soranos
Joined: May 14, 2009
|
 Posted:
Nov 13, 2010 - 22:28 |
 
|
| pythrr wrote: | pish
DP in 4.0 has the eye to make it ok. No eye in CRP makes things even more foul-friendly. |
why do people pretend like the first foul does not exist in lrb4, when they try to paint lrb6 as the nirvana for foulers?
I will simplifiy the calculation a little bit, since I am scrapping this on a paper: I assume for lrb6 that the amor was brought down to 0 and for lrb4 that no coach send-off happens.
So these are under the mentioned conditions the chances of your dp still being on the pitch after a certain number of fouls:
1 foul 2 fouls 3 fouls 4 fouls 5 fouls
lrb4 86,1% 50,2% 29,3% 17,1% 9,97%
lrb6 69,4% 48,2% 33,5% 23,3% 16,2%
Only from foul 3 on it is more likely in lrb6 to have nobody send- off and it does not become truely significant until the 5th foul. With the new assist tules in place and the weak DP, it is tough to get 5 quality fouls in in one half in lrb6. Not to mention than anybody in lrb4 could foul just as good as the DP in lrb6.
One of the strangest things I encounter on fumbbl is this zealous love for the eye. I never encountered this outside of this place. The eye was removed from the rules because it was an inefficient way of discouraging coaches from fouling. Once a player had more than 1 DP on the team, the eye ceased to have any impact on the strategy. The most dominant, logical strategy now is to foul every half until your DP is send off, eye or no eye.
In lrb4 it was not a good idea to return the favor, if you had less DP than your oponent on the field. You had to wait until the dp was send off which often did not happen until the 3rd or 4th foul or be agressive on the ball. In these situations it was never the eye that stopped the opponent from fouling, but your play. So in some way, the eye was actually protecting the fouler from retaliation. All the talk about the eye being highly strategic only surfaced here, when it was decided that fumbbl would move to lrb5. Mass fouling is still potent, but it is a subpar strategy. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 13, 2010 - 22:39 |
|
Do not disrespect the eye |
_________________
 |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 13, 2010 - 22:40 |
|
| soranos wrote: | | Mass fouling is still potent, but it is a subpar strategy. |
That, good sir, is entirely dependent upon what the goal of your strategy might be. |
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 00:16 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | DP is for fouling. My point was about fouling, not DP in isolation.
Because DP without fouling is like having a chicken strapped to your head. |
Are you talking about all those coaches that have a DP "for defence"? 
Its fun to boot the crap out of those coaches and watch whether they pursue an unwise fouling war or cry as they realise they dont have the guts to make one of their skill choices worthwhile. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
RC
Joined: Sep 22, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 00:21 |
|
How about just mb, p.o vs av7 teams? Is that overpowered? Isnt that the same thing  |
_________________
"Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." |
|
Carnis
Joined: Feb 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 00:38 |
|
No, AV7 teams are used to losing players, so they come with reserves, and they take fend ;P.
It's completely OP that AV9 teams may lose players from blocks as well  .
Let's see if we can make this thread 100 pages long like cyanide! |
|
|
PorkusMaximus
Joined: May 19, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 02:54 |
|
| jimmyfantastic wrote: | You are actually safer on the floor, because you cant be knocked over by his claw mb po man !
Also if you are fouled, your guy has effectively a 1/3 chance of causing another cas(the sending off).
It is easy to move a few guys around your man on the deck to stop your opp getting assists on the foul. |
A prone player has a 1/3 chance of permanently removing a player for the duration of the game?! Laying prone is clearly overpowered.
I like the part of the claw discussion over on Cyanide's forums where Dode posts a chart that shows the precise statistical effects of claw when used on a block, and is promptly accused of twisting the numbers to make claw look less effective. :p |
|
|
asharak
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 03:49 |
|
| soranos wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | pish
DP in 4.0 has the eye to make it ok. No eye in CRP makes things even more foul-friendly. |
why do people pretend like the first foul does not exist in lrb4, when they try to paint lrb6 as the nirvana for foulers?
I will simplifiy the calculation a little bit, since I am scrapping this on a paper: I assume for lrb6 that the amor was brought down to 0 and for lrb4 that no coach send-off happens.
So these are under the mentioned conditions the chances of your dp still being on the pitch after a certain number of fouls:
1 foul 2 fouls 3 fouls 4 fouls 5 fouls
lrb4 86,1% 50,2% 29,3% 17,1% 9,97%
lrb6 69,4% 48,2% 33,5% 23,3% 16,2%
Only from foul 3 on it is more likely in lrb6 to have nobody send- off and it does not become truely significant until the 5th foul. With the new assist tules in place and the weak DP, it is tough to get 5 quality fouls in in one half in lrb6. Not to mention than anybody in lrb4 could foul just as good as the DP in lrb6.
One of the strangest things I encounter on fumbbl is this zealous love for the eye. I never encountered this outside of this place. The eye was removed from the rules because it was an inefficient way of discouraging coaches from fouling. Once a player had more than 1 DP on the team, the eye ceased to have any impact on the strategy. The most dominant, logical strategy now is to foul every half until your DP is send off, eye or no eye.
In lrb4 it was not a good idea to return the favor, if you had less DP than your oponent on the field. You had to wait until the dp was send off which often did not happen until the 3rd or 4th foul or be agressive on the ball. In these situations it was never the eye that stopped the opponent from fouling, but your play. So in some way, the eye was actually protecting the fouler from retaliation. All the talk about the eye being highly strategic only surfaced here, when it was decided that fumbbl would move to lrb5. Mass fouling is still potent, but it is a subpar strategy. |
Interesting. However - you are treating fouling as it most commonly was used in LRB4. i.e. foul until your DP is gone. Now for teams that can afford the spares its just foul. Every turn. DP? Who needs DP? The total number of sendings off by the end of the first half will be rather lower than in LRB4. Some teams in LRB4 did this even, despite the higher ejection rate. The change to DP has made no difference here! The changed ejection rules have simply made it a more effective tactic.
As for the eye protecting the fouling team... pah. Generally one team is more suited to the foul-war than the other. So one team would be happier with neither side fouling. However, if both teams have a DP then at least the fouler team has to think a bit. Get their DP(s) sent off and its free reign to the other guy. The foulee team meanwhile has got the option to take the odd foul back if they like, so will be able to hit high value targets if they like, while slightly restricting the fouling of the oter guy. Yes, it doesn't stop fouling altogether. But it certainly makes it more of a choice than this system. If anything I'd rather that DP got better but so did the eye e.g. DP: +3 but foul with the eye = 2+ ejection. That way you really have to pick your fouls if the other team don't foul back. If both teams want a CAS-fest though it'll be like current LRB4 fouling but a bit bloodier |
_________________
Give a man a fire and he will be warm for the rest of the day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
PorkusMaximus
Joined: May 19, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 13:53 |
|
I've spent a lot of time fouling in LRB5/CRP and my personal experience is that while you are less likely to be sent off for consecutive fouling, the impact of those fouls is significantly lessened unless your opponent is allowing you free gang fouls. There is really no place for +3 dirty player when mb/po/(claw), a less effective apothecary, and +1 injury niggles already guarantee a potential blood bath on the pitch. |
|
|
tragedy4you
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 14:47 |
|
|
Catalyst32
Joined: Jul 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 15:17 |
|
| freak_in_a_frock wrote: | | It is all relative. If i brought my blodge, fend wood elves to the game it wouldn't seem quite so over powered |
omg... Blodge, Fend Elves are over powered too... 
omg... blanket AG4 is broken... |
|
|
Catalyst32
Joined: Jul 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 15:21 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | Lakrillo wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | pish
DP in 4.0 has the eye to make it ok. No eye in CRP makes things even more foul-friendly. |
Well... then how come that you in all your FFB-teams haven't had a single DP, while in all your current Ranked teams have at least one? |
DP is for fouling. My point was about fouling, not DP in isolation.
Because DP without fouling is like having a chicken strapped to your head. |
Fat chick bait? |
|
|
RC
Joined: Sep 22, 2005
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 15:23 |
|
I just get sent of on the first foul in fbb. And I am happy if it genrates a k.o. Its good that my vamp thrall don't mind sacrificing a game in order to get rid of a mino or suchlike for one drive |
_________________
"Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." |
|
Catalyst32
Joined: Jul 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 15:26 |
|
| RC wrote: | Old dp would have been fine.. it was the niggles/ageing that where broken in lrb4.
New claw combo doesnt matter so much since there is no ageing... but there is a suckier apoc.. so the conclusion is.. go play neccro or other regenerating teams |
omg... blanket Regeneration is broken... I can't kill or permanently injure these guys with Claw, MB, PO most of the time... |
|
|
freak_in_a_frock
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 15:26 |
|
Hmm not sure if you are agreeing wqith me or not Catalyst32, so forgive me if i took it wrong.
The point of my post is that ever combination of skills in FFB is countered by another selection of skills, therefore there are no OP skills. I will agree that some combos/skiills are better than others, but it is very much rock/scissors/paper now. For example, that wood elf team will be torn apart by block, tackle, mightblow teams. These in turn will probably get torn apart by the Claw/MB/piling on teams.
One day we will get a post on a chess forum on how over powered Knights are, seeing as you can't block them in. It is a typical gamer response to argue that a tactic that beats them is overpowered and should be removed, rather than chess logic that tells you to find a way to counter that game plan.
edit:- actually my sarcasm detector is a bit better now and i can see you were being just that. |
|
|
|
|
| |
New Gnones vs Old Gn...
Search
