So - about that human catcher

[dode74]

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.

Doubt it. TPOMB is also gone, meaning stinky elfses will be even more difficult to pin down and dismember.

[Babs]

Dode wrote:

Babs - I'm less interested in improvement in standings than I am in improvement in *performance*.

OK. You've lost me. How are these two things different? Surely standings(rankings of team by win percentage) are a direct reflection of their performance?

As you yourself linked - humans played by experienced coaches ranked #8 out of #24. Surely that is operating at Tier 1. That is data that is prior to the dropping of the price point of human catchers.
I agree that Orcs, coming in at #13 out of #24, is less clear cut.

[hutchinsfairy]

It's harder to have a productive conversation when no two people seem to agree on the problem that needs to be solved:

1. The rules for the Human catcher don't match the GW miniature
2. The win % for Humans don't match the fluff
3. The win % for Humans don't match the design tier
4. The win % for Humans in the boxset don't match the Orcs

Personally, I would only really care about #4 and its effect on new players. That discussion would have to consider the sub-optimal teams in the boxes though.

[Baxx]

I don't care about the boxset at all, I mean, goblin box with 12 goblins? The box just contains whatever was most beneficial for GW, not the players (obviously). Orcs with 6 line orcs? I'd rather play with a team that has 0 line orcs than 6!

[dode74]

OK. You've lost me. How are these two things different? Surely standings(rankings of team by win percentage) are a direct reflection of their performance?

Because teams with very close performances can switch ranking positions very easily despite there being no statistically significant change in their win percentages. Example using hypothetical numbers:

Code: Select all

Race       Win% 1   Win% 2
Human    - 53     - 52
Orc      - 52     - 53
Elf      - 51.5   - 52.5
Wood Elf - 51     - 52.5
Undead   - 50     - 51
Chaos    - 49     - 52

Given the above, assuming the means given as win percentages are not statistically significantly different for any of those races (they are small changes) then the drop of Humans from first to 2nd from last is actually not significant even though a comment on the straight ranking ("Humans were best and now are second worst!") would make it appear to be.

As you yourself linked - humans played by experienced coaches ranked #8 out of #24. Surely that is operating at Tier 1. That is data that is prior to the dropping of the price point of human catchers.
I agree that Orcs, coming in at #13 out of #24, is less clear cut.

Both Humans and Orcs are operating at T1 when you look at the full data. I don't know whether they do when you look at the experienced coach data, but I'm more interested in whether there is a statistically significant change in their performances as measured by win percentage than whether they move up the rankings. I inferred from Wulfyn's post that there was no such statistically significant change for Orcs; whether there was one for Humans or not I don't know.

[Babs]

Because teams with very close performances can switch ranking positions very easily despite there being no statistically significant change in their win percentages. Example using hypothetical numbers:
Code:
Race Win% 1 Win% 2
Human - 53 - 52
Orc - 52 - 53
Elf - 51.5 - 52.5
Wood Elf - 51 - 52.5
Undead - 50 - 51
Chaos - 49 - 52

But Dode, with enough data, even moving 1% would require a very large number of games 'improvement'.

E.g.
Orcs - win # 9620 of games. (out of 18500).
To get one more percent they need to win another 185 games, better than other races they are being compared to (taking those 185 games away from wins from other races)!

So even a small percentage change can be statistically significant if there's enough data.

[dode74]

But Dode, with enough data, even moving 1% would require a very large number of games 'improvement'.

E.g.
Orcs - win # 9620 of games. (out of 18500).
To get one more percent they need to win another 185 games, better than other races they are being compared to (taking those 185 games away from wins from other races)!

So even a small percentage change can be statistically significant if there's enough data.

Can be, but we don't know what the gaps are between the races, even. There could well be 10 races in the 52-53% bracket (for example), and it would require very few games to move the rankings with *no* significant change to the win%.

Yes, with enough data statistical statistically significant changes in win% will show where there is some. But a report on rankings only tells us nothing about the performance changes of *that race*.

[harvestmouse]

Actually I think the problem is (if we're comparing the human and orc rosters) that throwing isn't quite as good as it should be/was meant to be or looking at it from another angle...with the meta game being 'safe bowl' and 'T16 win bowl' It's a little too risky for most rosters. Add to that....that the AG3 throwing game isn't recommended at all and the rosters that do have AG3 throwers are essentially played as running teams.

Pass is an ok skill but catch isn't that useful. Pass and catch on AG3 teams are really only desperation skills and if you need to make a desperation pass it isn't that likely (or productive to set a catch player up specifically for that purpose.....I mean you're setting up expecting to fail your run drive by using an ag3 catcher that way). This means the 2 skills on a human team are not cost effective. 80k/90k blitzers....BOBs are cheap.....AV9 is worth its wait in gold......you're getting more bang for your bucks with Orcs.....so lowering the price of the catcher helps.......bringing back 2nd ed pass and catch stats wouldn't be a bad idea either.

[JPB]

I re-read (quick perusal) that old article and I think this is the point made: http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/playbooks ... Trades.pdf

The main weakness of the Human roster is the price of the positionals, with both the Blitzers and Catchers hugely overpriced. This isn't too much of
a problem when starting out, as the low cost of your rerolls and Linemen allow you to absorb this inflation. However, in league play it is almost crippling, with an inflated TV reducing your winnings with which you must then replace overpriced players on a regular basis. Once the bashy teams develop, with only AV8 you'll find yourself taking regular casualties and will struggle to find the 90K to replace a Blitzer.

And to say it in the words of father Jack
“That. Would be. An. Ecumenical matter!”
(i.e. a topic concerning the church in its entirety. Or in this case a “system problem” that should cause problems for all AV8 teams with expensive positionals (Skaven Blitzer cost 90k, too!?). Human Blitzer could be hit more often than other players (?), but overall it (attrition) really cannot be considered the problem of a single team only.

Unfortunately they are very expensive at 90,000 gc, unreasonably so in fact, but a coach must work with what he has.

They are seen as an easy target for your opponent, and at 70,000 gc are woefully overpriced when compared with players of a similar role (e.g. elves and Skaven).

Both is not entirely correct. The Blitzer is priced correctly, imo (5+4, i.e. paying +2 for each MA7 & Block is fair) (if not the Skaven Blitzer would be overpriced too, btw).
However, it is true that skills are somewhat overpriced (Catch (mind hand-off though) could count as only +1, rather than +2) compared to characteristic changes (+1 AG counts as +2 too ( ) (&) (Oh, my Gawd, GW was right!)). Although, it could be more correct to say that Elf catchers are underpriced by 10k, rather than Human Catchers being overpriced. For example the high elf catcher (8/3/4/7 Catch) should cost 100k, not 90k (the linked formula (viewtopic.php?f=4&t=38335) cancels this by counting MA7 as only +10k for agile players, and not as +20k as it does for basic players (...exact science...) but in a blanket formula where everyone pays +2 for MA7 several catchers touching 100k seem to receive a 10k discount).
So there is ground for arguing the costs of players (Catch and AG4 are treated as equal), and (Elf Catchers are underpriced, unless all the other Catchers are overpriced. Whichever way you want to look at it).
But it's not that big of a deal, imo. Variations of 20k to 60k is rather common and not exactly an unfair inflating of TV, but only touching lightly on becoming too much. And neither player is falsely priced according to the formula (no idea how official that formula is but it's correct most of the times, so it has my vote ).)
Of course the formula can be adjusted but,
I would not suggest to overhaul the formula to excessively as it may play out something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6WQaIIZ248

[plasmoid]

Harvestmouse said:

Actually I think the problem is (if we're comparing the human and orc rosters) that throwing isn't quite as good as it should be/was meant to be or looking at it from another angle...with the meta game being 'safe bowl' and 'T16 win bowl' It's a little too risky for most rosters. Add to that....that the AG3 throwing game isn't recommended at all and the rosters that do have AG3 throwers are essentially played as running teams.

This is quite true.
If AV8 catchers are considered too outlandish, and one is not interested in the massive power- and playstyle shift that comes with 4 times AG+ or ST+, perhaps a much simpler buff would be to give them Diving Catch. It would certainly make the human passing game considerably more stable.

Cheers
Martin

[harvestmouse]

Better still would be to combine catch and diving catch into one skill. The key to seeing if a skill is redundant or not is 'is it taken in resurrection format competitions?' How many competitive coaches would choose either skill? Even if you combined them how many coaches would take the combined skill? Still zilch. I can't see any OP reasons for not combining the 2 and I like what it does to the Slann roste.....sorry fantasy eastern european zoo freaks pretending to have the stats and physiques of a giant amphibian humanoid roster.

I remember Spubbbba or Purplegoo (can't remember which) suggesting the same for pass and safe throw.

[Purplegoo]

Doesn't sound at all like me (merge Pass and ST), it's very rare I ever suggest or discuss house rules. I don't (currently) think I agree it's a good idea, anyway, for a number of reasons.

I love DC on a Slann Catcher, it's one of the unique points about the roster and it's the one time I use it and factor it into my thinking. Would be a shame to change Humans at all, but changing them in a way that made Slann less unique would be even less likely to get my vote.

(I appreciate the existence of Slann is questionable, depending on how you want to argue it / who wants to argue it.)

[spubbbba]

I had a suggestion where the rubbish skills would be cheaper (10k each). You could then take multiple of them if desired. This would possibly be combined with the top skills costing more.
However that would require rebalancing starting costs of players.

A simpler option was to combine some of the rubbish skills. The obvious example being foul appearance and disturbing presence. But I could see something like catch and passblock.

This was just my own version of an idea I've seen here and other BB forums though.

[JPB]

I had a suggestion where the rubbish skills would be cheaper (10k each). You could then take multiple of them if desired. This would possibly be combined with the top skills costing more. However that would require rebalancing starting costs of players.

Not necessarily. Most starting players are very elemental. You have no 5/3/3/9 Shadowing, Pass Block, Sneaky Git 100k nonsense (for the most part). (i.e. most weak skills don't appear on team rosters).
And it could be enough to only adjust the improvement costs. And leave the starting costs as a system of its own. Basically what some tournaments are already doing (skills in different tiers etc.). Which could be enough.

A simpler option was to combine some of the rubbish skills. The obvious example being foul appearance and disturbing presence. But I could see something like catch and passblock.

Not sure about merging. From a design point it is quite nice to have the option to give someone Disturbing Presence (Slaanesh) without slapping Foul Appearance onto them as well. And merging could overload some skills, which isn't optimal either. I would look at improving the skills (for example, what if Pass Block could also be triggered by hand-offs, allowing to place a TZ on the receiver? i.e. a minor improvement to make it a bit more useable?). However, having Tier III skills is not really a problem if they would have a place in the game, which they currently don't (kind of).

(I appreciate the existence of Slann is questionable, depending on how you want to argue it / who wants to argue it.)

Not really. That Slann played BB should be a fact. If they wanted Slann out (only fat bloated team owners) they could have done that more elegantly & creatively (like Slann became fat on cushy manager jobs and lost the athletic ability to play) which would remove them, keep the past intact (79 BB finalist) and even leave the door a tiny bit open for an oddity team of a rare young Slann team still able to go.
Instead they just stomped it to death (as usual) saying Slann never existed and that's that. (makes one weep).
However, that's background related. The team roster itself may be another matter, but not much really.

[harvestmouse]

Are you aware that dis pre and FA used to be one skill? I don't remember it being OP and if you're essentially getting one for free where's the problem.

For the progressive environment I think it's a good idea that needs play testing. For resurrection I think it is pretty much essential. How many skills in resurrection are literally noob traps and just that? This means in the non-progression format they are influencing the game negatively. For a good tourney player who plays a lot of teams and a lot tourneys how many actual skills have you picked in the last few years. 10? 15? There's masses of waste and noob trap in the skill list when being cost effective.

My dig wasn't actually at slann (l am a fan). I have a team in fact from 1980s citadels. It was a dig at the poorly thought out alternative theme; kislev.