Galak's LRB7 test rules coming to FUMMBL

[dsavillian]

https://fumbbl.com/modules.php?op=modlo ... =26&page=5

interesting read considering recent tone of the thread

[dode74]

here you go again," Galak said galak said". We are talking about the future of the game not the past.

At what point did he do that? All I saw was a reference to the required win%.

As for the testing of various skills within the context of an incorrect skillset I remind you of this:

I think the hard thing about discussing blood bowl is that the game is so complex that it is hard to talk about one issue in a bubble because so many things are inner [sic] twined and effect each other.

viewtopic.php?p=614190#p614190

dsavillian - interesting read

[cbbakke]

it is a complex game which is why it is why the threads have several issues going on at once.

That doesn't mean you cant discuss a topic, it just means you have to try to see the big picture of how things all play together. The bank rule has little effect on talking about the issue of damage skills stacking for example. Where the bank rule would have a far bigger effect if your talking about spiraling expenses.

Are you still using the win % based on MM games? I thought we agreed long ago those were a bad set of games to pull data from

[dode74]

it is a complex game which is why it is why the threads have several issues going on at once.

Agree.

The bank rule has little effect on talking about the issue of damage skills stacking for example.

Disagree. The bank rules will make it harder for high AV teams to recover from games where they have taken multiple casualties due to damage skills stacking. It won't have as great an effect on low AV teams as they always take lots of casualties and rarely have any cash anyway. Complex game, like you say

Are you still using the win % based on MM games? I thought we agreed long ago those were a bad set of games to pull data from

ALL of PC-based BB is a poor place to pull data from for the reasons stated. None of the leagues (which are better but still not great) have produced sufficient data (i.e. 4k+ games, although I'd prefer nearer 40k) for me to even bother putting together data. When producing stats for FOL I do try to note that they are FOL-only stats and not indicative of CRP BB. If, however, even the piss-poor context of badly-ruled TV-based MM is producing data that is in or close to the win% bracket then I think that is indicative of the robustness of the rules.

[koadah]

Are you still using the win % based on MM games? I thought we agreed long ago those were a bad set of games to pull data from

Nope. Galak didn't have that data as those leagues were not running at that time.

When the data was eventually run it just happened to match the data gathered from elsewhere.

That might partly explain why some people are more likely to listen to Galak than most of the other 'experts'.

[Darkson]

https://fumbbl.com/modules.php?op=modlo ... =26&page=5

interesting read considering recent tone of the thread

That's cos Mr. Goo is a very sensible person (if to tall).

[spubbbba]

I think cbbakke does make some valid points, unfortunately they tend to get lost in all the tedious arguing with dode74 (seriously guys, do us all a favour and book a hotel room and resolve your tensions that way).

If there ever was to be a lrb7 then I do think online play should be factored in, either to the main ruleset or a section devoted to TV based random match ups. Whilst the game was designed to be played in small tabletop leagues it has since evolved and between the various online versions there are over 2 million games played (maybe over 3). I am sure there are far more online games that TT ones played every day and many of those TT ones will be in tournaments which are filled with various house rules anyway.

Now Cyandie and FUMBBL are both pretty close to being fully lrb compliant over the next couple of years we will have access to a huge amount of data that can be broken down and analysed. I always had an issue with the data used to balance lrb6 as I felt the sample was a bit small and not detailed enough as it did not show the TV used or the races played against.

This would have been fine if it was used as a indicator, but sadly with such a small sample there were some aberrations. The horrible nerfing of Khemri for being too good at winning and the silly jump in Necros win rate from the insignificant 10K price drop to golems both spring to mind.

[Darkson]

I always had an issue with the data used to balance lrb6 as I felt the sample was a bit small and not detailed enough as it did not show the TV used or the races played against.

If you mean the data Plasmoid collated for the BBRC, it did and it did.


As for LRB7 taking notice of online gaming, I guess that depends on whether it's a GW-run update, or a community based one.
If the community do it, then sure, why not, as long as the "fixes" for TV-based MM are in the optional rules.
If GW do it, then it won't, because GW is all about selling figures, hence TT, and because GW know that online players don't buy miniatures ( ).

[koadah]

It's not so much about fixes for online gaming. More that online gives you a large amount of data that is fairly easy to access.

[cbbakke]

Are you still using the win % based on MM games? I thought we agreed long ago those were a bad set of games to pull data from

Nope. Galak didn't have that data as those leagues were not running at that time.

When the data was eventually run it just happened to match the data gathered from elsewhere.

That might partly explain why some people are more likely to listen to Galak than most of the other 'experts'.

Please lets not start back with the Galak hidden vault info. We have no access to that information so we cannot sort through the data to get information one way or the other so it is not helpful. My understanding is that the data that Dodes is speaking about is from (atleast in part) MM system.

[dode74]

When did I talk about data? Darkson did, I didn't, and I think he is referring to this -> http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/LRB6Stats.htm

I don't think that rejecting the Vault is useful at all. Just because we haven't seen it doesn't invalidate it, imo.

Koadah -

It's not so much about fixes for online gaming. More that online gives you a large amount of data that is fairly easy to access.

True, but it must be taken in context. Reams of TV-based MM play may not give the same data as lots of league play.

[cbbakke]

TV based MM is not a very good system to take data out of, can we agree on that?


The vault may have had some great data against my opinions, the problem remains that we cannot access it so continuing to revert back to the vault is useless for a conversation. It is like saying that "my uncle Larry knows everything about the topic so we could ask him but he is dead." Maybe Larry did have the answers but it doesn't matter since I have not yet figured out a way to speak to the dead.

[Darkson]

Do you bother to read what people say in reply to you? Dode even put the link in his post.

[garion]

unfortunately they tend to get lost in all the tedious arguing with dode74 (seriously guys, do us all a favour and book a hotel room and resolve your tensions that way).

x1,000,000

[dode74]

Do you bother to read what people say in reply to you? Dode even put the link in his post.

+1.