7 coaches online • Server time: 06:02
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Hard to find a gamegoto Post Worldcup practice le...goto Post feature request: pen...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 18:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine
I think Borak probably needs a rethinking about the value of his skill set, sneaky git, DP +2 would be great on a lineman stat line, but really on a strength 5, block, MB piece you are going to have to commit in most situations to using it as a blocking/roadblock piece or as a fouler. There is something to be said for the flexibility but is a 260K fouling piece ever better value then say a mercenary beastman with DP upgrade and a bribe and a babe?

I know the wizard math is intentionally very soft - but I think you could posit it by comparing it to other defined inducements. How does a wizard compare to say two mercenary loner human linemen. Or a bribe and merc lineman? If you think the wizard is equivalent to about X value in other inducements that's probably what the cost should be.

I don't understand the Fungus vs Fanatic comparison. Shouldn't the Fungus skills be +20K as selected primary?

On that note maybe one option for modeling is to use skills that make sense for that stars role as selected primary in terms of cost, and skills that really make no sense as random primary/secondary? Maybe that's what you are doing - though fungus doesn't appear to be costed that way and I couldn't find an explanation of skill cost on the first page of the thread (my apologies if I missed it.)
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 19:04 Reply with quote Back to top

Borak:
Slightly changed it. Made Lord of Chaos worth more (it's still equivalent to a random secondary, which I think matches its value) but made Sneaky Git worth less (random primary) because of its poor match with his stats. However, in general, he's priced similarly to a Deathroller, except he doesn't have secret weapon, and he has block. So I'm happy with where he is. Particularly when compared with Vorag.

Fungus vs Fanatic. I completely agree, but I really don't think Fungus is better than that. So I have a comment at the bottom about how Fanatics are bad, and what this really means is.. Fanatics are terrible, and should be considered bloat, unless they get random Block - only once they have that, can other skills/stats be considered worthwhile.

In GENERAL, I try to make skills based on primary/secondary compared to the role the player actually has. For most stars, this should make sense. Fungus (and Kreek) in particular are exceptions because of how wonky Ball and Chain is (-2d block removing them from the game makes ANY extra stats or skills really.. pointless). If you want to convince me differently about Fungus and/or Kreek, I'm open to that.

When I get to a point of not modifying this regularly, I'll try to put a skill cost explanation.

Wizard, IF, and I stress this a lot, IF people like the addition of the wizard, then I would like to add in similar entries for Kegs and Bribes (as the other most commonly used inducements). Mercenaries, compared to stars, are ALWAYS bad. Just straight up horrible. That doesn't mean mercs never get chosen, just they don't compare well to stars. They might still fill a role that a star simply can't fill, or you might have some reason you simply can't choose a star (league restrictions or maybe you already have 2 stars)


Last edited by Nelphine on Jan 05, 2023 - 15:54; edited 1 time in total
Lorebass



Joined: Jun 25, 2010

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 20:48
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

So how is this in comparison to the Mega stars and star tiers?
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 21:27 Reply with quote Back to top

Their mega star list has Deeproot (which is fine, he's the top star in my 2nd tier), and Kreek (I disagree, but meh). They don't have Cindy, but she's super new, so not surprising. Otherwise, my first group and the megastar list are the same.
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 21:40 Reply with quote Back to top

I get it you can 2 dice uphill on a fanatic and it's a play that may make more sense to better players. I don't see it a lot when I'm playing goblins people tend to dodge away or just hope it wanders off into a corner.

It sounds like you are making a judgement 'ball and chain players aren't intrinsically worth it' and then discounting the price of the skills on Fungus because of that judgement.
I think it would make more sense to say 'Fungus is a fanatic with the following upgrades and loner' and price it based on that. Maybe a fanatic isn't worth it (see the chainsaw discussion earlier IMO) but starting at the prices of the most comparable player is reasonable and assuming the coach built the player 'intelligently'.

I like fanatics the _most_ of the goblin secret weapons and mighty blow is the best primary skill for them. On a good day they get three blocks per turn (and on a bad day none!) Block would be great but in context of the fanatics home team is rare to find on any player and three dice no block is usually as good of a block dice as they are going to throw.

I think 'is this skill really worth it' comes in those odd skills like Borak note if you think sneaky git should be discounted shouldn't DP? Also you could model Borak as a deathroller -secret weapon -2 strength +block +sneaky git curious what that would get you instead of starting as a chaos warrior but the secret weapon math is tough to figure (as is DP +2).
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 21:44 Reply with quote Back to top

secret weapon, per other sources, is roughly 2/5 of the cost of the player. it's a bit messier than that, but its a good baseline. So the deathroller would be about 290, but it has a lot of extra skills, and doesn't have block. So, right in the same ball park as my Borak


I can modify fungus and kreek again (i was about to post about the Mega stars list saying either you include BOTH kreek and fungus, or you include neither of them). I dislike it, because Fungus ends up very close to Cindy, and Kreek ends up right near Griff, but I can do it.


The problem with the comparison to saw (or bomber) is that the saw stars are definitely overpriced, and poor on the pitch. Dropping their price would help. Bombers are definitely underpriced, and great on the pitch. Increasing their price would help.

Fungus is odd because he's in theory quite underpriced, but he's simply not that good on the pitch.

I'll await further discussion before I modify them to potentially both be in tier 1.
PurpleChest



Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 04, 2023 - 22:49
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

I enjoyed reading this list at the time, and again now.
it is thought provoking, and rationale testing, and it is never a bad idea to have a fresh metric to rank and judge things.

But the quest towards 'perfect' seems redundant. As alluded to in the original post, such an arbitrary sum does not take context into account. And Blood Bowl has a lot of context.

For every star hire, as well as this pure 'stats/skills for bucks' metric, i would be considering the strength of the opponent as a coach, their race, their likely experience with that race, and against my race, and any star i field. my team composition and what I lack, the plan i hope to enact, the plan i think my opponent might try to enact.

I could go on.

Accepting this state i am forced to conclude that this list is entertaining, informative, a great and useful tool to provoke thought and aid decision, but impossible to 'finally get right'.

_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 03:05 Reply with quote Back to top

To be clear, what I'd really like feedback on is a) do the 4 broad categories make sense? B) is including something like the wizard helpful, or should I remove it for being too much of a judgement, and c) is stating a conclusion like '0 to -10% seems ideal' helpful, for league commissioners, for tournament organizers, and generally for by hobbyist who wants to make their own stars?

Or are these concepts too grand, and simply cutting back would be better?
Carthage



Joined: Mar 18, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 05:49 Reply with quote Back to top

Love that you spent the time on this Nelphine! Pretty cool that you, more or less, managed to predict the "Mega Stars" with math.
Carthage



Joined: Mar 18, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 05:55 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine wrote:
Borak:
Slightly changed it. Made Lord of Chaos worth more (it's still equivalent to a random secondary, which I think matches its value) but made Sneaky Git worth less (random primary) because of its poor match with his stats. However, in general, he's priced similarly to a Deathroller, except he doesn't have secret weapon, and he has block. So I'm happy with where he is. Particularly when compared with Vorag.

Fungus vs Fanatic. I completely agree, but I really don't think Fungus is better than that. So I have a comment at the bottom about how Fanatics are bad, and what this really means is.. Fanatics are terrible, and should be considered bloat, unless they get random Block - only once they have that, can other skills/stats be considered worthwhile.

In GENERAL, I try to make skills based on primary/secondary compared to the role the player actually has. For most stars, this should make sense. Fungus (and Kreek) in particular are exceptions because of how wonky Ball and Chain is (-2d block removing them from the game makes ANY extra stats or skills really.. pointless). If you want to convince me differently about Fungus and/or Kreek, I'm open to that.

When I get to a point of not modifying this regularly, I'll try to put a skill cost explanation.

Wizard, IF, and I stress this a lot, IF people like the addition of the wizard, then I would like to add in similar entries for Kegs and Bribes (as the other most commonly used inducements). Mercenaries, compared to stars, are ALWAYS bad. Just straight up horrible.




Oooooh you that comment about merc's I dont necessarily agree for pretty much 1 particular case... Tackle. If your opponent has a lot of dodge and you have no tackle and lack access to a star with tackle that isn't prohibitively expensive (elves/undead) then Mercs are worth it to get it.
Normally wouldnt be pedantic but you did caps lock "Always" Smile
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 06:05 Reply with quote Back to top

sure, but.. take a chainsaw. every single team can. and a tackle merc is the same price as (or higher than!) a chainsaw. and while chainsaws are bad (and i agree, they are bad!), a loner with tackle and no block is even worse.

the main problem with taking a merc with tackle is.. you can't dodge with him reliably. so when it counts, he probably won't be available to actually hit their ball carrier. and hitting anything else, with just tackle, isn't super effective, even if it knocks them down. So, if you aren't likely to do anything effective anyway, take the chainsaw, and at least break their armour reliably!
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 12:51 Reply with quote Back to top

Merc with DP is in many situations well worth it. Some teams dependent on strength 4 players can make an argument for inducing a merc strength 4 player.
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 15:51 Reply with quote Back to top

oh i agree, there are times and places for mercs. just not in comparison to stars. but usually if you're making the choice, it's because stars can't be chosen for whatever reason. or because you NEED some role filled, and it doesn't matter what the cost is.
PurpleChest



Joined: Oct 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 20:17
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine wrote:
To be clear, what I'd really like feedback on is a) do the 4 broad categories make sense?


Yes

Quote:
B) is including something like the wizard helpful, or should I remove it for being too much of a judgement,


I feel it gives another 'argue point'' about your valuation. so to me it's noise. others ,may disagree.

Quote:
and c) is stating a conclusion like '0 to -10% seems ideal' helpful, for league commissioners, for tournament organizers, and generally for by hobbyist who wants to make their own stars?


Yeah, sure. but whatever you state people will draw their own conclusions. i see no harm in it, and as you say, gives people a benchmark to deviate from.

Quote:
Or are these concepts too grand, and simply cutting back would be better?


The list is fun, informative, informed, useful and relevant. I think that's great, but trying to push it through into a 'truth' or 'acknowledged basic knowledge' seems ambitious. There are simply too many variables and edge case scenarios it cannot cater to.

_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Jan 05, 2023 - 22:26 Reply with quote Back to top

PurpleChest wrote:

The list is fun, informative, informed, useful and relevant. I think that's great, but trying to push it through into a 'truth' or 'acknowledged basic knowledge' seems ambitious. There are simply too many variables and edge case scenarios it cannot cater to.


Agree with PC. It's great but mostly as fun.

Please don't take my comments as complaints just feedback on the analytic logic/math because that sort of stuff is my love.

A general critique that is common in wargaming discussions is a lot of mathematical precision in an analysis implies there is some analytic definitive truth. Or said another way a great deal of mathematical precision implies accuracy even if universal accuracy can't exist.

The complexity of Blood Bowl matchups by team, coach, TV, injuries, an overarching shifting meta etc make absolute accuracy on 'how good is this star' really impossible to define globally.

As an example Bomber is a bit underpriced and is certainly a favorite now of many players, he'd be perceived as less 'good' though if BB 2020 (and FUMBLL in particular) weren't fairly bash heavy and 2 turns scores were more common.

I would just caution on using your own underlying assumptions on utility of rostered players (fanatics, chainsaws) and just go with what the game thinks is 'fair' (rostered player cost) and then do your analysis off that.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic