37 coaches online • Server time: 10:32
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
Garion



Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 19:46 Reply with quote Back to top

DukeTyrion wrote:


But in ranked, you can choose to avoid them.


In theory yes, but it is soooooo hard to get a game in ranked these days that you just have to take whatever min max rubbish you get a lot of the time.

_________________
Image
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 19:47 Reply with quote Back to top

Beerox wrote:
Depressing read.
This is prevalent in every fumbbl division. Gimmicky [L]eagues and all-regen teams are pretty much my last retreat, as I don't enjoy making teams like this or playing against them without regen.


There are hardly any teams like this running around stunty. Some high av teams like gnome and nurgle, but easy to click the no against them.

Ranked you can always put your team up and see what bites, not all teams are like this in ranked.

BRT isn't really doing much business as a supplier, I'm thinking about opening it's doors as an out and out league again, with open leagues that are found in chat. Teams there would definitely prevent this sort of team build.

And.........I have my doubts about how serious this topic was meant to be.
happygrue



Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 19:54 Reply with quote Back to top

I think there is some persisting confusion about what is "best". If your goal is to improve your game and/or to win as much as possible, then these min/maxed bash squads are not really the way to do it, unless you are cheesing zons at low TV, or really sniping undeveloped teams - then you can do this and win a very high percentage of games.

The real "advantage" of these teams is to narrow the amount of skill that can take part in the game and move it into more of a good dice => win, bad dice => loss area. It doesn't matter who you face with one of these teams, you have a chance to win against them using one simple tactic, so you are going to win some of those games against coaches might otherwise trash you a higher percentage of the time in a "fair fight". And if you're playing someone worse than you are, it's going to give you a good chance of beating them too. But are you winning more than 60-65% of games doing this at higher TV? Wouldn't you be winning that many games playing wood elves? Maybe a very few people are having better results, but I would wager that those people could do that with other teams as well.

If you really want a high win percentage, play the best races and strive to learn from your mistakes. People are using this strategy because it is easy to do fairly well. If all you want is a C+ or a B to pass the class then go for it. If you're looking for an A, then you're going to have a much easier time with wood elves.
Beerox



Joined: Feb 14, 2008

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:03 Reply with quote Back to top

Stunty or not, pitch removals are often the name of the game. Not much different from my experience. I suppose I'm talking about the way the game goes and not 11-man teams though.

But how does one build GS(M) access players in stunty? Let me count the ways...
Block
Tackle
Mighty Blow
Claw
Horns
(may need some doubles - Block Tackle MB will do)

or you could go
Tackle
Block
Mighty Blow
Piling On
Frenzy

if you are looking for something different :/

With just G access you go
Block
Tackle
MB (double)

or

Tackle
Block
MB (double)

anyhoo
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:11 Reply with quote Back to top

Now in the [L]eague division you can nerf the CPOMB if you wish and people have to find some other way. Mr. Green

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
PurpleChest



Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:19
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

It's the flat price of skills. For team development to rule once again, 3 skills on 3 players has to be cheaper than 3 skills on 1 player.

_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone
JackassRampant



Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:20 Reply with quote Back to top

See, I think the 11-man minmax team is just too much crapshoot. A bad first couple turns can give you total fits. I don't pick away from those teams any more than I pick on them. "Ugh, lots of POMB. Ooh, no bench!" You know how to deal with benchless POMB? Carry a man on the bench and take out two of his before he gets three of yours. Then he won't POMB so much.

As it happens, the answer to that game includes fighting fire with fire, so most smart coaches... carry a POMBer. This is not about TV minmaxing, it's simply one more arrow in the quiver. Paper-Scissors-Rock maintains itself at low-mid TV no problem.

_________________
Veni, Vidi, Risi
pythrr



Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:24 Reply with quote Back to top

yeah, but it is a crapshoot that improves your chances of winning on average.

so, as a one off game strategy, its a crapshoot

over the space of 20 games, it is a winning strategy

unless yr a noob. or smallman.

_________________
Image
Image
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 20:54 Reply with quote Back to top

JackassRampant wrote:

As it happens, the answer to that game includes fighting fire with fire, so most smart coaches... carry a POMBer. This is not about TV minmaxing, it's simply one more arrow in the quiver. Paper-Scissors-Rock maintains itself at low-mid TV no problem.


But if you're going to have a POMBer you may as well go the whole hog and have a CPOMBer. Wink

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
JackassRampant



Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 21:04 Reply with quote Back to top

Why? No teams with C-POMB lack for AV8 (or less) targets. Tackle + MB is at least as good an investment as Claw + MB, and if that doesn't hold when you add PO it's only barely.

_________________
Veni, Vidi, Risi
Garion



Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 21:28 Reply with quote Back to top

JackassRampant wrote:
Why? No teams with C-POMB lack for AV8 (or less) targets. Tackle + MB is at least as good an investment as Claw + MB, and if that doesn't hold when you add PO it's only barely.


sorry but that's just a load of balls.

_________________
Image
JackassRampant



Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 21:51 Reply with quote Back to top

ClawPOMB > TPOMB because of AV9 teams and because of spam value. TPOMB doesn't carry much spam value: six is only marginally better than two. CPOMB does carry such spam value, and what's worse, at the TV at which you can spam it it's supremely good against the teams that migrate to that value. As a one-off, as at mid-level TV, it's a little better for dealing damage and a little worse for stuffing carriers. My point on POMB is that non-Claw teams can play that game too (and with less effort), not that it's not better with Claw.

The problem with ClawPOMB isn't that it's over-powered. It's that 1) it's very good and specifically tailored against the mix of opposition it tends to meet in open perpetual environments, and 2) it's friendly to low-skill coaches but unfriendly to new teams (and hence new coaches, really only benefits the ones who have given up on the game). These are two critical design errors: the first one renders non-viable two of the most traditional rosters (absolute no-no in fantasy game design), while the second punishes both stalwarts and new blood in favor of the coaches with no sense of community (okay in some game design, but problematic in progression gaming).

_________________
Veni, Vidi, Risi
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 22:35 Reply with quote Back to top

JackassRampant wrote:
ClawPOMB > TPOMB because of AV9 teams and because of spam value. TPOMB doesn't carry much spam value: six is only marginally better than two. CPOMB does carry such spam value, and what's worse, at the TV at which you can spam it it's supremely good against the teams that migrate to that value. As a one-off, as at mid-level TV, it's a little better for dealing damage and a little worse for stuffing carriers. My point on POMB is that non-Claw teams can play that game too (and with less effort), not that it's not better with Claw.


From a box point of view CPOMB kicks TPOMB's ass. OnE TPOMB is often enough if you look after him. Two to be sure. But then, a CPOMBer can take tackle too.

There is no point saying that you play that game too if it is going to get you killed. Wink

JackassRampant wrote:

The problem with ClawPOMB isn't that it's over-powered. It's that 1) it's very good and specifically tailored against the mix of opposition it tends to meet in open perpetual environments, and 2) it's friendly to low-skill coaches but unfriendly to new teams (and hence new coaches, really only benefits the ones who have given up on the game). These are two critical design errors: the first one renders non-viable two of the most traditional rosters (absolute no-no in fantasy game design), while the second punishes both stalwarts and new blood in favor of the coaches with no sense of community (okay in some game design, but problematic in progression gaming).


The designers probably don't consider those 'errors'.
They didn't target these kind of leagues and these kind of leagues didn't offer them any data.

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
The_Provocateur



Joined: Sep 29, 2009

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 22:52 Reply with quote Back to top

Since we all know Min/Maxed, Low TV Clawpomb are hated, What is the general consensus on Min/Maxed, Low TV vampires? Very Happy
happygrue



Joined: Oct 15, 2010

Post   Posted: Sep 11, 2013 - 23:18 Reply with quote Back to top

The_Provocateur wrote:
Since we all know Min/Maxed, Low TV Clawpomb are hated, What is the general consensus on Min/Maxed, Low TV vampires? Very Happy


They suck. Razz
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