Need ideas for nerfing dwarfs - round 3: Poll

[Joemanji]

Those are LRB5 stats right? Not LRB6.

[SillySod]

Joe has been a bundle of nerves ever since he found out we were losing on purpose

[Pink Horror]

Oh, I don't like the idea of pushing teams up and down the ladder based on stats like that...

You want to give the Humans and Skaven 5% bumps? Stop letting beginners choose them. Should team balance be based on an average at all? I'm more concerned with what the teams do in the right hands.

[plasmoid]

Yes, those are LRB5 stats.
I would have used LRB6 stats if I had them.
I used the stats as a gauge to see which teams are likely to be the top teams and bottom teams.

Now, if the LRB6 tweaks changes this dramatically, then I'm sure that coaches will not use this resource to find buffs for teams that they don't think need buffing, nor nerfs for teams that they don't think need nerfing. So it's really a self correcting system

SillySod said

Joe has been a bundle of nerves ever since he found out we were losing on purpose

I take it you're a khemri coach then

Cheers
Martin

[plasmoid]

Pink Horror said:

Oh, I don't like the idea of pushing teams up and down the ladder based on stats like that...

Everybody - This is the house rules section, remember?
I used the stats as a gauge to figure out which teams were most likely to have someone looking for buffs or nerfs. Nothing more.

I could have done threads for all the 27 teams, but I figured it would be sickeningly repetitive, not to mention probably a waste of time. And it would detract attention from the teams that I did focus on.

But I will go on record and say that IMO halflings, gobbos, ogres, vampires, new khemri and (to a lesser extent) humans are among the least scary teams in the hands of a good coach. And that undead, wood elfs and dwarfs are among the very best in the hands of a good coach.

If I was in a tournament or reasonably short league against ace coaches, and put money on the guys playing wood elf, undead and dwarfs. Not on the dude with the ogres.

Cheers
Martin

[voyagers_uk]

I figured it would be sickeningly repetitive

I actually believed you had a league in mind when you started this process.

I guess that you didn't need to base this on statistics at all and you could have just said

Hypothetical league requiring nerfs for the following teams....X; X; X; X; & X

we would probably have been more objective and less objectional.

Your objective, and forgive me if I am still missing the point, is to provide a guide of acceptable Nerfs/Buffs to the masses in case they feel they need them for their own house leagues....

I do have a bit of a problem with anything provided to teh masses by anyone I respect in the BB Community... it tends to stick where it is thrown and leads to others campaigning for it to be made official.

thus I think that we should have maybe a sub-section of house rules for these threads to be dumped to and looked at specifically by those who care.

Your motives were no doubt pure Martin and your willingness to take this on is admirable, but because it was you I think it will do more damage than good.

[Pink Horror]

Everybody - This is the house rules section, remember?
I used the stats as a gauge to figure out which teams were most likely to have someone looking for buffs or nerfs. Nothing more.

I just made one general comment. I'm all for helping someone who wants to tweak the teams. I think, though, it you're looking to nerf or buff (I hate all the terms that cam from MMORPGs...) you should take the simple options that are guaranteed to work. Avoid the possibility of going the other way. Over the years, I've learned that balance is nebulous and a little stubborn. The core of a team decides these things, and perception has as much to do with it as the skills and prices. The Dwarfs have this solid base of AV, Block and Tackle that makes them who they are. Little tweaks are going to get blown away by that unstoppable force. And if you do something drastic, you're not working with the Dwarf team any more.

For instance, people make a big deal out of 4 AG PLAYERS! Like a 75% shot at most of your former rolls (3+ to 4+) is going to ruin the team. The balance is much sturdier than that. I should dig up one of my old league rosters, a friend's team. He decided to start scoring with Slayers one day, usually as hand-off recipients, sometimes as kick returners. It worked just fine. Yes, there were some turnovers, but they can do their job. I got a TD a week ago by recovering the ball with a slayer and handing to a blitzer. Anyway, I have a warning: make the dwarves worse at handling the ball, and you're asking them to focus more on killing your team. And they'll still do alright with the ball.

I say +10k on two things, because the simplest way to nerf them is make them carry 40k - 80k of extra team value. Dwarves benefit hugely from min/maxing (like Wood Elves). No player really has a deep discount or any broken combos. But as a whole, the team doesn't carry a lot of fat.

[plasmoid]

Hi voyagers_uk and Pink Horror,
thanks for your replies. I'm less frustrated now

Voyagers said:

I guess that you didn't need to base this on statistics at all and you could have just said Hypothetical league requiring nerfs for the following teams....X; X; X; X; & X

I did try to indicate that with my intro text - talking about leagues etc. I guess I wasn't overly succesful

The reason I went with statistics over plain discussion is a preference of mine that has made me the butt of a lot of jokes here on TBB, but:
In a discussion thread, you're lucky to get 10 people in on the discussion, and usually the most aggressive and persistent ones will scare off the others eventually.
With a poll, everyone gets their say - even the ones that have an opnion, but don't like to get slammed for it. And currently, the halfling poll has feedback from 40+ people. No way they'd ever have bothered to reply in a discussion.

I also trust polls. There are a few options on some of these polls that I'd consider very bad ideas myself. I trust that such options will lose out once a lot of votes come in. Or maybe they don't, in which case it just might be me who is wrong

I do have a bit of a problem with anything provided to teh masses by anyone I respect in the BB Community... it tends to stick where it is thrown and leads to others campaigning for it to be made official.

Heh. Thanks for the respect - I think you'll find it's not universally shared
My thinking was this: Campaigning is over.
(BTW I think I've been fairly up front about campaigning in the past).
LRB6 is almost locked down, with very specific items yet open for debate.
So, anyone who'd like to see a team tweak is out of luck. For a very long time.
That's why I thought a list of house rules would be a good idea.

And even if someone did like this so much that they'd start campaigning, they'd:
a) have to wait a very long time for anything to happen. 5+ years for LRB7.
b) then they'd have to go through discussion here and elsewhere, no doubt getting a good taste of what the majority thinks of the ideas
c) Convince the BBRC - which is highly unlikely - especially considering that I trust the BBRC to see that these polls did not ask "do you think that X team needs to be changed"

thus I think that we should have maybe a sub-section of house rules for these threads to be dumped to and looked at specifically by those who care.

My idea was to ask the general public once all the polls are up. Once the activity has died down, I'd do one summarizing post. Getting it stickied if I was lucky. The rest could then sink to the bottom.
Kind of like the threads I did way way back "make your new skill suggestions here".

Pink Horror said:

Over the years, I've learned that balance is nebulous and a little stubborn.

Agreed.

And if you do something drastic, you're not working with the Dwarf team any more.

Also true. But I've seen a few things that I liked here

you should take the simple options that are guaranteed to work. Avoid the possibility of going the other way.

I know. I ought to. But sometimes coolness also factors in.
For example, in the gobbos poll, I like the thought of a squig or 2 a lot more than just adding +1 troll or making rerolls cheaper.

That being said, I've seen a fair few suggestions on these threads that did get so complex that I'm not sure if they'd be moving the team in the right direction.
I trust the polls to whittle down that stuff

Cheers
Martin

[plasmoid]

Thanks for your feedback.

I'll be going to the poll in a few days, so by all means, please pick your favourites from the first post.

Cheers
Martin

[Joemanji]

Yes, those are LRB5 stats.
I would have used LRB6 stats if I had them.
I used the stats as a gauge to see which teams are likely to be the top teams and bottom teams.

Hi Martin,

See this is my problem with this whole endeavour. You are trying to provide nerfs for Dwarfs etc based on the presumption that LRB6 didn't go far enough. But you have no data to support that conclusion, because it hasn't been gathered yet. When it has, and if Dwarfs are still winning "too much" then fine, this thread theoretically has a purpose. But for all we know the LRB6 changes have gone too far. So some of these threads are jumping the gun, and I consider that dangerous. To be strongly implying that Dwarfs etc need a further nerf, when in fact they might need to go the other way.

P.S. I respect you too. Your posts are intelligent and rational, a rarity on TBB. I just disagree with you.

[Joemanji]

PS - I am really looking forward to the PC game being released because of the data it will gather. I probably won't play it. But I really hope the win ratios etc are presented online. That amount of data will be conclusive IMO.

[Grumbledook]

taken with a pinch of salt as there will be a limited selection of races

and the open format of games lets you avoid certain races like fumbbl

I think the fumbbl LRB5 client data from scheduled leagues will be the best

[Joemanji]

Yeah course, you'll have to select leagues that don't allow cherry picking.

Good point on the limited races though.

[plasmoid]

Hi Joe,
like I said, it's a self correcting system, since nobody will be looking for house rule ideas on how to nerf dwarfs if nobody playing LRB6 have the experience that they're too much.

I just don't see the harm.
This thread is not for providing experimental rules for LRB7 (2014?).
This a thread for providing ideas for house rules.

We discuss a lot on TBB that doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of becoming official.
But we still do it

(oh, and as for the secret agenda - yes, I'm totally calm now - my favourites aren't really winning a lot of the polls, so this is not a clever way to push my own house rules).

Cheers mate
Martin

[Digger Goreman]

1c and 3c....