What makes a good player?

[mattgslater]

What makes a good player?

Ma7, ST5 & Blodge!

I once played against a Human team that had a Blitzer with +ST, +ST, Break Tackle, Dodge, on an otherwise tough team. Man, that was hard. They ended up beating me 3-2 in OT.

[FischerKing]

Lots of wise things have been said in this debate allready, wanted to comment on some of them but I cannot get the quotes to stack so I will just shoot from the hip:

The best players are the players who finds the correct plan for every action, like in chess. I find the comparison to chess interesting, as I played that game before I started BB. I once read one guy saying that a great poker player would be a better BB player than a great chess player, and that didnt make a whole lot of sense to me at the time. Many bb games later though, its starting to ring true. In the field of BB, you cannot purely calculate your way to victory (chess players cant either as the perfekt game of chess havent yet been calculated, but calculation gets them very far) because the game situation changes constantly because of the dice. You have an overrall strategy, calculate things 2-3 turns ahead and asses the situations that might put you in, and then change the plan as the dice changes the game situation.
In poker that Im not very familier with, you will have to analyse the changing game situation again and again like in BB and then decide what to do on the basis of that analysis. You godda have a feeling for the odds like in BB, and you have to be reading and psyching your opponent like in BB.

The psychological factor of BB havent been described very much, and its hard to say something general about it as its something happening between two players at a table. But the important thing is, its there! Reading your opponents playing style and game plan, can be an important part of finding the right plan, like the poker player reading the cards. Having a psychological edge can be another important thing: If your opponent is scared of what you might pull off, he will be more likely to make a mistake, and if you dont feel very confident yourself, your heading down the road of your own defeat. If you give up and start playing like you dont care, at the first moment they dice is going heavily against you (like rolling double 1's in your offense and the opponent scores so your now down 0-2 at first halfs end) you dont leave Nuffle a chance to make it right again.

General rules of good coaching:
Play ultrasafe in offense and dont stall more than you have to (if your dwarfs vs woodelfs, you probably have to stall alot ofcourse). Bad dice will come! If it comes while your in the offense, you might loose the ball and the game. If it comes in your defense though, you just try again next turn! So score, play brilliant defense and let the preassure be on your opponent. Weigh the benefits of stalling vs the risk of being sacked at all times.

Take chances in Defense, thats were you might winn, but allways weigh the possible gains against the possible risks (a 5% chance of popping free the ball, getting it and scoring vs a big risk of loosing the wardancer might not be a brilliant plan)

Good possitioning! And that varies totally from turn to turn.

Hate loosing. Best coaches Ive played all hated loosing, dont just blame the dice when you loose, blame everything including yourself! Pinpoint your mistakes and get better. Be a good sport though

[cpatrol]

From an information point of view, Poker, BB and Chess are all different.

Poker has a random element(subsequent cards dealt), and asymmetric information, in that each player has access to different information (your own faced down cards)

BB has a random element(dice), but the information available to each coach is the same(what you see on the board)

Chess is a perfect information game. No randomness, and all information about the current state of the game is available on the chess board.

With this categorisation, I think the psychological part of the games only feature prominently in those with asymmetric (imperfect?) information, such as Poker or Bridge, where you want to read your opponents to gain information about their cards. Deception is viable then as you want to induce your opponent to make the wrong guesses.

I suppose in reality there is a psychological aspect of blood bowl, based on the fact that individual coaches are imperfect, and may choose a sub-optimal strategy due to the loss of their favourite player or be frustrated at the dice. Different coaches may notice different options as well, even though the same information is available on the board. Deception would then be carry out your plan subtlely, in a way that will make is less obvious to the opposing coach.

[cyagen]

I suppose in reality there is a psychological aspect of blood bowl, based on the fact that individual coaches are imperfect, and may choose a sub-optimal strategy due to the loss of their favourite player or be frustrated at the dice. Different coaches may notice different options as well, even though the same information is available on the board. Deception would then be carry out your plan subtlely, in a way that will make is less obvious to the opposing coach.

AN ECONOMIST!!!!!! RUN AWAY!!!! RUN AWAY!!!!



Nice analysis of the games by the way! I would say that in blood bowl, each players is trying to make the most of his imperfect information since only Nufle knows how the dices are gonna fall.

As for what makes a great player, in most games with dices I would say that it is the way one manages bad dices rolls. It is easy to win when Nuffle loves you but the great coaches manage to win or draw when he hates them.

[FischerKing]

Rid us from those

From an information point of view, Poker, BB and Chess are all different.

Poker has a random element(subsequent cards dealt), and asymmetric information, in that each player has access to different information (your own faced down cards)

BB has a random element(dice), but the information available to each coach is the same(what you see on the board)

Chess is a perfect information game. No randomness, and all information about the current state of the game is available on the chess board.

With this categorisation, I think the psychological part of the games only feature prominently in those with asymmetric (imperfect?) information, such as Poker or Bridge, where you want to read your opponents to gain information about their cards. Deception is viable then as you want to induce your opponent to make the wrong guesses.

I suppose in reality there is a psychological aspect of blood bowl, based on the fact that individual coaches are imperfect, and may choose a sub-optimal strategy due to the loss of their favourite player or be frustrated at the dice. Different coaches may notice different options as well, even though the same information is available on the board. Deception would then be carry out your plan subtlely, in a way that will make is less obvious to the opposing coach.

Thing is, in gaming reality chess isnt free from randomness, as nobody can calculate everything and you have to rely on your gut feeling once in a while and that creates randomness in chess too. Otherwise I more or less agree.

But my question was, what gaming skills would be most usefull for BB, chess or poker?

[mattgslater]

Backgammon.

You and your opponent have the same incomplete information. You have resources that you must manage, and the value of your resources changes semi-uncontrollably by their relative position as the game advances.

Even if you were a mind-reader, you wouldn't know your opponent's strategy with much certainty, in Backgammon because your opponent doesn't know his next move until his situation resolves (he rolls the dice), in BB for the same reason to some extent, but more because there's just too much to think about for one person to game multiple turns like they would in Chess.

Your approach to risk is huge in both games. In Backgammon, you need often to balance security vs. expediency, and I don't need to tell anyone here about risk management and Blood Bowl.

[mattgslater]

On the psychological aspect of BB, there are two factors that make it prominent in a way that it isn't in Chess.

1) Risk. A lot can go wrong, and a little mistake or a little bad luck can have huge repercussions. This is true in Chess (you can accidentally sacrifice your Queen -- been there, done that), but not as true (you can give up your Queen, but you can't give your opponent the equivalent of a few free turns after you do it).

2) Consequences. If your Queen gets taken, you know she'll be back for the next game and will still be able to move 7 squares. Moreover, if you get your butt kicked, you get embarrassed for 5-10 minutes and pick it up again, but if you get screwed in the opening drive of a BB game, it'll be as they say in football "a long three hours."

This is where the psychological component comes in. Unlike in Poker, it's pretty rare that you can bluff someone (cards, I guess), but you can certainly intimidate him with bad odds and an evil grin, and it can certainly drive an opponent into a suboptimal strategy.

[Warpstone]

On the psychological aspect of BB, there are two factors that make it prominent in a way that it isn't in Chess.

1) Body odour. A little can go a long way here too. It's hard to assess risk when you're trying not to breathe. Dwarf coaches are the worst...
2) Childishness. Seriously, it's the complete and utter twits that I have the hardest time with. When they tend to hinge their entire plan on trying to catch me on an illegal procedure, I find myself dying for the post-game on turn 2.

Tritex was right. A good player is someone I have fun playing against.

[stashman]

On the psychological aspect of BB, there are two factors that make it prominent in a way that it isn't in Chess.

1) Body odour. A little can go a long way here too. It's hard to assess risk when you're trying not to breathe. Dwarf coaches are the worst...
2) Childishness. Seriously, it's the complete and utter twits that I have the hardest time with. When they tend to hinge their entire plan on trying to catch me on an illegal procedure, I find myself dying for the post-game on turn 2.

Tritex was right. A good player is someone I have fun playing against.

First: Hahahahahahaha!!!! Possible the most fun post that I have ever read! I am glad that I never have hade this experience!

Second: I played one of the better coaches in our league in the final and he called Illegal Procedure! I lost a reroll for that turn and I think even that you are a good coach, winning by calling illegal procedure is LOW! Its a game of having fun, but some coaches in our leagues play for the WAC and its not that fun to play them as it is to play the more soft and laidback players.


One thing that I have experienced from a "not-so-good" coach was that when he played my wood elfs with his chaos, he started fouling out my one-turner and my ST4 Block & Dodge thrower! He took me by suprise and he usually DON'T foul. I was caught with my pants down and I tried to "revenge" the fouling but I got sented off and he won the game by 2-1.

After I said: - That was good playing skills. Suprising me and get me out of focus made me loose the game.

He answered: - Well, thats what you did with my wood elfs in the match against your undead. You taugth me to foul the weak and powerful.

Hahahahahaha. The apprentice become the master! Thats something that makes diffrence when you are used to play the same coach and he starts playing all diffrent style.

And a BIG PORTION of GUTS!!!! Do that crazy move, dare it and alot of times it will work, and the opponent just say: - Youre sooooo lucky! But if you do crazy things at the right moment and it works, the opponent coach probably get annoyed and maybe starts to loose his focus.

[cpatrol]

A good coach is one with a clean toilet.
A good player is one who make sures both parties have a good time.


-------

I think that one way of getting around extreme dice rolling is to forget about what happened prior to the current turn.

His thrower killing your wardancer and his troll passing the ball, shouldn't be taken differently from his troll killing your wardancer and his thrower passing the ball (that is if it wasn't down to his poor coaching that led to him needing to pass with his troll in the first place). As long as the board layout remains the same, you should be making the same decisions no matter how it got to that state.

[fen]

On the psychological aspect of BB, there are two factors that make it prominent in a way that it isn't in Chess.

1) Risk. A lot can go wrong, and a little mistake or a little bad luck can have huge repercussions. This is true in Chess (you can accidentally sacrifice your Queen -- been there, done that), but not as true (you can give up your Queen, but you can't give your opponent the equivalent of a few free turns after you do it).

2) Consequences. If your Queen gets taken, you know she'll be back for the next game and will still be able to move 7 squares. Moreover, if you get your butt kicked, you get embarrassed for 5-10 minutes and pick it up again, but if you get screwed in the opening drive of a BB game, it'll be as they say in football "a long three hours."

This is where the psychological component comes in. Unlike in Poker, it's pretty rare that you can bluff someone (cards, I guess), but you can certainly intimidate him with bad odds and an evil grin, and it can certainly drive an opponent into a suboptimal strategy.

You missed number 3, confidence. A confident attitude improves your chances of success, if you feel like you're going to win you're actually more likely to spot additional plays and options. When someone believes they're likely to lose, they miss seeing the whole picture and they start to think in a very narrow level of focus.
You can also get people to think this way by giving them assumptions to make. If they assume you're going to "Go after player X at all costs and foul him out of the game." You can at times convince their play to be more cautious with regards to player X. At other times you can convince them the wrong player is a problem with the way you act. Getting your opponent to lose sight of the big picture is quite a potent skil. It's all down to con[i/]fidence.

blah, blah to anyone who tries to cite overconfidence, that's a different thing entirely.

[DoubleSkulls]

I suppose in reality there is a psychological aspect of blood bowl, based on the fact that individual coaches are imperfect, and may choose a sub-optimal strategy due to the loss of their favourite player or be frustrated at the dice. Different coaches may notice different options as well, even though the same information is available on the board. Deception would then be carry out your plan subtlely, in a way that will make is less obvious to the opposing coach.

I think the psychology of BB is very interesting.

There is a "big match" aspect that affects many competitions where some coaches really play quite badly in "big matches" whilst doing well at other times. Sometimes the pressure just gets to you!

Also people can have psychological issues playing certain opponents. It might be fear of losing due to a poor past record or even something else e.g. rushing against a slow coach because you want to finish your turn asap.

Also there is that coaches will see the effectiveness of certain plays differently (regardless of the actual odds) and adjust their play accordingly (he always makes dodges so I won't bother marking etc).

From a risk perspective Texas Hold em in particular has a lot in common with BB because its a very luck affected game. Even a pair of aces is only about a 2/3 chance of winning heads up. Understanding the probablities of success and failure is a key ingredient to success. So the risk management strategies that make effective texas hold em players also tend to make effective BB coaches.

[BigD]

If odour is a problem for you then from my minimal experience BloodBowl isn't a problem. You should try attending a Magic: The Gathering Tournament, the gag reflect can be particularly hard to avoid. I attended one by accident as I was playing a Dreamblade Tournament in the same room and the stench was horrendous!

For me a good player, something I'd like to be myself is not only somebody who knows how to play and is good at playing the team he/she knows but is fun to play with and offers suggestions to encourage thinking and playing the game more.

I love the game but don't get much time to play hence going to a tournament where I get some snotty little 16 year old who talks his head of the entire time about a tonne of shite, plays badly and constantly quotes rules when its to his advantage is just annoying and offputting! I had this happen to me and it was the worst game I played. I lost but it wasn't my first for the day and wasn't my last but then I played a game against an Aussie who took me apart from a score point of view but I enjoyed the game, it was fun and I learnt from it!

BigD

[FischerKing]

I suppose in reality there is a psychological aspect of blood bowl, based on the fact that individual coaches are imperfect, and may choose a sub-optimal strategy due to the loss of their favourite player or be frustrated at the dice. Different coaches may notice different options as well, even though the same information is available on the board. Deception would then be carry out your plan subtlely, in a way that will make is less obvious to the opposing coach.

I think the psychology of BB is very interesting.

There is a "big match" aspect that affects many competitions where some coaches really play quite badly in "big matches" whilst doing well at other times. Sometimes the pressure just gets to you!

Also people can have psychological issues playing certain opponents. It might be fear of losing due to a poor past record or even something else e.g. rushing against a slow coach because you want to finish your turn asap.

Also there is that coaches will see the effectiveness of certain plays differently (regardless of the actual odds) and adjust their play accordingly (he always makes dodges so I won't bother marking etc).

From a risk perspective Texas Hold em in particular has a lot in common with BB because its a very luck affected game. Even a pair of aces is only about a 2/3 chance of winning heads up. Understanding the probablities of success and failure is a key ingredient to success. So the risk management strategies that make effective texas hold em players also tend to make effective BB coaches.

And Texas Hold em is some kind of poker right?

As you say, some players tend to looser their nerve in big games. I think every big league has a player who is just the eternal number 2: The player with the biggest most kickass team, who wipes out all opposition during the season, and then looses the final again and again and again. We had one in our league http://www.arosbb.dk with its offseason cup http://www.kyndes.bloodbowlleague.com/ were the same player managed to winn silver 7 or 9 times (mostly in the offseasoncup, but also one silver in the danish BB championship) and now another player tries to top that record, with 4 silvers so far, both players without ever winning a gold.

Thing with certain opponents is also true, there are players were you just know that you have the upper hand from the kickoff, and not because your team is the best.

Many of you agrees that a good bb coach is a coach who is funny to play against. Basicly I think thats bullshit. You can be a good coach and you can be a funny opponent, you can als be a good coach and a very boring opponent, or you could have a rotten personality and take yourself very seriously, but still be a good coach. Dont confuse the discussion by mixing the definitions.
If you discuss any other game or sport, nobody would make that argument as it would be considered silly. Just like that old hippie saying "its not about winning, its about participating" but then why play a game at all? The purpose of a game is to winn and it is in that process you are having fun, the purpose of fingerpainting or smoking joints in a circle is to participate.....and thats cool too though not the same

[Cramy]

Many of you agrees that a good bb coach is a coach who is funny to play against. Basicly I think thats bullshit. You can be a good coach and you can be a funny opponent, you can als be a good coach and a very boring opponent, or you could have a rotten personality and take yourself very seriously, but still be a good coach. Dont confuse the discussion by mixing the definitions.
If you discuss any other game or sport, nobody would make that argument as it would be considered silly. Just like that old hippie saying "its not about winning, its about participating" but then why play a game at all? The purpose of a game is to winn and it is in that process you are having fun, the purpose of fingerpainting or smoking joints in a circle is to participate.....and thats cool too though not the same

I think that you may have confused "fun" with "funny"?

I interpret the posts as people wanting to play fun coaches, not funny coaches. Fun means different things to different people. If you enjoyed the game, it was fun. It may or may not have been funny.