ben_awesome
Joined: May 11, 2016
|
 Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 01:50 |
 
|
The Communists are coming, they're worse than the warmists! Run, save yourselves! |
|
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 05:03 |
|
TWO FREE CARDS FOR RANKED AND BOX!
TWO FREE CARDS FOR LEAGUE!!
TWO FREE CARDS FOR sTUNTY!!!
TWO FREE CARDS FOR ALL GAMES!!!!
For the record, I just want the extra Pro on my Vamp teams. |
_________________
  |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 10:58 |
|
Actually we have a bunch of cards coded into the client that can be used as inducements in any R or B game. Thing is nobody uses them because they're hardly worth their 50k. AFAIK there aren't free cards in CRP or BB2016 as there were in Third Edition's Death Zone.
Maybe the most obviously anti-stalling ones aren't coded so they don't work as a tactical fear generator. |
_________________
 |
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:42 |
|
| Helloo wrote: | Harad, I didn't say people should be forced not to stall.
But, as it happens in my experience there is tacit and sometimes explicit agreement on some things outside the rules; for example I would say timing people out is generally held to be "bad" unless the player is consistently taking a long time and there is a warning. There is also something about concessions I have seen/heard. It seems to me that some people are not actually such moral relativists about BB as they would have us believe.
Another thing which occurs to me: suppose someones tries to stall, and it goes wrong somehow and so the game ends in a tie. I think then the would-be staller is naturally annoyed, because they feel like they had it in their hands to win and they threw it away. If they feel like that then it undermines the justification of the stall being fear of a 1-turn TD. If they genuinely feared a 1-turn TD then one would expect them to believe it still might well have ended in a tie. In this way a lot of the responses seem more like rationalisations than reasons to me. But people can do what they want, I never said otherwise. |
A good observation I think. |
|
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:44 |
|
What is RNG an abbreviation, and why is it always broken? Shoddy Chinese manufacturing? |
|
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:47 |
|
| Dalfort wrote: | Zhems... I saw this Blog and thought you may be interested.
Link
Especially as they have some new ideas since I was last involved. |
Thanks. |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:52 |
|
| Helloo wrote: | | Another thing which occurs to me: suppose someones tries to stall, and it goes wrong somehow and so the game ends in a tie. I think then the would-be staller is naturally annoyed, because they feel like they had it in their hands to win and they threw it away. If they feel like that then it undermines the justification of the stall being fear of a 1-turn TD. If they genuinely feared a 1-turn TD then one would expect them to believe it still might well have ended in a tie. In this way a lot of the responses seem more like rationalisations than reasons to me. |
Another thing which occurs to me: suppose someone decides not to stall, and this gives the other team plenty of time to score so the game ends in a tie. I think then the precocious scorer is naturally annoyed, because they feel like they had it in their hands to win and they threw it away. If they feel like that then it undermines the justification of the fast score being fear of a 3-turn drive. If they genuinely feared a 3-turn drive then one would expect them to believe it still might well have ended in a tie. In this way a lot of the responses seem more like rationalisations than reasons to me. |
_________________
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:54 |
|
| Zhems wrote: | | What is RNG an abbreviation, and why is it always broken? Shoddy Chinese manufacturing? |
Random Number Generator, the thing that rolls the dice. It is broken because of the loser bias.
We have a very good and robust RNG rolling our dice here. |
_________________
|
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 11:58 |
|
As an observation/advocation of not stalling; if you choose to play without using this tactic you are effectively giving yourself a handicap, rather like in golf. You are challenging yourself to play the best you can, to beat your opponents, at a disadvantage; so if/when you are successful you can feel even better about your win. And even congratulate yourself on a close fought loss, knowing you have chosen to 'do it the hard way'. |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 12:02 |
|
| Zhems wrote: | | As an observation/advocation of not stalling; if you choose to play without using this tactic you are effectively giving yourself a handicap, rather like in golf. You are challenging yourself to play the best you can, to beat your opponents, at a disadvantage; so if/when you are successful you can feel even better about your win. And even congratulate yourself on a close fought loss, knowing you have chosen to 'do it the hard way'. |
There are a few races that can easily get away with this, namely the faster and most agile (WE, PE, HE, Skaven). It is often a winning strategy for them too, but usually detrimental for team development since it makes them get more blocks along the game.
Then if you value winning 4-1 more than 1-0, this is the way to go.
Yet again, don't expect those mean dwarves to get along with a fast-paced game. Their legs are too short. |
_________________
|
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 12:08 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | Zhems wrote: | | What is RNG an abbreviation, and why is it always broken? Shoddy Chinese manufacturing? |
Random Number Generator, the thing that rolls the dice. It is broken because of the loser bias.
We have a very good and robust RNG rolling our dice here. |
We all know the Dice Gods care not for how well the code is designed or how square your dice may be! They are capricious and cannot be placated easily. Offerings of blood and alcohol must be given regularly or you loose Their favour. |
|
|
Zhems
Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 12:18 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | Zhems wrote: | | As an observation/advocation of not stalling; if you choose to play without using this tactic you are effectively giving yourself a handicap, rather like in golf. You are challenging yourself to play the best you can, to beat your opponents, at a disadvantage; so if/when you are successful you can feel even better about your win. And even congratulate yourself on a close fought loss, knowing you have chosen to 'do it the hard way'. |
There are a few races that can easily get away with this, namely the faster and most agile (WE, PE, HE, Skaven). It is often a winning strategy for them too, but usually detrimental for team development since it makes them get more blocks along the game.
Then if you value winning 4-1 more than 1-0, this is the way to go.
Yet again, don't expect those mean dwarves to get along with a fast-paced game. Their legs are too short. |
I am talking about using teams in the middle ground like Humans, or when playing against high speed/agility teams.
Also, the point is about the feeling of achievement in doing things in a more challenging way. |
|
|
Harad
Joined: May 11, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 12:56 |
|
| Zhems wrote: | | As an observation/advocation of not stalling; if you choose to play without using this tactic you are effectively giving yourself a handicap, rather like in golf. You are challenging yourself to play the best you can, to beat your opponents, at a disadvantage; so if/when you are successful you can feel even better about your win. And even congratulate yourself on a close fought loss, knowing you have chosen to 'do it the hard way'. |
I don't think it's a great mechanism for handicapping oneself. That's what halfings are for.
Some of the better coaches have already hinted at or touched upon this but chosen not to go into it for the difficulty of convincing those with a little less experience, so wish me luck:
To a good coach there is little difference (note there is a difference, it's just not as large as less experienced coaches will think) between stalling at one end or managing their pace so that they arrive at the endzone in turn 8. So in their mind they are, if playing a fast race for example, stalling in every turn after turn 1 in almost every game they play.
If you truly insisted on not stalling you are really saying, you must score as quickly as you can without rolling unnecessary dice. And even that is hard to self police as one would create situations where you could argue there is more risk in driving towards the line in this turn. But don't get caught up on this part. The important thing is that, for good players, the whole drive is essentially a stall in most cases.
It would be a handicap of sorts but it's saying, I will play the best I can on defence but on offence I will always choose a suboptimal move (as an aside the best tactic on defence would often become to allow your opponent to score, forcing them to do so quickly, meaning that you had the time yourself to score and I assure you this would be much duller than stalling).
Imagine a game of football where you defended as well as you possibly could but every time you got the ball you shot instantly from wherever you were. It's good practice for defending and it's a handicap but it's such a mindless handicap that I suspect both sides would start to wish that the handicap wasn't in place to make the game more interesting.
The reason that I keep returning to play games is that due to the complexity they are endlessly challenging. I think simplifying attacking in this way would greatly reduce the complexity and challenge and make the game far less interesting.
Now I agree that there are occasions where, in the spectrum of stalling almost everyone would agree that the fun of the game would be better served by the team scoring so that we can get on and play another drive because the options of even trying to stop the stall are so low and the balance of the rest of the game would be interesting. These happen extremely rarely in my experience, maybe 1 in 100 games. Less experienced coaches will likely think they encounter this far more often because they may not be doing all they can to counter the stall or present risks when the opposition do score.
If you want a handicap play halfings (or try and stop the stall). |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
I actually ran into this issue last night in tabletop. I struggled to stall. I did one turn, could easily have done 2 but just scored instead. It makes a big difference psychologically seeing and being faced with your opponent. I even said that, if playing online, I'd stall for another 2 or 1 or 2 turns. My opponent made no attempt to stop the stall, instead just making meaningless blocks on the halfway line.
Maybe the issue is less about stalling and more about the expectation of your opponent within a given community. In tabletop I care more about my opponent's fun than I do online. We we chatting, we'd got a pizza and a brew, and he's a close friend. In that situation I felt it'd be more fun to give him 3 turns to try and score in return. Yeah, it was risky but in the end it didn't affect the game (this time).
I think it also depends a lot on the skill level of the opponent. I probably wouldn't stall against Zhems seeing that he hadn't won a game here yet. But then again that's why my W/L record isn't so hot. I've been bitten by not stalling a number of times. |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Jun 30, 2017 - 13:26 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | Actually we have a bunch of cards coded into the client that can be used as inducements in any R or B game. Thing is nobody uses them because they're hardly worth their 50k. AFAIK there aren't free cards in CRP or BB2016 as there were in Third Edition's Death Zone.
Maybe the most obviously anti-stalling ones aren't coded so they don't work as a tactical fear generator. |
This isn't quite right. And by not quite right, I mean it's mostly wrong.
First of all, plenty of people take cards. A dirty trick is quite often worth more than one babe, especially if you get illegal sub, pit trap or custard pie. Greased shoes and kicking boots can be absolutely great in some match-ups (either added to a solid setup can end a one turn), and blatant foul can give you a solid shot at removing a key player.
The magic cards aren't quite up there, but still have strong uses in certain matchups and people write them off far too readily. Force shield for instance is quite handy to fish for if you're up against leaping strip ballers with no sure hands (and if you fail to get it, the gloves of holding will do the same job with some negatives attached).
With the advent of the new rules on inducements, cards have gone up in use (like stars), because plenty of the teams who have cash lying around don't get much value out of a single babe (dwarfs, chaos dwarfs, necro, undead etc).
Lastly, unlike CRP, the core rules for BB2016 do involve a card drawing stage based on TV of participants, and actually include a lot of the old cards that would make some people think twice about playing never mind stalling. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
