing what i said and accusing me of being a pixelhugger/cherrypicker/whiner/whatever.
I don't have anything to add to what CircularLogic said right now, but soon, probably ^^ |
_________________
'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 15:07 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: | | mmm, doesn't the sheduler try to equalize TS BR and BBR? |
Yes... in a way that you get TS advantage for BR and BBR disadvantage. Not in a way that it tries to match TS, BR and BBR as closely as possible. |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 15:50 |
|
There are plenty of legitimate Orc/Dwarf coaches out there, so they should be applauded for playing the way they normally would. But the coaches that play teams outside of their normal preference? Well, I attended my live BB league today and discussed this. The majority of my live opponents don't use fumbbl, and they couldn't grasp why there's such a fuss.
This place, as wonderfull as it is, can become far too complex for it's own good. I know that I have been sucked into all the more negative aspects of online gaming by playing here. I almost wish I could go back to opening the blood bowl box for the 1st time and playing it, not having a bloody clue what I was doing! I am now making a real effort to just play the game online and enjoy it. Sometimes it's not easy for a guy like me, but I try.
My point? Personally I will try to smile and enjoy the game regardless of my opponent's team. And I will leave all the mathematics to guys like Crister and Circular Logic, who understand the mechanics of the box far more than I ever will. Any change to make it more balanced I will support, although I am happy with it as it is. |
_________________
 |
|
Eddy
Joined: Aug 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 15:54 |
|
Well, it's the same here, really... That's why i find it boring that there are all those computations based on my previous successes, my previous bashing, the relative power of each teams, etc, which cause me to get games where i can only play half the turns due to lack of players. |
_________________
'The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.'
Robert R. Coveyou |
|
kn00b
Joined: Jan 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 16:19 |
|
Before we start with the 'quote the other guy and disagree' format I'm going to say that all this has been said before in a few other threads. Notably this one http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=14900
The second bit of preamble is taken mostly from the earlier thread, that the problems you're having are a problem with the Blood Bowl Rules, not FUMBBL or Black Box. There are far more bash teams than score teams in any league and they have more players 95% of the time. You don't always have the option of a recovery game and the Blood Bowl rules are designed this way on purpose.
| CircularLogic wrote: |
Actually... wins don`t matter in the box. They give you nothing but a harder match next time.
|
This is the worst sentiment I have heard in a forum debate. If you're not playing to win in blackbox I don't really care to play you.
| CircularLogic wrote: |
Who enjoys losing over winning?
|
You do, apparently. Because it gives you an easier match next time. 
| CircularLogic wrote: |
I`m not talking about surviving matches or winning them - I`m talking about enjoying a match. I can say, that I wouldn`t shout 'Here!' on any of those questions. And at the moment the current scheduler is handing out the 'enjoyable' matches to the heavy bashing mass MB, mass DP teams because they just are more likely to maim hostile pixels, get the TS advantage and start the game with a full squad while still having the 50% shot at winning.
|
As stated earlier and in earlier threads ad nauseum, this is a problem with the Blood Bowl core rules, not Blackbox. You're not going to succeed in creating an acceptable solution in B without seriously unbalancing it because the framework of Blood Bowl is inherently weighted towards bash.
| CircularLogic wrote: |
| Calcium wrote: |
What you are doing, along with lots of other coaches on here, is trying to change the structure of the game to give yourself an edge.
|
I`d rather say you are trying to keep the edge we want to eliminate. At the moment the edge is clearly on high AV tough teams that can dish out the hurt.
...
So now you have balance at the expense of diversity while Eddy just wants to add a better balance that encourages diversity. |
Here you go, twisting words again in order to dismiss a valid point. Bashers, in particular Khemri, don't have an edge at all because Elves have a fairly easy time beating them. Winning matters to some. All this talk of 'diversity' is coming from coaches who see their elves get smacked around repeatedly and want it to stop - not realizing that getting smacked around is how the team was designed by Jervis or Galak or whoever up at GW. Not getting smacked around would be changing the structure of the game to give yourself an edge.
The 'problem' you're experiencing in the blackbox is the natural consequence of Blood Bowl put through FUMBBL's ranked division and then squished into a box with a schedule. The scheduler can be tweaked slightly but if anything needs real change it's the community. People need to play to win, even if all it does is give you a harder game next time. A win is a win. |
|
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 16:40 |
|
Many inaccuracys in your post knoob:
| kn00b wrote: | | The second bit of preamble is taken mostly from the earlier thread, that the problems you're having are a problem with the Blood Bowl Rules, not FUMBBL or Black Box. There are far more bash teams than score teams in any league and they have more players 95% of the time. You don't always have the option of a recovery game and the Blood Bowl rules are designed this way on purpose. |
You are wrong on the main purpose of bloodbowl but as it is off-topic and indeed, more LRB5 oriented, I won't go into this.
Actually, there was some moves done against unfair matchups with inducements in later LRB. But there's no use of debating of LRB4 ruleset when it is actually an outdated one.
However, with plenty of threads about the equilibra of [B], and with [B] rules being ruled on FUMBBL, it's the only thing where you can actually do something.
As stated earlier and in earlier threads ad nauseum, this is a problem with the Blood Bowl core rules, not Blackbox. You're not going to succeed in creating an acceptable solution in B without seriously unbalancing it because the framework of Blood Bowl is inherently weighted towards bash.
| Quote: | Here you go, twisting words again in order to dismiss a valid point. Bashers, in particular Khemri, don't have an edge at all because Elves have a fairly easy time beating them. Winning matters to some. All this talk of 'diversity' is coming from coaches who see their elves get smacked around repeatedly and want it to stop - not realizing that getting smacked around is how the team was designed by Jervis or Galak or whoever up at GW. Not getting smacked around would be changing the structure of the game to give yourself an edge.
The 'problem' you're experiencing in the blackbox is the natural consequence of Blood Bowl put through FUMBBL's ranked division and then squished into a box with a schedule. The scheduler can be tweaked slightly but if anything needs real change it's the community. People need to play to win, even if all it does is give you a harder game next time. A win is a win. |
Question: If the blackbox limits itself to khemri, orcs and chaos (like smacks) what would you think of this? |
_________________
Join NL Raises from the Ashes |
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 17:12 |
|
First of all - I take it as an insult, when you claim that I enjoy losing over winning. On the other hand you still haven`t said, why winning matters more in [B] compared to [R].
The rest is the same of tale of 'we need bashers to avoid elven supremecy'. You claim that khemri don`t have an edge over elves at all. How comes that in ranked khemri coaches aren`t spammed by elven coaches with offers to play? You apparently also don`t like to play that matchup with your elves/skaven - why not? I suppose the khemri`s might not be such an underpowered team at the end of the day...
You also have not responded (besides insult) to the core arguement of my post. Do you enjoy being wiped out? Do you enjoy playing up in TS continuously and do you like starting with 9 players or less against full squads? Do you enjoy losing? Lets sum it up to 4 points - the fun of the game can suffer significatnly if:
1) Your team/important players gets destroyed
2) You are outnumbered from the start with little hope that might change
3) You lose the game.
4) You face stronger teams continuously.
I would say that the vast majority of coaches might have fun even while lose or playing with only 9 players to begin with, but will enjoy games more where they aren`t being outnumbered by 2+ players at any time on the pitch. They will enjoy games more, where they have an equal/higher chance to hurt opposition. So if bashers have a much lower chance to suffer points 1,2 and 4 compared to fragile teams, why should they have equal chances on point 3?
On your last point:
How is 'What you are doing, along with lots of other coaches on here, is trying to change the structure of the game to give yourself an edge.' a valid point instead of just an accusation? I play orcs AND woodies in the box. how would it give me an edge, if elves now win abit more over orcs in the box? As described above, I think bashers are the one having the edge matchmaking wise at the moment. So why should they have the edge? |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 17:22 |
|
| CircularLogic wrote: | | You claim that khemri don`t have an edge over elves at all. How comes that in ranked khemri coaches aren`t spammed by elven coaches with offers to play? |
That one's simple Circ. The elves would stand much more chance at winning, but generally the win comes with a price...paid in elven blood.
In Ranked the elves can easily avoid that kind of matchup. As they largely always have. Unless you're a psycho like Chewie 
Given that the box is a random game generator (within TR/TS/BR/whatever parameters) if you started tweaking which races should play which then it no longer fulfills it's intended purpose.
Eventually every elf team in the box WILL come across the proverbial 'Killer Khemri' team. Or chaos. Or Orc. The challenge is to win AND survive...good luck! |
_________________
|
|
Ash
Joined: Feb 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 17:54 |
|
what can be done? well.... quota!
Three group of team : usualy soft, usualy neutral, usualy bashy.
You can t have a delta bitween 2 groups of more than 1... if you do by some retirement, you can t join the box until you got your number right again.
I know it s lame. But it s the only solution IF it s a real issue. |
_________________
Ash |
|
morraywolfymax
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 14, 2008 - 18:25 |
|
| Calcium wrote: |
That one's simple Circ. The elves would stand much more chance at winning, but generally the win comes with a price...paid in elven blood.
|
So you're kind of reinforcing Circs well made point to be honest... |
_________________
Anyone named Vampy is ace! |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
