Narrow Tier BB - 2012

[dode74]

nick - while such stats would be interesting, as I said before it is the potential which must be addressed. If people choose to limit the way they use it then that is up to them. I agree that AV7 is supposed to be less survivable, and it is. It still would be without changing anything since not every block against an AV9 player during the course of a league is using claw. I already posted the stats regarding the odds of breaking AVs here: viewtopic.php?p=632088#p632088

Here's my issue:
Under your proposed rules (no two skills used together):
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my BOB (for example). You use claw for 5/12 (so 8+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 2/12 (10+ required).
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my Wardancer (for example). You use MB for 7/12 (so 7+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 5/12 (8+ required).
Under the CURRENT rules:
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my BOB (for example). You use claw and MB for 7/12 (so 7+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 7/12 (7+ required).
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my Wardancer (for example). You use MB for 7/12 (so 7+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 7/12 (7+ required).
Under MY proposal (PO cannot use MB, but claw can combine with either one):
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my BOB (for example). You use claw and MB for 7/12 (so 7+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 5/12 (8+ required).
Your CPOMB player hits and pows my Wardancer (for example). You use MB for 7/12 (so 7+ is required) but DON'T break AV. Do you pile on? Your odds if you do are now 5/12 (8+ required).

Under your proposal the odds for the BOB are far better than the odds for the WD - many people wouldn't bother using PO with only a 2/12 chance to break AV, but might take a punt on 5/12 if the situation is right. Under the current rules the odds for both are the same, but high. Under my proposal the odds for the WD are the same as the odds for the BOB, but are also the same as the odds for the WD under your proposal. I think it's REALLY important that the relative survivability of the different AVs stays the same for the full combo - that is, after all, the point of claw: to be an AV-neutral attrition mechanic.

For casualty rolls our two mechanics would be identical, as only MB and PO come into play.

Your response to those stats was:

I don't care if the odds are better to break an av7 player. They should be. Elves have better odds to do other things. That's part of what balances the game out. The point should not be to normalize the effect of the skill so much as to bring it back towards balance.

As I stated above, that will remain the case because not every block is with claw.

[Oxynot]

So I am trudging through this interesting thread (on page 13 now, I believe). First off, I agree with the goal, if for no other reason than that I like Ogres and wished they did not suck that much. Ok, I agree with it in a general sense as well. I.e. keep up the good work!

But one suggestion popped into mind when reading through the endless suggestion on how to nerf Piling On, or the whole stack of Claw, Mighty Blow and Piling On. How much would it help or hurt things, if Piling On stayed as it is in the CRP except that you could only use it on a Block action?

It'd still be powerful, but you could make use of it much less than you can now. I mean, the Piling On player has to get up on the next turn and not use his skill, barring Jump Up and even then he might need help from pushing friends. My gut says there's some good in it, but the hour is late.

Also, give Mutation access ulfwereners on doubles, that team needs the help on high TVs and those players have long skill tracks already! Though I admit, I've suggested it already and it got shot down. I'll let it stew for a couple more years.

[plasmoid]

Hi Doubleskulls,
I was working on a big, thought clearing, stat-heavy post for Ryoth (and for myself, frankly), when you posted something interesting yourself. I've been mulling it over for a bit in my head, so I figured I'd better reply.
I'll post the other monster tomorrow

Anyway,

I do think the drop off in casualty rates from Piling On alone will be enough to lead to a reduction in the number of Dwarves and Orcs.

I'm really not sure about that. I don't think coaching dwarfs or orcs was ever about wholesale slaughter - they have their trademark slow, but reliable grinding game. Think about it - if you were just out to break stuff, you'd go straight to Chaos for that (in any edition)! Even without the amped up damage levels of CRP, Orcs and dwarfs can grind.
Contrary to you, I do not fear that Dwarfs and Orcs will become unpopular when Chaos can no longer beat them up as badly and efficiently as in CRP. If anything, based on my experience with the previous editions of BB, I'd be worried that orcs and dwarfs would become overly popular. In LRB4 they were pretty damn popular.

However Chaos aren't absolutely much worse at bashing (with PO to Av RR, CLPOMB still gets a casualty every 5th block instead of every 4th block) and relatively they have just got better than the other bashers.

I'm still not buying that relatively thing.
Sure, at exactly 2 bashy skills, Chaos will have a better combo.
But now they can either stay at the 2, and therefore not hit as hard, or go to the 3rd skill of the combo and be weaker than before.
Their bite will be weakened.

Besides: Chaos has always been better at bashing than everyone else. As I've said, in LRB4, The AV9 hitters did just fine, even though Chaos was still relatively more deadly. Damage levels were just lower then - or at least they were for AV9 victims.
And Chaos will be better, as long as claw stays in the game. It can't be helped!
And I don't think you'd go as far as to remove Claw, so we're stuck with that situation.

But, as you said:

(with PO to Av RR, CLPOMB still gets a casualty every 5th block instead of every 4th block)

You make it sound like that's nothing
Which is really what got me thinking:
If we're ever to make any progress, I suppose we have to figure out: What would be good damage levels for the game? How far could damage levels drop before this thing turns into SissyBowl? If we knew, what numbers we were shooting for, we might be able to create the skill to match.

Let's take the example you quote above. With 20 knockdowns, CRP CPOMB would not (roughly) 5 casualties and 7 KOs - 12 players off the pitch. With PO to AVRR you'd get 4 casualties and 5 KOs - 9 players off the pitch. I think that's a pretty significant drop!

I agree we need to be careful to keep the amount of blood spilled at the right level. I think that's too high for high TV teams right now, and we need to bring them down a bit - but that change needs to be consistent between claw and non-claw teams.

I agree completely. But to me keeping things consistent between claw and non-claw would mean not to fix this by fixing claw, as that would obviously only affect one of the sides.
It feels to me like you're not looking to maintain the current (im)balance between the sides, but rather you're trying to create a new balance(?)

But again, the above quote really begs the question: What would be the right ammount of blood spilled?

Cheers
Martin

[Chris]

But again, the above quote really begs the question: What would be the right ammount of blood spilled?

Well, somewhat trite but no one worries that much about losing rookies. And everyone likes to kill the opposing stars. What is most annoying is losing those 2 (or maybe 1) skill supporting players. I like seeing a turn over of stars, its great to bump off the enemies and though sad losing yours unless you have a true freak of dice rolling you can buid those players back up if there is a team to support them. Looking at Orcs my blitzers and other scorers tend to gather up the spp's. That isn't to say the black orcs don't progress, its just slower. Saying that I recognise once they hit 3+ skills they really need killing off by the opponent! But that 1-2 skill stage they spend the majority of their life at is pretty crucial tot he rest of the team. Having one, or maybe 2 as rookies after kills can be managed, but you can often find that with 2 or 3 rookie black orcs the other players aren't supported and the type of teams that will play you outside of a scheduled league will have a more balanced team.

So, tricky stuff, how to have the cake and eat it - keeping those infuriating slow to skill players skilled enough while bumping of the stars so teams can't get unduly dominant? Because of course, the best solution for a beastman with block, tackle, mb, po, claw and frenzy, is to kill the beast.

[dode74]

Two things we've discussed before, Chris, spring to mind:
1. Change MVP allocation (already in the rules as a possible house rule). Anything from a reroll to direct allocation would assist skilling up rookies.
2. Add the number of skills the player has taken to any casualty roll. For a Superstar you would add 5, so a roll of 36 (BH) would be 43 (MNG). The odds of -ST or better increase from 9/48 to 14/48 for such a player.

[DoubleSkulls]

I do think the drop off in casualty rates from Piling On alone will be enough to lead to a reduction in the number of Dwarves and Orcs.

I'm really not sure about that.

Now I'm getting confused about the objectives. I was under the impression a key measure would be to get fewer people to play bash and more to play hybrid or agility teams.

I'm still not buying that relatively thing.
Sure, at exactly 2 bashy skills, Chaos will have a better combo.
But now they can either stay at the 2, and therefore not hit as hard, or go to the 3rd skill of the combo and be weaker than before.
Their bite will be weakened.

I'm just trying to think like a coach who, as dode has shown, doesn't particularly like getting hurt and does like causing pain. It seems to me relativity is the key here - its not how tough/lethal you are, its how relatively tough/lethal. Everyone gets a bit tougher by turning down piling on, and teams dependent on it for inflicting damage relatively get worse compared to other teams. Chaos are effected by this, however because they've got Claw which still works as normal their relative ability to inflict damage is reduced by less - meaning that relatively their "score" gets better compared to all the other bash teams.

This isn't about making Chaos so much worse that CLPOMB isn't any better than POMB, but about ensuring that all the relative gap between the combos remains consistent. In particular POMB used to be better than CLMB, and now they are about the same, giving Chaos a key edge in the bash on bash match ups.

[plasmoid]

Hi Doubleskulls,

Now I'm getting confused about the objectives. I was under the impression a key measure would be to get fewer people to play bash and more to play hybrid or agility teams.

I said 'I'm really not sure about that' - meaning 'I'm not sure that would happen'. Not 'I don't want that to happen'.
But I don't think weakening PiOn will deter people from playing orcs or dwarfs at all.
IMO, Dwarfs and Orcs don't live by piling on. Or at least they don't have to - they have other excellent tactics to fall back on.
If anything, Dwarfs and Orcs will no longer have to fear annihilation by Chaos, and this will make them more popular. Yes, I know Chaos will gain a relative edge, but I think this ammounts to nothing compared to the absolute power that Chaos will be losing.
As I said, a cut by 25% (from 12 players lost to 9 players lost) looks very substantial to me.

For "evidence", such as it is, I'll quote LRB4 in FUMBBL.
As stated earlier, in high-TV play, the top 5 were (semi-random order) Chaos, Orcs, Dwarfs, Khemri and CDs.
So those teams with AV9 on the key positionals were doing fine.
This at a point where CPOMB against them was 38.5 (KO+)/18.3 (Cas)
And straight POMB was nowhere near as potent at fighting back.
So they got played, despite the relatively poor position they were in, because they weren't torn to shreds.

Still, Chaos was substantially more popular - which might be explained by the fact that FPOMB Chaos obliterated AV7 teams - with a CAS level substantially(!) higher than in CRP 59.7/34.4. That would also rather neatly explain why fragile teams - just like in CRP - aren't very popular at high-TV.

Now, from your opening question I get the sense that you were asking 'why nerf PiOn if it won't reduce the number of Dwarf and Chaos coaches?'
Because it will reduce the number of chaos teams (who rely on CPOMB as their main strategy). And because it will make the squishier teams more viable, and open up the metagame considerably.
As I said, I think it might increase the number of orc and dwarf teams. Fortunately I have small nerfs in place for both teams.

I'm just trying to think like a coach who, as dode has shown, doesn't particularly like getting hurt and does like causing pain.

I think these coaches more than anything are a product of the CRP meta-game: Hurting is just so darn easy, and not getting hurt easily is absolutely crucial in such an environment.
If the meta-game changes, then so does priorities.
Or as Hitonagashi said in another thread - people pick these teams to survive.

meaning that relatively their "score" gets better compared to all the other bash teams.

And I think having the highest bash "score" isn't game breaking, if that bash score (and hence impact on the game) has dropped quite a bit.

In particular POMB used to be better than CLMB, and now they are about the same, giving Chaos a key edge in the bash on bash match ups.

Agreed. But Chaos has always had the advantage in bash vs bash, if the other side was content to just trade blocks for 16 turns.
I think dwarfs and orcs have other strategies available to them, meaning that their team "power" will not drop as far as the "power" of POMB - they have other ways of winning, and if Orcs and Dwarfs are truly winning bu just POMBing away in CRP, then I think it is a perversion of what these teams are about.

So I don't think comparatively rocks at all. But yeah, if they do wish to stick to just 2 bash skills (CMB) for their bashing, where their advantage is the greatest, then, in 20 knockdowns (see above) they'll be down to just 3 KOs and 3 Cas. That's another substantial drop, and a damage level quite a bit lower than LRB4, where, as stated, AV9ers were doing fine.

So I think it is obvious that we see things differently, when it comes to the impact of changing PiOn and the importance of relative advantages.
But I'm still quite curious to know, what do you think would be good damage levels KO+/Straight-cas against AV9, AV8 and AV7/claw?
I'm not setting you up or anything, I genuinely want to know what you - and others - think would make for a metagame: I.e. not too harsh, but still curbing team growth.
For reference, CRP PiOn is: AV9 31.5/14.2 AV8: 45.0/20.5 AV7: 58.5/26.8

Cheers
Martin

[dines]

I've been trying to keep up with this fastgrowing thread and must say I agree with Plasmoid. Orcs and dwarves should be able to dish out some damage using mb, but mostly they are about outstrengthening the opponent with loads of guard (and ST4+ for orcs). If PO becomes weaker, they will survive longer at high TV, as their only current weakness is the cpomb combo. In LRB4 neither orcs nor dwarves loaded up on PO and did well, why should that change?

I hope to convince my tt buddies to use the NTBB ruleset in our next season, as I really like the majority of the proposed changes. I'd prefer the bank to hold 150k instead of the 100k so you can stash money enough for a key replacement player on any team. It's good that you moved the "no tackle effect" from right stuff to titchy, as I'd hate not being able to smash orc gobbos down, they are strong enough without the TTM one turn option. And repricing the wizard instead of removing lightning is also a good choice imo. I played CDs as underdogs in most of the games of two seasons and had great use of wizards (fireball all the way), you really get an edge against the bashy opponents even when you play bash yourself.

[DoubleSkulls]

What I was actually looking for was more of an additive effect from the skills, rather than a multiplicative (which is consistent with the increased TV of the player). So long as Claw is unchanged that doesn't happen.

Under LRB6, and roughly speaking Claw, Mighty Blow and Piling On alone are about twice as good as an otherwise unskilled player. Two of them is about four times as good and all 3 about 8 times as good. Fundamentally that's what makes the kill stack such good value and why people pick it - the fact the skills get better and better the more you have. There isn't any other combo with quite the same effect really. Generally speaking I think more skills on a single player should be less valuable, rather than more, because that encourages teams with even development rather than a few stars and rookies.

Anyway that would make the numbers work for any of the following:

• Piling On Av only, Mighty Blow cannot stack with Claw or Piling On.
• Piling On Inj only, Mighty Blow cannot stack with Claw or Piling On.
• Piling On +1/+1, Claw cannot stack with Mighty Blow or Piling On (but MB & PO can).

As I think you are aware I believe that the PO Av reroll will generate slightly worse numbers against Av9 than I've shown below because I've got piling on being used 100% of the time on armour and I don't think that's realistic.

Code: Select all

PO Av only, no stacking MB   (CLPOMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
8+   27.5%    20.2%    18.3%    28.4%   
7    34.3%    22.2%    19.2%    30.3%   
PO Inj only, No stacking MB   (CLPOMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
8+   10.1%    17.1%    14.5%    23.0%   
7    15.8%    23.7%    18.9%    30.7%   
Piling On +1/+1, No stacking Claw/MB   (CLPOMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
8+   11.6%    12.7%    17.4%    23.7%   
7    18.5%    17.8%    22.0%    30.9%  

CLMB - all the same since only PO is changing
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
8+   17.4%    12.7%    11.6%    17.9%   
7    27.1%    16.9%    14.4%    22.8%   

PO Av only, no stacking MB   (POMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
9    18.4%    11.5%     9.8%    15.6%   
8    26.4%    16.9%    14.5%    23.0%   
7    34.3%    22.2%    19.2%    30.3%   
PO Inj only, No stacking MB   (POMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
9     7.8%    11.2%     8.7%    14.3%   
8    11.5%    16.9%    13.3%    21.7%   
7    15.8%    23.7%    18.9%    30.7%   
Piling On +1/+1, No stacking Claw/MB   (POMB)
Av   St       KO       Cas      Score
9     9.3%     8.5%    10.0%    14.3%   
8    13.5%    12.7%    15.4%    21.8%   
7    18.5%    17.8%    22.0%    30.9%   

[Juriel]

This thread was a lot more interesting before it became just another ClawPOMB thread..

[DoubleSkulls]

It is the most interesting CLPOMB thread though...

[dode74]

The issue I have with ALL of those is that it changes the relative casualty rates between high and low AV teams in favour of the high AV teams. If our theory is correct this will precipitate a shift away from low AV to high AV as well as (possibly) away from Claw. That means Orcs and Dwarves (already two of the most popular teams) will become even more popular at the expense of (probably) Nurgle and Chaos.

[plasmoid]

Hi Dines,

I hope to convince my tt buddies to use the NTBB ruleset in our next season, as I really like the majority of the proposed changes.

I'm very glad to hear that you like (most of) the rules, and I'm positively thrilled that you might give them a go!
If you do, I hope you'll let me know how your group reacted to the rules both before and after trying them out.

I'd prefer the bank to hold 150k instead of the 100k so you can stash money enough for a key replacement player on any team.

In most cases with 100K + your winnings roll you can.
But I get the attraction of 150K, and really, it was a toss up between those 2 options. Had I gone with 150K, I would probably have lowered the SE starting point to 170. After all, those 2 rules are targetting the same thing.

It's good that you moved the "no tackle effect" from right stuff to titchy, as I'd hate not being able to smash orc gobbos down, they are strong enough without the TTM one turn option.

Indeed. Gobbos on the orc teams was one of the main reasons I gave it up.

And repricing the wizard instead of removing lightning is also a good choice imo. I played CDs as underdogs in most of the games of two seasons and had great use of wizards (fireball all the way), you really get an edge against the bashy opponents even when you play bash yourself.

Glad to hear it. And both Ian and Tom could stomach that better than getting rid of the Lightning Bolt, which was my original proposal.

Let me know if you decide to give the rules a go.
Cheers
Martin

[DoubleSkulls]

The issue I have with ALL of those is that it changes the relative casualty rates between high and low AV teams in favour of the high AV teams. If our theory is correct this will precipitate a shift away from low AV to high AV as well as (possibly) away from Claw. That means Orcs and Dwarves (already two of the most popular teams) will become even more popular at the expense of (probably) Nurgle and Chaos.

1. Dwarves and Orcs ( ) are already getting directly penalised.
2. The benefit I'm suggesting is to Av8 and above which means teams like Humans and High Elves benefit as much as Orcs or Dwarves do.
3. Orcs and Dwarves don't appear to be more popular than Chaos in most long term leagues, and if anything the opposite is true. So movement away from Chaos is a good thing.
4. Even if it does result in more Orcs & Dwarves, more punitive spiralling expenses make it harder for them to get very high.
5. It stops Claw having a greater effect the more kill skill you stack on top. Hence encouraging claw access teams to diversify their skill selection.
6. I'm only proposing an additional change to Claw, which is most easily available to 3 bash teams (Chaos, Chaos Dwarves & Nurgle) which makes their hitting power reduce proportionately to that already proposed for non-claw teams.

[dode74]

1. Not in survivability terms.
2. True.
3. The only data I have is for OCC. Chaos has 76 teams played 2065 games, Orcs have 118 teams played 2692 games. I can get aggregated data for OCC and UKBBL later.
4. The same is true for Chaos. In fact the lack of starting skills, greater options available, and more skills required to complete the "stack" should mean this hurts Chaos more than Orcs and Dwarves.
5. You could say the same about any change to a skill in the stack.
6. Yes, but the relative effect on AV7 teams may drive people away from them.