So - about that human catcher

[plasmoid]

JPB said:

But as pointed out the Human Catcher is not really a broken player, and placing all problems of the Human team (and how to get beginners into the game) on the Catcher's shoulders may run the risk of overburden it, and perhaps even tunnel vision.

True. If I want to run fair intro games, I just play humans vs. humans. Problem solved
Cheers
Martin

[JPB]

Well, or as I said Dark Elf (AG4) vs Orc (ST4) which may also be a better introduction to flash vs bash than Human could ever be. Perhaps using old Dark Elf players (Thrower) to get a pass option in.

I just felt the topic was all over the place.

Starting with the Catcher can't have AV8 because of the miniature (we made).
And having that odd 10k cost reduction instead,
which of course is insane as
obviously

Human BLITZERS are overcosted. there I said it, Orcs are 80 k 6339 Humes are 90k 7338, where did the extra 10k come from? catchers were always fine, blitzers are the issue.

it's the blitzer that needs to be 10k cheaper.

[Heff]

Well, or as I said Dark Elf (AG4) vs Orc (ST4) which may also be a better introduction to flash vs bash than Human could ever be. Perhaps using old Dark Elf players (Thrower) to get a pass option in.

I just felt the topic was all over the place.

Starting with the Catcher can't have AV8 because of the miniature (we made).
And having that odd 10k cost reduction instead,
which of course is insane as
obviously

Human BLITZERS are overcosted. there I said it, Orcs are 80 k 6339 Humes are 90k 7338, where did the extra 10k come from? catchers were always fine, blitzers are the issue.

it's the blitzer that needs to be 10k cheaper.

Yes. Yes it does. I am not alone in this, in fact some people think BOTH are over priced

http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/playbooks ... Trades.pdf

[Heff]

either that or the Orc blitzer should cost 90k

[JPB]

My bad, I thought that was always a bit of a joke...

According to this formula MA7 is higher valued than AV9
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=38335

Which of course is somewhat arbitrary as all salary calculations are but it has some logic as MA is arguably better (applies more universally) than AV (which may not come into play at all).
If MA6 to MA7 is such a major leap is another point, but I guess it's somewhat acceptable (half-line to end-zone is 13 squares, so MA7 cuts it to two turns).
However, MA in relation to the board is a very weird thing in BB. I only once noticed that dropping from MA6 linemen to MA5 lineman felt dramatically slower.
Also traversing from one wide zone to the other matters (15 squares, or from wide-zone line to wide-zone line, 7 squares).
Anyway, I think there is a lot of depth in the science of MA in relation to the board. And valuing MA over AV is not wrong, but justified.

Edit: I guess one could discuss salary compared to a player's meta (pays for MA it doesn't use), but I think that would probably go beyond what a salary system is actually able of doing. Besides, how much would it actually matter if 40k got knocked off (10k per blitzer)? Neither Team (Human/Orc) is particullarly expensive to begin with.

[Heff]

My bad, I thought that was always a bit of a joke...

According to this formula MA7 is higher valued than AV9
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=38335

Which of course is somewhat arbitrary as all salary calculations are but it has some logic as MA is arguably better (applies more universally) than AV (which may not come into play at all).
If MA6 to MA7 is such a major leap is another point, but I guess it's somewhat acceptable (half-line to end-zone is 13 squares, so MA7 cuts it to two turns).
However, MA in relation to the board is a very weird thing in BB. I only once noticed that dropping from MA6 linemen to MA5 lineman felt dramatically slower.
Also traversing from one wide zone to the other matters (15 squares, or from wide-zone line to wide-zone line, 7 squares).
Anyway, I think there is a lot of depth in the science of MA in relation to the board. And valuing MA over AV is not wrong, but justified.

Edit: I guess one could discuss salary compared to a player's meta (pays for MA it doesn't use), but I think that would probably go beyond what a salary system is actually able of doing. Besides, how much would it actually matter if 40k got knocked off (10k per blitzer)? Neither Team (Human/Orc) is particularly expensive to begin with.

Yeah, speed kills but armour stops you dying. At least they don't come with thick skull as well. I do think that there is a problem with both positionals cost though. Probably more of a problem with the catcher as he is squishy but it is there for both of them.

[JPB]

Beg to differ.
I just don't see that players' costs have that much of an impact beyond the selection of a starting team.

And, based on the formula, the cost are in relation to the rest of the system.

You can start fiddling by moving costs 10k one way or another, but I don't think it will change that much. Skills cost about 20 to 30k. Improvements cost in average 23.889. That are the dimensions in which you have to move costs to have an effect on anything. And unless you make really dramatic changes it is not going to blow anything out of the water.

Unless the problem is a starting team problem (as the 70k re-roll was for Chaos).

I think improvements should focus on players' profiles and skills. Costs, if it's a starting team issue.

[Babs]

Im reading all this and wondering, if we were to alter the Human roster at some point In the future, how would that be received if it shifted between tiers as a result?

I think it's a lower priority than "Doing a Norse make over" to the Amazons.

Remember, Norse used to all be 6 3 3 7 Block (as per the 3rd edition miniatures). Then the rosters was reworked to the roster we have today, which is far superior.

Amazons have been screaming for a make over since LRB 3. Khemri need a boost since about LRB 5. Humans are pretty way down the list.
Both Orc and human rankings on the NAF are subdued in part due to the fact that they are a logical choice for new coaches to take. However, AV8 catchers was the way to go - but someone made a philosophical error. The look of a miniature should never affect rules balance. </preaching hat off>.

[dode74]

Both Orc and human rankings on the NAF are subdued in part due to the fact that they are a logical choice for new coaches to take.

While I agree with most of the above post Wulfyn took a deeper look at that claim and discovered it is not the case, certainly for Orcs. It may be the case for humans.

[harvestmouse]

How about doing a Norse make over to Norse? Personally I think the Norse make over was poor. You have a runner that doesn't follow the rules of other runners and made one of the least utilised players in the game (thrower) absolutely useless bar being a leader carry (which is also a terrible aspect of the game). I played a lot of lrb 4 Norse and catchers were my favourite player. Bring back catchers, lose the throwers and make runners P access.

Orc blitzers should be 90 not human blitzers 80. However if we could convince JJ that 5k increments are ok we wouldn't have the problem.

[Babs]

While I agree with most of the above post Wulfyn took a deeper look at that claim and discovered it is not the case, certainly for Orcs. It may be the case for humans.

Note I said "In Part", meaning one factor of several or many. Of interest, Wulfyn did not screen by coaches who had played 15+ matches already with orcs, but by coaches who had already played 60+ tournament games. Hence an elf coach, sick of being pummeled, might change to orcs, but still behave like a rookie. (Although with 60+ tournament games under their belt I think this is unlikely). Both results _did_ see an improvement of standings - even if Orcs only moved from 14th to 13th. As discussed, I thought it interesting that Humans moved 15th to 8th. This is also looking at ALL coach data of games ONLY between coaches who had ALL played 60+ tournament games, so that boost for Orcs is still significant, as it will have displaced something from 13th spot, and remember Humans leapt past Orcs too.

[dode74]

Babs - I'm less interested in improvement in standings than I am in improvement in *performance*. That said, if you think the rookie factor is still significant despite the work which has been done to show otherwise then I think it is probably necessary to show it is the case rather than merely claim it to be.

Orc blitzers should be 90 not human blitzers 80. However if we could convince JJ that 5k increments are ok we wouldn't have the problem.

Why should Orc blitzers be 90k? This was trialled in BB2 and proved silly: Orc performance doesn't need a nerf at all. There may be an argument for Humans needing a buff, but there simply isn't one for nerfing Orcs.

[Darkson]

either that or the Orc blitzer should cost 90k

If there is an issue with the human roster (not saying there is or isn't) then nerfing the orc roster isn't going to fix it.

[Heff]

either that or the Orc blitzer should cost 90k

If there is an issue with the human roster (not saying there is or isn't) then nerfing the orc roster isn't going to fix it.

I was not being entirely serious at that point. I just think they should cost the same

[harvestmouse]

Why should Orc blitzers be 90k? This was trialled in BB2 and proved silly: Orc performance doesn't need a nerf at all. There may be an argument for Humans needing a buff, but there simply isn't one for nerfing Orcs.

Yeah? I didn't know that...actually yeah it rings a bell. With CPOMB now gone maybe Orcs will be more dominant at higher end TV. The roster still is too cheap to build for me.