Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
 Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:42 |
 
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | 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?
Because if you don't have Fend on every player, Clawpomb can just focus the not-Fend players (clue: the majority of them). |
We could get into the whole play ground arguments of "if you do that, I do this" back and forth. Which will be fun for a reply or two (maybe).
Or we can just accept the fact that the nature of Box will serve us a shit sandwich from time to time. It's the price we pay for the convenience of the scheduler. And then get on with the game. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:52 |
|
| PainState wrote: |
On and on we go with the most effective "stacks" we can come up with, trust me, the list is long.
|
I'm not convinced the list is that long. But let's see.
It's not like we are going through every permutation of skill in the book. The majority of skills are unused. |
|
|
The_Great_Gobbo
Joined: Aug 04, 2014
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:57 |
|
der REAL problem wiv tv iz dat yew pay attenshun tew it |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2016 - 23:58 |
|
| PainState wrote: | Lets say CPOMB should cost when 'stacked' 200TV
Blodge should cost 150TV when stacked
MB/PO should cost 120TV when stacked |
Why? |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:06 |
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: |
We could get into the whole play ground arguments of "if you do that, I do this" back and forth. Which will be fun for a reply or two (maybe).
Or we can just accept the fact that the nature of Box will serve us a shit sandwich from time to time. It's the price we pay for the convenience of the scheduler. And then get on with the game. |
Or we could adopt a more accurate TV calculation for the Box, like TS during LRB4. |
|
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:12 |
|
reducing the tv cost of the bench would resolve a lot of issues. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:21 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | PainState wrote: | Lets say CPOMB should cost when 'stacked' 200TV
Blodge should cost 150TV when stacked
MB/PO should cost 120TV when stacked |
Why? |
Because of this
| PainState wrote: | | 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? |
Lets not forget our FUMBBL history lesson of the day.
When Box Version 1.0 was around, Christer changed the TS formula to make it more costly to take DP and other 'stacks', Christer in his hubris thought this would change the dynamic of Box version 1.0....fast forward to Christer sitting in a bar taking shots of whiskey, drowning in his realization that his grand plan resulted in Box version 1.0 reduced to a desert waste land filled with Khemri teams with 9 DP on them.
As Christer was dragged out of the bar in a drunken rage one night this quote was heard.
"Iam serious!!! Double the TS cost of DP and no one will take it any more!!! What? Triple the cost? YES!! TRIPLE THE TS COST OF DP and it will be vanquished from Blood Bowl."
 |
_________________
Comish of the: 
Last edited by PainState on %b %03, %2016 - %00:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:23 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
Or we could adopt a more accurate TV calculation for the Box, like TS during LRB4. |
Please don't debate with the few people that seem to be averse to change.
Regarding TS:
https://fumbbl.com/help:Strength
It used 'stacks' to calculate value; some of which have been listed in this threads list. I find that encouraging.
This TS formula could be used, and part or all of this threads list could be utilised with it instead of the old list containing:
- Block and Dodge.
- If the player has a skill that modifies armour roll in addition to Razor Sharp Claws add 1 to the player value.
- Pass and Throw Team Mate and there is at least one player on the team with Right Stuff add 1 to the player value.
- If the player has Sprint and MA 10, add 3 to the player value. For higher MA, the one-turner effect is already taken into account in the movement array above.
- If the player has ST<3 and AG<3, remove the effect of one skill (reduce Cumulative by 0.5 and subtract [2+Cumulative] from the player value) and reduce player value by 4 (so in total reduce by [6+Cumulative]).
- If the player has ST>3 and MA>5, add 2 points to the player value. |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:26 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | Because of this |
Then follows non-numbers to justify numbers. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 00:33 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | | PainState wrote: | | Because of this |
Then follows non-numbers to justify numbers. |
Ah, sir, my follow up retort had no numbers in it just 2 questions. No attempt at justification was made. Since the idea of inflated TV cost of 'stacks' is totally subjective and speculative.
What is not subjective or speculative is what happened to Black Box Version 1.0 when this exact practice of inflating TS costs for 'stacks' and skills took place and it DIED.
Conclusion?
Messing with TV/TS/TR will not solve the problem, in fact, it just might cause more problems. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
Desultory
Joined: Jun 24, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 01:00 |
|
| PainState wrote: |
Messing with TV/TS/TR will not solve the problem, in fact, it just might cause more problems. |
This argument is such a logical fallacy.
You are using the argument; that once upon a time a mistake was made that caused problems. So now we should change nothing because it could cause problems.
But you are ignoring the fact that TV is a problem now, and at least I think most people agree. Christer even 'agreed' in the GLN.
And that problem could be potentially fixed, from a much more experienced and informative place than the days of black box version 1.
Really nothing would improve if every one had this attitude, and sadly a lot of people do.
I don't know if some coaches stand to lose something by a TV change. Maybe that is their real problem. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 01:10 |
|
| Desultory wrote: | | PainState wrote: |
Messing with TV/TS/TR will not solve the problem, in fact, it just might cause more problems. |
This argument is such a logical fallacy. |
I would like to point out to the masses that I was not making a argument but a conclusion I laid out in previous posts.
**Side Note**
For those readers who only take serious logical responses to heart.
** Foot Note **
I amended by initial response due to the fact that FUMBBL is not a place for political statements and so forth, even though my points where spot on and totally backed up by 50+ years of results. |
_________________
Comish of the:
Last edited by PainState on %b %03, %2016 - %01:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 01:22 |
|
| Desultory wrote: | Really nothing would improve if every one had this attitude, and sadly a lot of people do.
I don't know if some coaches stand to lose something by a TV change. Maybe that is their real problem. |
Maybe psychologizing in the middle or at the end of an argument is fallacious too.
Just maybe.
Please continue not to care about otters' feelings. You probably won't like them anyway.
***
Let's cut to the chase:
(0) This Nerf All Combos is a generalization of Nerf CPOMB, which means it'll sooner or later inherit all its problems;
(1) Our theorizing depends upon how we conceive Fumbbl's divisions, which means we'll get into "B!," "no R!," "L all menz!" slug fest in a matter of a few pages;
(2) It might be best to test all this theorizing before getting a set of rules just for the fun of it, because Jervis;
(3) Changes won't be vetted unless the NAF does, because reasons.
That said, I'd like to see some numbers, for I'm interested in theorizing. |
Last edited by thoralf on %b %08, %2016 - %15:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
Cavetroll
Joined: Jan 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 01:26 |
|
I don't think it's a good idea to get into basing TV on what opponent your are facing (i.e. Tackle being underpriced vs. Zons but overpriced vs a non-dodge opponent). That's just the risk you run when you take any skill that has a counter or is sometimes just dead weight (i.e. Claw vs. a mostly AV7 team).
However, since we're pretending we can actually change things I did like PC's suggestion of a flat fee on all skills past the first. I would just suggest it should start on the 3rd rather than the 2nd - +10 for each skill starting at the 3rd skill. So a Legend under this system would cost an additional +40 TV. Alternatively, you could start at the 4th skill but make it a geometric progression - +10 on 4th, +20 on 5th and +30 on 6th. A Legend under this system would cost an additional +60 TV. I'd be ok with either system.
I also agree that something needs to be done to FF. For that matter, I'd like to see Assistant Coaches and Cheerleaders used more, so lump them in here too.
One thing to consider with making changes to the TV, or creating a new TS, is how it would impact inducements. |
_________________
nerf indigo 2016 |
|
Traul
Joined: Jun 09, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 03, 2016 - 02:05 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | One turning and Clawpomb aside the answer is every skill after the first.
Because the problem is flat skill cost. |
This. A linear skill cost makes legends more valuable than spread-out skills, skills more valuable than a bench, amazon linewomen with block more efficient than blitzers, enables min-maxed teams with legends at TV 100,...
In LRB4 TR, a legend would cost 35+ TR points (plus base player cost). In CRP, it is only 12 TV.
To implement a quadratic skill cost together with the differentiated +trait costs, one could track it separately:
Player cost = Base cost + skill cost + XP cost
XP cost:
-Rookie: 0
-Experienced: 10000
-Veteran: 30000
-Emerging Star: 60000
-Star: 100000
-Super Star: 150000
-Legend: 210000 |
Last edited by Traul on %b %03, %2016 - %02:%Sep; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
