ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
 Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 12:06 |
 
|
| juck101 wrote: | | On the BB2 client you purchase stadiums which negate some of the kick offs. But I dont think I often anyone do that and find it a winning choice. Im not certain fo the meta enough but I dont think removing riot or throw a rock makes much difference |
It's enough of a change that anti-riot is almost an auto-take in their regular season for bash, and stadiums have been debated endlessly - including for their playoffs.
Almost every single player who qualifies for their playoffs has a stadium or had one during regular season, and then tailors it in playoffs if home team.
It's broken. I'll see if i can get one of the "bb2 lads" who've crossed over to comment further. |
_________________
 |
|
Frowny
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 13:35 |
|
I think most of you are missing my point.
My problem is that the kick-off events, either though FAME or through favoring the defense actively favor the winning player,
I am totally OK with randomness, but not OK with systematic bias in a board game.
How would people feel about chess, if the person who played more started with an extra pawn?
FAME rewards the team that has played more (thus being stronger for players.). I'm talking about games 1-5 mind you) and the kick-off events
For example, throw a rock (which there was a lot of discussion about) could simply be random instead of giving +1 to the team with the better record.
This last game, my opponent had played more games, and had the FAME advantage. He won the FAME roll with a +1, and my thrower got hit with a rock on a roll of 3-4.
Unlucky? Yes! Interesting to play down a player and have to adjust your strategy? Sometimes, yes. Biased in the favor of the team that has played more, ALSO YES.
It is hidden behind a veneer of randomness, but it is there nonetheless |
|
|
D_Arquebus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 13:38 |
|
@MattDakka - I guess I don't consider losing even a strong player in a mirror match in Turn 0 (the most extreme sample we can think of, naturally  ) as "ruining a game".
Still plenty to play for in that match. And fun to be had doing it. 
@Frowny - the assumption that the Kicking team is "winning" is false. 1st and 2nd Half kicks are independent of such consideration
Also, encouraging teams to play more, even if not directly relatable to necessarily having the higher FF, is surely a good thing? It also plays to the narrative of coaching a successful sporting team with rowdy fan following. I'll take a pinch of unfavourable conditions early in a teams development to increase the interconnected fluff and rules that supports the flavour of the game |
_________________
TT Bloodbowl in AUS (FB)
NZ BB Community on FB |
|
stej
Joined: Jan 05, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 13:46 |
|
The FAME thing is thematic though. Bigger team, bigger crowds etc. |
|
|
Harad
Joined: May 11, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 13:48 |
|
It’s interesting, I tend to see the rules (at least as we implement them in terms of match making) as having a small bias against the stronger player. The stronger player is ‘rewarded’ with additional fan factor which leads to them being matched with generally stronger teams. Give a competent player a choice between TV in fan factor and TV in other skills and they will choose the TV in other skills.
As to the other point, I would, absent the criteria of needing to score, never score. It gives the other player the initiative back, enables them to have fiat blocks etc.
So, it’s interesting that we see the same factors but come to quite different conclusions. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 13:51 |
|
Even if you have the FAME it's not guaranteed you will not get the rock.
Rock could be thrown against the team with more FAME (it's D6 + FAME, not 1D3 + FAME) or against both teams.
And that leads to another thing I think it should be changed, Fan Factor price:
it should be 5,000 per Fan Factor point, not 10,000 or, alternatively, 10,000 per FF point but only a D6 is rolled to calculate the number of fans, not 2D6. Rolling 2D6 reduces the importance of the Fan Factor.
If the TV of my team is increased by FF, I want it to have an impact of the game, or at least, not to suffer some Kick-Off Events. |
|
|
Frowny
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 14:03 |
|
@D_Arquebus The kicking teams IS winning is a true assumption. It is true that both teams will get 1 roll on the table each (for the half kickoffs) But after that, yes the team with more points IS getting more rolls on it. And the events are much stronger for defense.
Also @everyone, please stop offering me match reviews. This is not about getting better. I will keep doing that on my own. This is about poor game design hidden in a vaguely random table.
You could use the table in different ways. For example, it used to give more money at the end yes? That might be still interesting and would be neutral on-pitch. Or just give an extra reroll to both teams, rather than the one with the higher FAME.
You could even make it HELP newer teams, for example, adding event where a lonely devoted fan tackles (But doesn't injury) a single player on the winning team. Now it would be a challenge for high-level players to keep their FAME and keep their win streaks. It would also give another aspect of team management, trying to not have too much fame and make yourself too much of a target. I think expert players would enjoy that aspect of management much more than the current fan-cheerleader thing that seems mostly to be a trap. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 14:06 |
|
| Frowny wrote: | I think most of you are missing my point.
My problem is that the kick-off events, either though FAME or through favoring the defense actively favor the winning player,
I am totally OK with randomness, but not OK with systematic bias in a board game.
How would people feel about chess, if the person who played more started with an extra pawn?
FAME rewards the team that has played more (thus being stronger for players.). I'm talking about games 1-5 mind you) and the kick-off events
For example, throw a rock (which there was a lot of discussion about) could simply be random instead of giving +1 to the team with the better record.
This last game, my opponent had played more games, and had the FAME advantage. He won the FAME roll with a +1, and my thrower got hit with a rock on a roll of 3-4.
Unlucky? Yes! Interesting to play down a player and have to adjust your strategy? Sometimes, yes. Biased in the favor of the team that has played more, ALSO YES.
It is hidden behind a veneer of randomness, but it is there nonetheless |
But it's not.
FAME is not as clear cut as you make it - FF gain is not fixed, a team can easily win all its games and have the same or less FF than a team that drew all its games if unlucky on the FF rolls post-match.
You can also just flat out buy FF at roster creation if you wish.
In addition, FAME is not solely addressed by FF - yes you stand a greater chance of winning it with higher FF, but that's all it is - I lose it all the time with a better record in games 1-5 and further on.
Most of the complaints the majority of people have on throw a rock is that you still have a very good chance of being rocked even when you win FAME - each point of FAME over your opponent only decreases the odds you take an inj roll by 16%, while increasing the odds opponent is rolling by 14% - this sounds like a lot, but in practice, without +2, it's really not.
The "kicking team is winning" is a false proposition btw. KOE roll from t1h1. And the vast majority of proper play dictates 1/2-0 or 2-1. |
_________________
|
|
D_Arquebus
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 14:29 |
|
@Frowny - the losing team can be kicking the ball as well was my point, or even just a team on equal point . Some % of a majority of Kicks will perhaps be by the currently winning team, but not all of them. That is possibly beside the point anyway.
The core game massively favours receiving team. The Kick off table has a swing (for a very few results) to the kicking team. This was discussed up thread by myself, JanMattys and others. If it did not, then the game would be much more predictable and become a somewhat tedious exercise in clock watching... the variance delivered by the Kick Off slightly and in some cases giving the Kicker back some momentum keeps the game interesting and fresh. And critically, less "predictable"
It is not poor design. It is quite clever and well thought through design. Which has even been adjusted several times to get to this level, which is much more conservative than the Kick Off table I played with for many years
Not sure that will change your mind, but some reading may find something useful in there.
Peace, and hopefully we get a chance to play sometime if you hang around o/ |
_________________
TT Bloodbowl in AUS (FB)
NZ BB Community on FB |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 15:28 |
|
| Frowny wrote: |
Also @everyone, please stop offering me match reviews. This is not about getting better. I will keep doing that on my own. This is about poor game design hidden in a vaguely random table. |
Blood Bowl implements the greatest possible game design.
They simply say that "the commissioner's word is law".
If the commissioner decides (probably after consultation with their coaches) that any rule is crap, they can remove it or change it however they wish.
Feel free to petition the site owner for more league options. The option to ignore the kick-off table doesn't sound like that big a change. Though people who don't look after the system often think that.
A lot of people like it exactly as it is. Except maybe the sweltering heat.
some may like the option of an even crazier kick-off table.
It sounds as though you are getting the match review offers because people have looked at your games and decided that you are not setting up correctly. i.e. You are complaining about bad game design because you don't yet know how to play the game properly.
Or you may just be Matt light. 
If so, you'll still be moaning in 15 years time. But I kind of think that if you are still playing after four and half thousand games, it can't really be that bad.
Though, to be fair... I was an infamous CPOMB whiner. In some ways, it was a little disappointing when they nerfed it leaving nothing much to really whine about. 
I have to content myself by making feature requests.
Go on, give it a try.  |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 15:31 |
|
|
Seany18
Joined: Mar 12, 2016
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 15:38 |
|
You don't get FAME from winning. Winning more games gives you a higher chance of getting fan factor (the team with the best record doesn't necessarily have the highest fan factor) which gives you a higher chance of getting FAME which gives you a small benefit on some KOEs and as AD showed it's surprisingly few.
To add to this fan factor (ff) costs 10k tv. If your opponent has 5 more ff than you then that is equivalent to an extra player for most teams or a couple of skills without being nearly as valuable (I would drop ff on some of my teams if I had the choice).
KOEs create a chance to come back into a game where there isn't one. Without KOEs what can go wrong for a better coach choosing offence? How are you going to stop an 8 turn drive that will start with a guarantee of 3 blocks on the los and a higher chance of a safe ball early? You say that worse coaches are more negatively effected by KOEs because they are on defence more. The only scenario this is true for is if you conceded a TD on your offence so unless you conceded off of a blitz! it is not the KOE at fault (and after you score to narrow the margin from 2 TDs to 1 you are going to need the chance of a KOE in your favour).
As for stadiums in BB2 they are no great fix to stopping KOEs. They are a way for some races to try and minimise events that effect them most e.g. stop weather changes for lizards/ khemri or stop riots for bash. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 16:38 |
|
As an aside, I think that 8 turns per half could be too many.
I'd like to try 7 turns per half (or maybe 6 too but it could be too few for teams like Tomb Kings and Dwarfs).
That would encourage a bit the passing game and would make defence vs the stalling bash teams a bit easier. |
|
|
Lasgalen
Joined: Jun 30, 2018
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 17:44 |
|
If we remove the most impacting events of randomness what can we blame then for our losses?
I mean it's half of the fun not seeing our mistakes and blame dice/randomness/Zeus/nuffle. |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2020 - 17:48 |
|
We can Blake Zeus???? Why did nobody tell me! |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
