Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
 Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 21:19 |
 
|
Here is a list of problems with 'Team Value' with credits for each suggestion on the list.
The purpose?: For me, the game is more fun when teams are competitive; When not facing a substantial disadvantage before the kickoff. Evidently, as people choose to play certain races less commonly than others, that would imply their purpose of playing (which doesn't necessarily have to be fun) from playing those races is diminished, because of TV, TS or whatever pricing system (given this pricing system is used for inducement selection, and/or matching as in blackbox.) For me. the idealistic goal is to make all races competitively playable against one another at every TV or TS. Note this is idealistic, but that doesn't mean impossible, at least to move in a direction to it.
TS used a similar list to get a 'better' calculation of team strength/value than LRB4's TR:
https://fumbbl.com/help:Strength
A purpose of the following list could be used to apply a similar TS calculation to CRP's TV.
If you scroll past the list, their is another popular suggestion for a change of TV made by Purplechest and/or almic85.
Price of each skill is relative to the price of initial build players pricing (which is also arguably broken): https://fumbbl.com/help:CreateRoster
So when I write 'underpriced or 'overpriced' what is meant is that the value of that skill isn't incorporated fairly in to the TV price.
[HEAVILY] means it is heavily over or under priced relative to the others.
SKILL SPECIFIC:
TV UNDER priced;
- CPOMB (Claw, pile on, mighty blow). [HEAVILY]
- Ma10+sprint, on player combination [HEAVILY][Uedder]
- +AG and +ST combinations on the same player. [HEAVILY]
- Any roll(s) that create a situation where a player has ST+AG > 8 (especially 9+) i.e. ST5 AG4, ST4 AG4. [HEAVILY]
- >AG4+Leap+strip ball+wrestle/tackle [HEAVILY]
- Horns!
- Block on 'big guys' with high strength and Mighty blow.
- Block+dodge+sidestep/stand firm, one player combination. [Uedder]
- Jump up + piling on [Uedder]
- Guard
TV OVER priced;
- Pretty much every other skill unmentioned.
- Sneaky git [thorelf]
TEAM SPECIFIC:
TV UNDER priced;
- Tackle vs dodge teams. Particularly without Block.
- AG4+dodge vs non tackle teams.
- Block vs non block teams. (Amazon)
TV OVER priced;
- Each re roll bought after 3 re rolls (Vampires/blood lust teams exceptions).
- Benched players(given their value sits off the pitch for a lot of the game).
- Fan factor. [PurpleChest]
- Tackle vs NON dodge teams. [thoralf]
- Cheerleaders [Cavetroll]
- Assistant coaches [Cavetroll]
- <AV7 players are overpriced. Given they are more likely to spend time off the pitch than AV8 or AV9. [inspired by Wreckage]
- Most big guys for most teams because 'really stupid', 'bone head and 'wild animal' don't factor their price down enough.
- Blood lust does not factor price down enough.
OTHER
- Having skill(s) access i.e. G,A,P,S,M [Cyrus-Havoc]
- Single rolls and double rolls cost the same. [ArrestedDevelopment] then the double roll in itself becomes more of a factor of prominence on a specie specific team rather than extra cost.
- Tackle exists to neutralise Dodge with AG4 [fidius]. So split tackle/doge into components (Tackle/Clutch, Dodge/Deflect). Elves skill much slower. Dwarves keep Clutch only but their 2 Blitzers gain Tackle. Blitzer types would take Tackle and marker/Blocker types would take Clutch. Zons keep Deflect but lose Dodge (or v/v). Wardancers and Gutter Runners can still Dodge but lose Deflect so are suddenly not as protected.[fidius]
- Random skill rolls [Arktoris]
- Random mutations [JellyBelly]
Another suggestion of how to change TV, from [Purplechest & almic85] which I think deserves to be put here:
Written support for this stated from Garion, ArrestedDevelopment, JellyBelly, JackassRampant and Desultory.
"TV - Team Value: the value used now, with skills costing 2 (actually 20) TV.
TR - Team Rating: the old LRB4 value calculated on spp's. With progressive and varying costs for skills.
TS - Team Strength, a FUMBBL (Christer) invention used to pair teams (and tourneys) in LRB4 because TR was so utterly crap.
Skill 1: 1TV
Skill 2: 2TV
Skill 3: 3TV
Skill 4: 4TV
Skill 5: 5TV
Skill 6: 6TV
Double/MA/AV: 1TV
AG: 2TV
STR: 3TV
This wold make a legend 21TV+base cost.
Currently it is 12TV+base cost
LRB had it at 35TV+base cost and rising.
This would also drop the price for a single skill, making DP spam more attractive again. In general I would expect it to promote team building more while still making legends affordable in small numbers.
Of course I do not pretend this isn't massively in keeping with my feelings on one turning and clawpombing, both of which attract huge spp's and hence would be taxed somewhat under this system." |
Last edited by Desultory on %b %24, %2016 - %10:%Dec; edited 33 times in total |
|
Uedder
Joined: Aug 03, 2010
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 21:42 |
|
Block+dodge+sidestep/stand firm is under priced.
Jump up + piling on is under priced too.
Ma10+sprint is heavily underpriced. |
|
|
Azure
Joined: Jan 30, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 21:46 |
|
Bench players are overpriced...yup...please keep using teams with 11 players and no bench! My teams just love playing against them  |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
One turning and Clawpomb aside the answer is every skill after the first.
Because the problem is flat skill cost.
Oh, and FF. FF IS overpriced. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 22:37 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | One turning and Clawpomb aside the answer is every skill after the first.
Because the problem is flat skill cost.
Oh, and FF. FF IS overpriced. |
What have been some ideas tossed around for progressive skill costs? Or do you mean skills themselves having the same cost despite disparate utility? |
Last edited by mrt1212 on %b %02, %2016 - %22:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 22:42 |
|
What are we basing these judgements on? And when we say something is over priced or under priced, by how much and how do we know?
Clawpomb is a over costed vs Fend Wood Elves.
Clawpomb is deffo under costed vs Rookie Dwarfs.
When we speak about costs, shouldn't we also keep in mind that the skills and combos don't exist in a vacuum?
I'm not convinced about this project. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:16 |
|
Stunties should have their TV skill costs halved. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:17 |
|
I'm afraid of hijacking this thread with a greater "lets spitball some ways of adjusting skill cost" post. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:22 |
|
Tackle is underpriced against Zons.
Tackle is overpriced against Orcs.
Chaos S skills are underpriced except when playing against Chaos Pact.
Chaos Pact are underpriced even when playing Chaos.
Sneaky Git is overpriced. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:27 |
|
Your mama is underpriced. Like a Hobgoblin.
Seriously, I'm with Purple Chest. 3 skills should carry +10k, 4 skills +20k, 5 skills +30k. That's how I'd solve it. Oh, and fix Claw/MB. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor.
Last edited by JackassRampant on %b %02, %2016 - %23:%Sep; edited 1 time in total |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:28 |
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: |
Clawpomb is a over costed vs Fend Wood Elves.
|
How many Wood Elf teams do you see in the Box?
How many of them spam Fend?
If you don't have Fend on every player, Clawpomb can just focus the not-Fend players (clue: the majority of them). |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %02, %2016 - %23:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:28 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | | I'm afraid of hijacking this thread with a greater "lets spitball some ways of adjusting skill cost" post. |
Well, that is what it is, lets call a spade a spade.
Lets say CPOMB should cost when 'stacked' 200TV
Blodge should cost 150TV when stacked
MB/PO should cost 120TV when stacked
On and on we go with the most effective "stacks" we can come up with, trust me, the list is long.
Is the goal by having a TV penalty for "stacking' to reduce the # of those 'stacks' on a given team? Is it to give an incentive to take the secondary support skills to promote roster skill diversity?
This is all fools gold.
Oh, I could go on and on about this but it seems Pythrr stole my soap box and when I found it the box was destroyed and is now a thousand pieces of kindling wood.
DAMM YOU PYTHRRR!!!!!!!!!!! |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
ramchop
Joined: Oct 12, 2013
|
A 1 and a 6 both cost one dice roll. A 6 is vastly underpriced, a 1 is way overpriced. Something should be done about this immediately. |
|
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:37 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | One turning and Clawpomb aside the answer is every skill after the first.
Because the problem is flat skill cost.
|
Please explain further if you will.
'Flat skill cost' in regard to player skill combinations?
In which case this is my very early attempt at beginning a list to make it easier for someone else, or us as a community to solve that problem. |
|
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:39 |
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: | What are we basing these judgements on? And when we say something is over priced or under priced, by how much and how do we know?
When we speak about costs, shouldn't we also keep in mind that the skills and combos don't exist in a vacuum?
|
None of this can be assigned a definite value, and yet it has already been assigned a horribly basic definite value in the form of the current TV.
This is hopefully the beginnings of a list to allow someone or the community to improve upon that.
Or at the very least, it interesting to me.
If you have any 'realistic' disagreements with anything on the list i'll put it to a poll.
It's easy to be awkward, and keep problems the same. I am trying to be progressive. If that fails for whatever reason, I don't mind.
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: |
I'm not convinced about this project.
|
I haven't started it to 'convince' any one. Feel free to go away and NOT contribute. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
War Drums?
Search
