Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
 Posted:
Jan 27, 2018 - 09:34 |
 
|
Yea I also see it as a bash vs agile scale; not a triangle
The main output of any kind of analysis like this is about use of resources:
Like 'how many guys do I commit to the block war, vs how many guys do I need to use to secure the ball'
If the game is going well, you'll have enough guys to protect the ball and also can get 2 dice on all your potential blocking.
This applies for every team regardless of their playstyle/stats..
every team needs to secure the ball first and then do some blocks after that
In new BB2016 rules the attrition is less, and people can afford a bench. so bashing someone off the pitch is now much harder, compared to CRP rules.
So bash2win can't be just your sole activity. every team needs to prioritise the ball.
See Skullhunters for example, 2310tv chaos with a fair amount of killers but also several ball focused players, including +ag +ag chaos warrior https://fumbbl.com/p/team?id=838837
I'd guess in a typical game, one team has a 1 or 2 player advantage over the match. Games aren't generally long enough to bash the opponent to bits then win afterwards.
If you've got only a 2-man advantage in numbers, you still need to split your team and secure the ball first, then bash with some of the rest.
Some teams like dwarves will often go into contact not just for the blocks but mainly because they want to tie them up, as dwarves are so slow
Arguably, relative speed is the most important factor in determining playstyle. It definitely correlates with relative bashyness / agility |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2018 - 12:37 |
|
And i see it totally different way. Most drives starts as a war of attrition, and most drives ends as a dashing party. If there are 8 turns from the half, the effect of a player eliminated is much bigger if there are lets say only 2 turns left. Even agile and soft team could block, and cause damage. And frankly, they should try if there are 8 turns left.
Furthermore, speed, and agility can be transformed into bash. Lets say you have a GUARD on +AG player. You have a mobile guard, hence you can attack a mosh pit where it is best for you, then chainpush your way as you wish, or massblock the opponent. With speed, you can force the opponent to defend screens, hence spreading their players, so you have easier time to pick the player you want to attack. You can pick the weakest link (Armor and skill), and can even gangfoul conveniantly. So see, resources are transformable. |
_________________
 |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2018 - 14:37 |
|
A major concern in this equation is the coach, too. A hard-hitting coach with Humans produces more "force" than a finesse coach running Chaos.
Also, for me, what OP calls "force" is really two things: Aggro, and Control. An optimal "bash" team will do both, yes, and you can use one to establish the other, but they're fundamentally different elements of the game, and some teams do one or the other exclusively. Stymie teams don't necessarily do a lot of damage, and the good ol' LRB6 CPOMB strategy mostly isn't about keen positioning, or at least so goeth the stereotype. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2018 - 18:42 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | Aggro, and Control. |
You're missing Combo from MTG's triumvirate. It's a bit different than the usual one in BB - Bash, Agile, and Hybrid. A good MTG deck does what it does well. A good BB team does what it does well, and more.
I have a portable ontology somewhere. Will report tomorrow. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2018 - 19:59 |
|
|
AunoAdam
Joined: Apr 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 02:55 |
|
This is exactly the same line of thinking I want to develope. I miss more high level strategy documents, like the 1000 thousand plays guide. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 03:44 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | JackassRampant wrote: | | Aggro, and Control. |
You're missing Combo from MTG's triumvirate. It's a bit different than the usual one in BB - Bash, Agile, and Hybrid. A good MTG deck does what it does well. A good BB team does what it does well, and more.
I have a portable ontology somewhere. Will report tomorrow. |
No, it's not the same "aggro" and "control" because it's not the same game. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 04:38 |
|
| JackassRampant wrote: | | [No, it's not the same "aggro" and "control" because it's not the same game. |
Being able to aggro, control, and combo can be seen as the building blocks of *every* game where resource management is key. "Aggro" refers to the side that seeks the initiative, "control" refers to the reactive side which seeks to contain that initiative, and "combo" refers to the moment where the initiative gets transformed into a win. Just like all MTG deck can contain all of these aspects, all BB teams can too.
The most obvious candidate for a combo is the 10 MA one-turner. The most obvious candiate for control is a Nurgz tentacular spam team. The most obvious aggro team would be an Orc or a Necro cookie cutter.
The "need to attack" that describes Mike Flores in his article is isomorphic to what discovered Steinitz by looking at Morphy's Chess games:
- every advantage is temporary;
- the only way to seize an advantage is by attacking,
- if you don't attack, you will lose your advantage.
It adds to this basic principle of the struggle the idea that the strategy that works is relative to the mutual assets in play. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 13:00 |
|
Bbowl is different from Chess and MtG in the sense that there is a turn restriction. And i argue that one plays the 'clock' at least as much as one plays the race. In that sense if one masters the clock-management, and situational bbowl (shameless reference here to all Bill Bellichicks situational football quotes), then one will be at least semi capable with any team in bbowl. |
_________________
|
|
The_Great_Gobbo
Joined: Aug 04, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 14:51 |
|
Goblinz av a teem aspect circle, s'kalled dyin. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 18:13 |
|
What I'm saying, thoralf, is that my "aggro" doesn't exist in opposition to my "control": they're not two sides of the same coin, or two of three aspects.
Aggro: the degree to which you try to win by depleting your opponent's resources.
Control: the degree to which you try to win by controlling space.
There are other ways to win. Several, in fact, not just one. They're also not exclusive, by any means. You can use an early control game to go aggro when it starts paying off, and you can go aggro to establish control. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
gpope
Joined: Jun 04, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2018 - 18:40 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | To me ball handling is not very relevant. Like the profiles of teams at low TV are mostly going to resemble one another in terms of pickup probability, pass probability and catch probability with only a quarter of teams being on a 2+ for any of those rolls.
Also the ability to move the ball around the pitch only speaks to potential, not practical application of those abilities. Sure, you can do a lot of coocoo bananas stuff with elves but by and large their offenses aren't engaging in gratuitous passing as the gameplan. Yes you can utilize a game plan involving a lot of passing and hand offs but even a lot in FUMBBL terms is like 3 or 4 passes at the max and an average of 2 passes per game even if you're a passing aficionado like me.
This is just a critique within the system you are trying to build. I would love to explore alternative ideas but will refrain because I'm afraid of crapping up the thread with my own pet theories.
Edit: Also a straight up measure of team agility would be more informative than ball handling. |
An average of 2 passes per game is a lot when you consider that each one of those has a high probability to score a TD that could not otherwise be scored--sometimes even converting an opponent's likely TD into your own!
I do agree that overall agility is probably more relevant than ball handling specifically, though. There is a lot more difference between humans (best pure AG3 ballhandlers) and dark elves (worst pure AG4 ballhandlers) than there is within any of the agility tiers. Hell, there is more difference between humans/dark elves and mixed AG3/AG4 teams than there is within any AG tiers. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2018 - 05:33 |
|
| bghandras wrote: | | Bbowl is different from Chess and MtG in the sense that there is a turn restriction. And i argue that one plays the 'clock' at least as much as one plays the race. |
Both MTG and Chess are turn-based. Both Chess and MTG competitions use clocks. If you think that MTG has no Chewing the clock strategy, then you've never played against a Prison deck, say Stasis or MUD Stax. Experienced players will concede when they're locked down, as it gives them more time to win the next game.
In Chess, when you have no more time, you simply lose, so there are players who just learned to play really, really fast. In strategical terms, the clock applies too. Some call it the "Dorfman algorithm": the side who has the worse long term chances needs to create chaos on the board. If nothing happens, it will lose. Its opponent will try to make sure nothing happens. He will "run out the clock," so to speak. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2018 - 14:59 |
|
FYI - I played Stasis myself on tournaments. 
Also played in the Sensei's Divining Top era. It was actually something different. Players who wanted to be successful there, needed to learn to make decisions very fast.
I still stand by the statement what i voiced above, it is different game. One could make timely decisions. No matter how fast one plays in bbowl, the half still ends after turn8. |
_________________
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 30, 2018 - 07:47 |
|
I know you played Stasis, bg. We discussed this over Discord. I'm your DLE manager, and I'm trying to make you understand my point that time, whatever its form, is a resource like every other aspect of games, and strategies can be seen as ways to exploit those resources to one's advantage.
Let's continue this elsewhere. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
