Was: Claw Poll - Now: Dice vs RNG

[Calcium]

I'm embarrased to be a member of FUMBBL right now with the massive level of whining that's going on around this issue....

Sadly I have no other real options to get my BB fix, and contrary to the crybabies making noise in FUMBBL and here regarding the evil of ClawPOMB, there are a lot of coaches that just want to get on and PLAY THE GAME....

I was no real fan of the change to the current ruleset, but it's grown on me, and it's what we've got. So I Prefer to get on with it....

[Deathwing]

There was an old lady that swallowed a fly....

What was your argument again, that there is no case because we are evil? I completely find it hard to comprehend what WYSIWYG, or in fact anything in that post you put up.. Has to do with clawpomb being OP.

The point was that there is neither an argument nor a case that is:
i) Relevant to me (or I suspect the vast majority of TT players)
ii) Going to make a blind bit of difference however strong given that the CRP is set in stone for the foreseeable future.

My apologies for being cynical and facetious. Born of frustration.

To reiterate: Deal with it strategically within the current ruleset or house rule to deal with it if the former proves to be impossible or undesirable.

[PorkSol]

I'd be curious to hear what people think is the specific factor which is present in table top leagues which keeps claw po mb in check that isn't present in online environments.

I understand you can't min max a team in tabletop to have 5 clawbombs at 1400 TV or whatever, but I'm thinking more of the high TV, naturally developed clawbomb teams that could easily be built in a long running league. The min maxed teams are admittedly a side effect of the online matchmaking, but there is nothing preventing any high TV chaos from having several claw bombs in tabletop eventually, so what is it that is keeping clawbomb balanced there that isn't working online?

Is it the increased emphasis on winning rather than on team development? More elves, etc.

More inducements to chainsaw down those stars?

Or is it a social thing; people being reluctant to wipe out teams in the a face to face game where many people are friends and driving people away from the league if you kill their teams is a concern?

[Darkson]

no idea about FUMBBL, but a big thin in Cyanide play is (was?) the lack of proper concession rules. Players would just concede/ragequit if you looked like injuring their players (and not always in ways that gave their opponent the win), especially if they were playing the 11-man roster with one or 2 skilled players and the rest rookies.

[RandomOracle]

no idea about FUMBBL, but a big thin in Cyanide play is (was?) the lack of proper concession rules. Players would just concede/ragequit if you looked like injuring their players (and not always in ways that gave their opponent the win), especially if they were playing the 11-man roster with one or 2 skilled players and the rest rookies.

That's not present in FUMBBL in my experience. I've only had one person concede against my chaos in almost 90 games. People finish their games, at least at high TV where they would risk losing their 51+ SPP players if they conceded.

[Deathwing]

Hmmm...good question Porksol.
How many games to develop enough of a core of clawpomb players to be a real problem at higher TV?
10 games, 20, 30?
Whatever the equation is, online will allow compression of what would be months or years of tabletop into days or weeks. Happily losing early to develop a min-max roster say 15 or 20 games down the line just isn't an option in the vast majority of TT leagues that I'm aware of or ever been involved in.
The 'pond' factor has relevance too. The smaller the pond the more teams will build to counter the other teams in that pond. The less they will be able to optimise their own roster. I don't think you'd be able to min-max any roster in any kind of closed league.

Let's imagine... say a 20 team league, broad mix...12x tier one, 6x tier 2, 2x tier 3... say 2 games a week per team. (and that is way over what most TT leagues will ever average).
Questions:
i) Would it even be possible to build a dominant CLAWPOMB roster in that environment (given that as it developed others would naturally build to counter it)?
ii) If so, how long would it take?

[Daragor18]

I'm not sure I like the tone of this 'discussion'. There certainly seems like a them and us mentality here, which is a little childish.

Until recently I hadn't played on Fumbbl for years as I had quite a large TT league going, until recently moving. During which time I put together undead, chaos, dwarf, d elf and wood elf (fully painted ofcourse) teams. I'd class myself as a decent player and have won the most, in what was a competitive but largely friendly league, with my D elves in lrb4 and I would say that my skills on Fumbbl are what probably put me at the top of the TT league.

Now, under lrb4 we were all aware of the claw/rsc killer players and the damage they could do, but due to being traits, they were relatively few and what with the powerful dp rule, they were atleast foul magnets then.

Now, under lrb6 they are easy to get, with every chaos team getting atleast 2 such players and with the nerfing of the dp rule are harder to take off if they are on the floor. Nerfing dp - fine, exit rsc - fine but to stack claw, mb and to make po effective on both av and cas is a terrible design. Garion had a highly relevant point when he said that due to the social factor of a TT league you wouldn't experience the claw bomb effect and I guess that is true. I know I wouldn't be too happy to have to put up with such combos in a social arrangement.

However Fumbbl is not like that. It has, imo, the best 'exploit' coaches in the game. It is competitive play in its purest sense. It's comparible to the online poker players taking the 'TT' poker players by storm. It's simply a whole different level of play, far more clinical and far more defined.

Now with all these posts that we've seen on this topic surely there has to come a point where you have to admit that maybe those fumbbl types have a point, they can't simply all be whiners, at the genetic level. Maybe you should set up and account on the site and try out the Blackbox division or just use the ranked division and have a few games.

I would strongly advise the blackbox, use the tactics you have devised (such as fend heavy teams) and we can see if the Fumbblers are wrong or they may just have a relevant point. Imho investing in fend, dp/sneaky git combos just aren't enough because instead of using the bombs to hit the opposition stars (as was mostly the case in lrb4), it is now so easy to create these players that they can be used as highly effective vacuum cleaners to just simply clear the pitch.

This is not a challenge (to the death, sought of thing) nor am I a died-in-the-wool Fumbbler, as I've only played 6 games since coming back but I certainly do see their point. Simply trying it out may help with future considerations and rulesets

[GalakStarscraper]

Is it the increased emphasis on winning rather than on team development? More elves, etc.

More inducements to chainsaw down those stars?

Two fold:

1) The low side min/max team (ie aroudn 1400) eventually meets the more developed team and singles out and hammers the stores.

2) The high side TV team (2000+) meets the lower TV team that loads up on the high damage inducements we delibrately added to the rules for this case and helps deal with these guys.

Blackbox and MM prevent both of these situations from happen.

IE ... the 15% is not enough to matter for the design of the game

My opinion ... FUMBBL is already house-ruled due to the 15% so they've already messed with the rules as a result. So since you've already house ruled in a system to mess up what was written ... go the next step and house rule in the suggestion that 2 BBRC members made about not allowing Piling On to be used with either Mighty Blow or Claw and move on.

The game works fine in the environments it was created for. If it isn't working for FUMBBL because they are not matching folks on winning records (ELO) instead of TV as they are doing ... fine ... house rule in one more rule beyond the one you already house ruled in.

Tom

[Carnis]

1) The low side min/max team (ie aroudn 1400) eventually meets the more developed team and singles out and hammers the stores.

2) The high side TV team (2000+) meets the lower TV team that loads up on the high damage inducements we delibrately added to the rules for this case and helps deal with these guys.

Blackbox and MM prevent both of these situations from happen.

IE ... the 15% is not enough to matter for the design of the game

My opinion ... FUMBBL is already house-ruled due to the 15% so they've already messed with the rules as a result. So since you've already house ruled in a system to mess up what was written ... go the next step and house rule in the suggestion that 2 BBRC members made about not allowing Piling On to be used with either Mighty Blow or Claw and move on.

The game works fine in the environments it was created for. If it isn't working for FUMBBL because they are not matching folks on winning records (ELO) instead of TV as they are doing ... fine ... house rule in one more rule beyond the one you already house ruled in.

Tom

I find your tone very patronising, I don't think I understand where it's coming from (the tone).

1) I don't really think a high TV team (generic high TV-team, not a all guns blazing clmbpo team, which is a threat to everything) is a threat to a minmaxed team in TT. If your team is built "correctly", and you use the inducement system to max effect you will have easy wins on higher TVd teams. Been there done that, vamps with count + chaney for instance vs dwarves, other examples exist. This is not an argument against minmaxed teams, rather it is an argument FOR minmaxed teams.

2) What would such inducements be, that beat the highside team to a significant degree, that are not implemented in fumbbl? We already see bribes, babes, apoths being used regularily. I can't believe you mean Block/MB stars, because again they only have 1 of the 3 in the killerstack, and you deliberately removed mb from icepelt hammerblow too to avoid having a single real high dmg star. So, list those inducements that work, in order of preference. I think porksol asked for it too btw.

3) The 15% argument then. My experience is the lower my opponent's team is compared to my killer team the easier the game is for me, not harder. I've played some down 300 tv matchmaker games and its not pretty, really isn't. It's really interesting to call it a houserule though, as the CRP book in no way tells you how to organize your games, in fact it claims it's completely up to the commissioner. Hence no matchmaking system can really be considered a houserule, as the rules clearly do not define how the games are supposed to be played in a league.

4) On the matching on ELO then, basicly earlier fumbbl matched games by ELO allowing the lower ELO coach a better team in the process (this was LRB4). This basicly made pretty dull matches apparently (I didnt play back then), because the worse coaches just got a seriously superior team which basicly overcompensated the difference. It doesn't help if you are NAF #1 with orcs if you have 3 players on the pitch. So if fumbbl were to move back to ELO based matchmaking it would be a step backwards, not a step forwards. As it is now the games are matched using racial factors (calculated form results of previous games at each TV segment for each racial matchups) & TV as the basis. This means that the higher ELO coaches win more games than they would in an open environment, but the games are usually fair from the onset and gravitate towards 50% for each side assuming optimal matchmaking.

As a sidenote, my team's toast now btw, it's not going to obscenely win any games for a while until I rebuild the 7 players that I've lost in the last 25 games. Probably after another 25 games the team will start shining again.

[Deathwing]

I'm not sure I like the tone of this 'discussion'. There certainly seems like a them and us mentality here, which is a little childish.
[snip]

Hello Daragor and welcome,

Maybe there is an 'us and them' mentality here. Whether it's childish or not is a moot point. As you said: " It has, imo, the best 'exploit' coaches in the game. It is competitive play in its purest sense. It's comparible to the online poker players taking the 'TT' poker players by storm. It's simply a whole different level of play, far more clinical and far more defined."

The most defined, clinical and 'exploit' players would be 'them' rather than 'me'. Childish? Or realistic?
Poker analogy doesn't work either, FUMBBL only players have tended to be competitive in the TT tournaments, but absolute Farming nonsense to suggest that they have been playing on a more competitive level.

[Daragor18]

Well, thank you for the welcome. As for your critique you have no counters to my points, in the slightest. You seem to be far more concerned about my estimations that those who play mostly on fumbbl are of a high calibre. By that very statement it allows one to pretty easily infer that you have a concern with fumbbl. It may contain the best BB players, it may not but to react in such as way as to take insult to my observations may be somewhat narrow-minded. Either way, I don't care. As, primarily, a TT player (and will be again, as soon as I get another group going), I have my concerns. I know for a fact that most of my friends are willing to travel for their games, as GW shops haven't run BB games instore for ages.

As that is the case the new handicap system will easily allow my previous gang to bring their now advanced teams and play any new members' teams we can introduce. However, if the rules are incorrect, the rules are incorrect. There are 2 advanced chaos teams coaches who I know will play (advanced being around the 200 tv mark) and if this bomb rubbish is broken it will simply ruin the game.

Again, I have no regard, in the slightest, as to which are the better players. I'm just concerned by what I have seen, so please, instead of throwing glib references, simply providing some reasonable answers to my concerns will benefit me.

[garion]

This is not about min max teams. This is not about Claw. This is not about online play. The problem is MB combined with PO and Claw as well for the mutation teams and how it is OP.

The data gathered on fumbbl cannot be ignored people keep saying the game wasnt designed for this environment etc... But that is irrelevant. In table top leagues people can easily achieve these killer games in the course of a season which Plasmoids has pointed out numerous times throughout this thread and his comments have sadly been ignored. All fumbbl is prooving is that killer combo players are OP.

I think all people want is an admission that if the rules were to change this would be the first thing to change. All that needs to happen is to make PO av only and you still have a really nasty combo but it isnt as ridiculously powerful as it is.

Galak keeps saying well inducements would make the difference in a league. But how would they no team has any inducements that could make any difference to these teams as we will find out very soon on fumbbl when the Leagues start up again and the tourenys start up again. I have provided links of games on fumbbl where teams have taken 2 babes and an extra apoth to try and reduce the massacare. But they made no difference. Star players are mostly terrible only one or two on each team are any good. The two that could potentially cause the most damage to these teams are the two fanatic players and maybe bomber as well but they would both require an aweful lot of luck do do any real damage.

There are no inducements that make any difference unless you get insanely lucky with the cards. Or use a wizard and his fireball luckily kills 5 players (but you cannot rely on those things they are far far to luck dependant)

Now TT - in my league we only play 12 games in a season followed by a tournament another 2 games. So 14 games isnt enough for these teams to completely dominate. Which is one reason why this doesnt happen so much in table top. Secondly we reset all our teams at the end of every season.

But as said before plasmoid has provided evidence of 50 games seasons and I know people that play continuing teams from season to season, anyone that plays in these environments will feel the force of these teams and realise how OP this combo is. There is just no stopping it. The real reason this hasnt been happening much in TT leagues is because of a social factor people will not want to play against you. People will get angry with you. So to me that is more the leagues creating there own social code of conduct.

Fend yes it is a counter of sorts but it can only really be used effectively by a handfull of ag3 and ag2 teams. Also even with fend there is still a 31% chance of getting ko'd or worse when knocked down.

Lets look at tournaments now, one of the main ways many people on site enjoy playng the game. Well the WIL is coming round again and there is already talk of people taking Chaos Pact teams to that with the following skills and stats -

1 Marauder = Block, tackle, Mighty Blow, Claw, Piling On (5 points).
5 Marauder = Block, Guard (10 points).
5 Marauder = Block (5 points).

That fits in with the tourney point spending rules, and the person that is considering doing this has got rid of any other positionals to make a killer team. They could also do a little bit of skill juggling and get a Dark elf in that team with Blodge and Sure hands quite easily. Again this is taking advantage of how one combo is far better than anything else in the game and how to makes skill selection boring. Which has always been my main arguement for why PO needs nerfing. It is making skill selection and team building really really boring.

[Darkson]

The data gathered on fumbbl cannot be ignored people keep saying the game wasnt designed for this environment etc... But that is irrelevant. In table top leagues people can easily achieve these killer games in the course of a season which Plasmoids has pointed out numerous times throughout this thread and his comments have sadly been ignored. All fumbbl is prooving is that killer combo players are OP.

And yet, as was pointed out many, many times to Cupcake (the OP), all the data from tabletop leagues around the world (and plenty of evidence was given [and ignored] to him) shows that Claw/MB/PO is NOT broken in TT leagues.

[garion]

But plasmoids, Carnis and others have played in TT leagues and are both saying those teams dominate in longer leagues. Or perpetual leagues. As I said - this will not be seen in most leagues because so many of them just are not long enough.

Edit: And you have just taken one small quote from my post and ignored all the other factors supporting the problem. Did you not see this same problem with Lrb4 2+ fouling a long time ago (something i neverminded) and the BBRC changed that after defending it for so long.

[Darkson]

Well, a third of your post was regarding tournaments, which are houseruled anyway, so have zero relevence.
The rest of it I ignored because this has all been hashed to death in the 400+ page thread on the Cyanide forum.

I couldn't care less whether FUMBBL, Cyanide or even PBeM has a problem, because none of these were how the game was intended OR designed to be played - the Cyanide even less so as they can't even get the rules right. There is an almost deafening silence on the subject from TT leagues, which shows to me it isn't a problem in the environment it was designed for, and that's good enough for me.

If you play in a house-ruled environment, then either sort out the environment, or add more houserules - don't expect to change a system that works correctly when played as intended.