Tweaking teams after LRB6

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
roughly 6 months ago, I started a 10 thread project looking for tweak suggestions for the most obviously strong or weak teams. The suggestions were meant as inspiration for any league wanting to buff or nerf teams post LRB6.

All tweaks were designed by committee, so it was a bit cumbersome, and perhaps some obvious ideas were missed. In short, ideas were collected and then a shortlist was compiled, containing only suggestions supported by a few people more than the original poster. Finally, a poll was held between the ideas on the shortlist. It is probably worth noting that some of the discussion was a bit tentative, because not all posters believed that the LRB5 power teams needed any more nerfing beyond LRB5+- but now we have some stats on both the nerfs and buffs, and the strong teams are still very strong, and the weak ones weak.

The most popular ideas were:
Ogres: +1MA for snotlings (for free)
Gobbos: 0-2 Squigs. (Statline could be: 90K AS 5438 frenzy, leap, wild animal, no hands)
Halflings: +1AV for halflings (for free)
Vampires: Thick skull for thralls (for free)
Khemri: Decay off the Guardians + Thick Skull on Blitzras/Throras (for free)
Humans: AV+ on human catchers (for free)
Chaos: Thick skull on beastmen (for free)

Wood Elfs: No Treeman. (Wardancers lose dodge skill, 110K)
Undead: Zombies gain decay (and become 0-2 with ST-access)
Dwarfs: Slayers replace block with juggernaut. (Blockers become 80K 0-2, new lineman = old blockers without Block)

Cheers
Martin

Oh, PS, the old threads can be found here:
Gobbos: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27277
Ogres: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27408
Vamps: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27349
Chaos: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27516
Khemri: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27515
Humans: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27446
Halfs: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27157

Dwarfs: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27558
Undead: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27564
WoodEs: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27591

[plasmoid]

Right. Personally, I'd love for BB to have 2 tiers rather than 4.
To that end, I think the above changes didn't go quite for enough - either that, or they were cludgey/patchey as a result of the design process. Now that we have some stats for team performance in LRB5+, it is clear that the top teams could take a pretty big nerf and the bottom teams could take a pretty big buff, without turning the power hierarchy upside down.

So, here are my own suggestions for the tweaking these teams, (except I've removed the chaos buff and added an orc buff). The suggested nerfs are pretty rough, and I'm sure that lovers of these species would protest. But seriously, IMO, coaches of these teams are super spoiled, and ought to just suck it up.

Ogres: +1AV for snotlings (for free). Ogre price reduced to 130K
Gobbos: 0-3 trolls.
Halflings: AV8 for halflings (40K)
Vampires: Thick skull for thralls (for free)
Khemri: Decay off the Guardians + Thick Skull on Blitzras/Throras (for free)
Humans: AV+ on human catchers for 80K, blitzers 80K, ogres 130K.
On the Ogre team the MA+ idea was very neat, but IMO Ogres are simply too vulnerable to opponents targetting the snots.

Dwarfs: Slayers and Linemen lose Block but gain Wrestle.
Undead: Ghouls lose dodge but gain fend
(IMO, the problem with undead is their easy early access to 4 blodgers)
Wood Elfs: Lose Treeman. wardancers lose Dodge (110K) - as above.
Orcs: Lose throwers. Gobbos reduced to 0-2.

Cheers
Martin

[Joemanji]

Absolute nonsense. Just bitter people trying to destroy the power teams ... they'd just be replaced by a new "best". Dwarfs lose Block?

[Purplegoo]

I've always been facinated by the idea of 'balance' in BB. The way people band the term around endlessly in rules discussion, the way people believe it to be a good thing, the way weaker teams constantly need a push up, and stronger teams always need to be thwacked with the nerf stick (at least, if you believe everything you read).

I think one of BB’s greatest strengths is the lack of balance in the game. Afterall, truly balanced teams would basically be hoards of Amazon Linewomen facing off awaiting POWs, or rock / paper / scissors teams and skills that basically involve trying to force situation ‘a’ and avoid situation ‘b’ for 16 turns.

You can see the effects of ‘balance’ in the new rules; some of the most eloquently written critiques I’ve seen written have been bemoaning choices like killing off Khemri because they were winning ‘too much and needed balancing to their correct tier’, or the slow introduction of ‘Yu-Gi-Oh’ BB where skill ‘a’ works unless cancelled by skill ‘b’. These are directions ultimately driven by this seeming need for ‘balance’.

Actually, part of the joy of lesser races is the challenge. The difficulty. The difference. Afterall, how many BB races could one create that are totally balanced? Three? Four? A bashy slow one, a runny fast one and one inbetween with no shades of grey? I don’t think you could get many more than that. The chess-like situation where there is nothing to choose between teams / skills isn’t something in the end that we want. Whilst LRB 5-6 seems (at least to my eye) to have begun to take us down this route with panic nerfs and the odd r/s/p types of skill, we thankfully aren't far enough down it yet to start causing real damage.

I guess we’re in the house rules section, so it’s best you progress to whatever rule set you find the most enjoyable for you and your mates. However, I personally read your desired options with a heavy heart. Something has to be best, and something worst. If you progress further and further down the route of buffing the weak and nerfing the strong, we really will end up with 20 races that are all the same, and be worse off for it. Tweaking the win % of WE (for instance) by the Catcher change is just dull, if you ask me (and believe me, I'm aware the time for argument is long since past here). It's the thin end of a boring wedge that you seem to want to continue!

Nerf Undead far enough (and, seriously, get them past 150 now and they begin to nerf themselves, it’s just low down they’re great), and soon you’ll be on to something like Rats being too strong and move onto them. Let the good be good and the challenging challenging, imo.

[besters]

Can't believe I'm saying this, but on the whole I think I agree with Pgoo, I would like to to see LRB 6 given a fair amount of time to bed in before looking at any other changes.

Doesn't stop anyone houseruling, but would like to see the feedback on LRB 6 in 2 / 3 years time.

[Darkson]

I'm happy with 4 tiers - just not so happy in the discrepancy within each tier.

That said, I would be unhappy to play in a league that used the nerfs/buffs in your 2nd post, but then I don't want to play in a balanced league, so our views are completely opposite anyway.

[Purplegoo]

Can't believe I'm saying this, but on the whole I think I agree with Pgoo

Am I generally controversial, then?

Never thought I had it in me!

[besters]

Nah, it was me forgiving you for the last beating you gave me!

[DoubleSkulls]

Can't believe I'm saying this, but on the whole I think I agree with Pgoo, I would like to to see LRB 6 given a fair amount of time to bed in before looking at any other changes.

Doesn't stop anyone houseruling, but would like to see the feedback on LRB 6 in 2 / 3 years time.

That's exactly where I am right now.

[Smurf]

I don't believe this.

BB is a stratergy game. WE have 2 blitzers that are the best in the whole game, no, they are not difficult to get down, not since 5th Ed. 2 skills could down them and a foul. AV 7 is not much.

Get with the idea that various teams are challenging. WE natural enemy are dwarves.

[plasmoid]

Right, I think I'd better clear up a few misconceptions.
I thought I had been pretty explicit about a few things, but there you go.

Just so we're clear: This is in the house rules section, as a source of inspiration for anyone who thinks that any one of these teams is a problem. It is not a plan to change the actual rules.

Pgoo said:
Afterall, how many BB races could one create that are totally balanced?
And Darkson said:
I don't want to play in a balanced league, so our views are completely opposite anyway.
I don't want totally balanced. Never did. I think the "2 tiers rather than 4 tiers" rather explicitly stated that. I want 2 tiers, I want challenges. And I'm a little surprised that anyone would think that the ogre change (for example) will push them near (or over) the low average. I just think "tier 0" is still crazy strong, and that "tier 3" is overly challenging. After all, it is easy to make any team challenging (just ignore buying a complete position).

Pgoo said:
Something has to be best, and something worst.
And Joemanji said:
Just bitter people trying to destroy the power teams ... they'd just be replaced by a new "best".
Logically, something will indeed always be best. Fully agreed.
I just think that those 4 teams are best by too big a margin.

Pgoo said:
If you progress further and further down the route of buffing the weak and nerfing the strong, we really will end up with 20 races that are all the same
This looks like the mother of all straw men.
I fail to see how all-wrestle dwarfs, 3 troll gobbos, or AV6 snotlings would reduce the tactical options in the game, or make any of them play like eachother.

Besters said:
Doesn't stop anyone houseruling, but would like to see the feedback on LRB 6 in 2 / 3 years time.
And Doubleskull agreed
That's exactly where I am right now.
Well by all means wait
But I'm confident that a system designed for 3 tiers, with a handful of teams suspiciously close (or over) the edge of the top one, will not magically be 2 tiers. And I also don't need to wait for 2-3 years of playtest to know that new halflings, ogres or vampires will still be nowhere near some of the good (let alone great) teams.

Finally, saved the best for last:
Smurf said:
WE have 2 blitzers that are the best in the whole game, no, they are not difficult to get down, [snip] WE natural enemy are dwarves.
And we all know that wood elfs can't win without their wardancers
Seriously - wood elfs are a sickeningly powerful team, no matter how easy it is to dispense with their super fragile always exposed never just stunned wardancers. In fact, your dwarf comment just emphasizes this - because not every league has dwarfs, and besides, losing often against dwarfs just means that they're even stronger against everyone else than their stats imply.
Joemanji said:
Dwarfs lose Block?

Yup. Dwarf, orc, wood elf and undead teams are super spoiled.
My personal opnion is f*ck 'em. Until they drop below 50% they have nothing to whine about.
Dwarfs are super tough, have MA6 AG3 ball movers, reasonably cheap rerolls and don't even turn over on both-down.
The suggested nerfs are for those leagues that feel the same way.
I wonder if a well known dwarf fan will swing by shortly to explain that dwarfs are actually super tricky to play, and that 1250 "wins" in 2040 games (LRB5+6) is a complete fluke.

But for those leagues that don't agree, perhaps some of the buffs would add a bit more variation to the league.

[Joemanji]

Yup. Dwarf, orc, wood elf and undead teams are super spoiled.
... Until they drop below 50% they have nothing to whine about.
Dwarfs are super tough, have MA6 AG3 ball movers, reasonably cheap rerolls and don't even turn over on both-down.

In a sample of significant size, no half decent team should be below 50% because of the effect crappy teams have on their win ratio. As you know from your own stats on LRB6, where more than half the races have a win ratio >50%.

Incidentally those stats of yours do not show the 4 teams you list above as being streets ahead. So is this opinion just based on anecdote?

Dwarfs are an easy team to use out of the box because mass Block makes them less likely to turnover. But they are incredibly slow, and I find them actually quite challenging compared to many other races. One turn of poor positioning and your opponent can be away. They are also totally inflexible, with no ability to overcome a freak bad roll, kickoff event or just a mistake. I admire people who use Dwarfs well in serious competition, because it requires utter concentration for 32 turns. Whereas any chump can roll a 3+ with a Wardancer. But a combination of Wrestle and MA4 would utterly cripple the team.

My personal opnion is f*ck 'em.

Prove my point. Everyone hates certain teams. WEs and Amazons piss me off royally. But I don't want to see them nerfed out of contention, because something else will just rise to the top of my hate list.

[DoubleSkulls]

At the moment it doesn't feel like you are being clear enough about the goal of your exercise. If you want to change the tiers then really you should start off with a definition of what those tiers are, what performance level you expect from each team and then a gap analysis between the "as is" and "to be" states.

Desired Tiers
Tier 1 - .475-.525

So for example:
Wood Elves
Currently .550
Gap .025 to .075 reduction

Solution: MA7 War Dancers

I actually think trying to define the tiers and put the races into them is the important part because then agreeing on the appropriate solution becomes much simpler and easier to agree due to consensus on the objective. This is even more important in public discussions of these sorts of changes because many participants in the process won't agree with the goal of the exercise and so recommend or prefer solutions inconsistent with it.

[GalakStarscraper]

I actually think trying to define the tiers and put the races into them is the important part because then agreeing on the appropriate solution becomes much simpler and easier to agree due to consensus on the objective. This is even more important in public discussions of these sorts of changes because many participants in the process won't agree with the goal of the exercise and so recommend or prefer solutions inconsistent with it.

I fully agree with Ian's post.

You cannot start with the suggestion of the changes to the teams ... you have to start with a definition of the tiers. I have to tell you that once the BBRC agreed (okay majority agreed) on where the Tiers should be ... it TOTALLY changed the way we looked at BB changes in our discussions. Based on what the BBRC has done the last two years ... I really wish I had thought of this concept during the vault ... it would have made things so much better defined than the gut feel I had to work from. Also would have prevented things like the LRB 5.0 Khemri team (which was too good) and the LRB 5.0 Halfling team (which was too bad).

Galak

[tchatter]

It would be fun to read through the transcripts of the BBRC discussions, even with names removed. Just to see how the discussions went. LOL.