Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
 Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:03 |
 
|
Matt, I know you want the game to be something it isn't, this is clear from many posts I've seen from you on different topics and how I've seen you play the game, but frankly it isn't and this isn't a game made specifically for you and your interests nor should it be. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:08 |
|
I suggest to toss a coin rather than roll a D6 to work out actions. That would make the game even better in terms of high variance. |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:24 |
|
Yes Matt you've totally figured me out, I clearly want only randomness, glad we had the chat. Excellent job taking down that strawman. As always your takes are perfect and you truly should be in charge of the game's design. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:35 |
|
Considering the quality of current ruleset, yes, I should be, it's hard to do worse than what they did! 
My point was that a game with more nuance of randomness rewards more the coach's skill. The coin was an extreme example to show that a system with easy automatic success and failure is flawed. 16.66% is not that easy, but not that hard either, considering that now multi rr improved the odds thus rewarding silly plays relying more on dice than on positioning and careful moves to maximize the odds.
A match lasts 1 hour and this is too much time to be wasted just because you fail a 2+ (or you opponent rolls a 6 picking up a ball in 5 Tackle Zones). |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %20, %2024 - %19:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:35 |
|
With average dice it should be a draw.
Also. I played better. |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:38 |
|
If a roster is better average dice can't be enough. |
|
|
DoctorMidnight
Joined: Jul 07, 2022
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 19:51 |
|
Jervis Johnson, from an interview you can find here:
https://ttgamingdiary.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/an-old-interview-with-a-young-jervis/
"OK, well, one of the things that actually developed with Blood Bowl is what I call the rule of 2, 4 and 6, which is if you are going to have a dice roll, it should either be a 2+, 4+ or 6+, and 3+ and 5+ are wimpy cop outs. It’s for people who think well 4+ seems to good, 6+ seems to difficult, I know, I’ll go for 5+. And for me that is just wimping out, you have to decide." |
_________________
CR is a joke. |
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 20:08 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | Considering the quality of current ruleset, yes, I should be, it's hard to do worse than what they did!
My point was that a game with more nuance of randomness rewards more the coach's skill. The coin was an extreme example to show that a system with easy automatic success and failure is flawed. 16.66% is not that easy, but not that hard either, considering that now multi rr improved the odds thus rewarding silly plays relying more on dice than on positioning and careful moves to maximize the odds.
A match lasts 1 hour and this is too much time to be wasted just because you fail a 2+ (or you opponent rolls a 6 picking up a ball in 5 Tackle Zones). |
My point was the coach skill does not need to be more rewarded. The best coaches already have high win rates. Variance is good, it keeps less good coaches engaged in the game. There is a limit, obviously, where the game just becomes too random. We aren't there or we wouldn't see coaches that win 70% of their games.
You want a game where your coach skill is rewarded more go play chess. But I'm done engaging on this at this point. The d6 system isn't going away not should it and I'm not gaining anything by arguing with you one it. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 20, 2024 - 21:04 |
|
Jervis Johnson is not a game designer anymore, as far as I know.
We should ask current game designers.
That explanation makes no sense, by the way. |
|
|
The_Murker
Joined: Jan 30, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 01:43 |
|
"Variance is good, it keeps less good coaches engaged in the game."
This. For the 100th time.. this.
Imagine if you will.. difficult I'm sure.. but imagine a Blood Bowl player who really just didn't like losing. At anything. Ever. He doesn't know he's a Blood Bowl player yet, but when he's introduced to the game everything just seems to fit. The fantasy setting.. the sports.. the experience and fun skills the players can gain.. even the silly nature of the commentary in the rule books. He would totally be hooked on the game if it only gave him a chance.
But it didn't. He lost every time.. always. He never had a chance to win. His opponents always trounced him.
It's a complex game, with a truck-ton of rules, and it's been tweaked over time to reward skill, and skill alone. No one is around that plays anymore that isn't a master. Everyone else left. Everyone else lost. Almost always.
One could easily tweak the rules and the variance past a critical point without knowing it, and we'd slowly walk into an age where engagement was just.. gone.
Some of us are here because the game rewarded us enough, even when we sucked horribly, to keep us engaged. A noob beating a Super-Star, just once, might be massive in their development and motivation.
Matt, knowing your absolute aversion to failure, I suspect you 'barely' made it through your learning curve on the way towards your current skill level. You, more than most, are probably here because of the forgiving nature of the variance you dealt with along the way.
That same variance pains you today.. but not enough for you to stop playing 4 games per day. I submit that variance is what keeps you flush with fresh noob opponents. |
_________________
Join the wait-list. Watch the action. Leave the Empire. Come to Bretonnia! |
|
dolphinandrew
Joined: May 09, 2017
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 11:35 |
|
Whether Blood Bowl is high or low variance depends very much on what you are comparing it to.
I'd say it's a high variance game compared to a lot of modern (especially Euro) boardgames. Compared to a lot of miniature games and other GW games, on the other hand, it's relatively low variance, with skill being comparatively more important. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 11:48 |
|
I'm not saying to turn BB into a coach's skill-only, deterministic game like Chess.
I'm saying to tweak a bit the rules to reward more the coach's skill than now, remove the frustrating uncontrollable randomness (the one affecting you without any decision made by you in game) and nerf the automatic success/failure %.
It's not only about the dice, there are many aspects that could be tweaked: Officious Ref, as far as I know by talking with other coaches (of any skill level), is universally considered bad randomness for the sake of it.
If you are a bad coach struggling to play vs a better coach, losing a Bloodspawn or a Tomb Guardian on turn 0 just due to a totally uncontrollable random event it's super frustrating.
It's the kind of stuff that can drive coaches off.
About me: I'm still here because the game improved compared to 3rd edition, but under some aspects it got worse (multi rr, for example, random skills, passing, random MVP, worse CAS table).
Cpomb in CRP was awful, BB2016 was an improvement, BB2020 is a step backward again.
About a noob beating a Super Star: yes, it can boost motivation temporarily, but on the other hand, when a win is due to sheer dice you are not actually getting better as a coach.
You get better as a coach when the moves you do and the way you play have more impact on the games than rolling dice.
So, yes, the noob coach will gloat, for a while and be rewarded, that day, but it's not something bound to last.
I started to have more fun from the game when I played better, without relying too much on dice.
People should not rely on dice, they should rely on doing the right moves. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 13:21 |
|
You are free to move to a D8, D20, D100 as you wish.
I'd say that coach skill is rewarded too much.
It is just a matter of preference. You do what you want. I'll do what I want.
My favourite part of the rules was the bit that said
| Quote: | "In a league, the Commissioner’s word is LAW. He is allowed to
change or modify any of the Blood Bowl rules as he sees fit,
including any of the League Rules that follow." |
That seems to be gone now but I'll follow it all the same.  |
_________________
O[L]C - Old style skill progression - 1100TV KO --- All Stars Autumn Bowl 11th September!! |
|
CrisisChris
Joined: Dec 11, 2023
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 13:25 |
|
I am not what you would call a very experienced coach at all, but I can agree with both positions:
1) The current random dice are really fun for stunties etc. It is just so much fun to see a Snot do heroic things against all odds.
2) Playing the game more 'strategic' is fun too and in this case more dice variance would be great.
As a general feeling I would say, It would be a good idea to think about ways to improve the 'ball' aspect of the game a bit compared to the 'blood'. But that is only IMHO.
While in a single game the Bash and Dash may be balanced more or less, the lasting effects of beeing beaten to pulp are there, even if you win the game. And the income component does not compensate that.
So BH should make up a bigger part of the CAS compared to MNG (NI) and Stat decreases. Speaking of those: Stat decreases should be reflected in the TV.
Another idea could be to change the income table. Maybe something like 'sum of DF multiplied by 2.5k for each team plus 20k per TD' and a negative incentive for loosing with high TD difference comparable to lasting injuries: 'star is annoyed' (highest SPP player does not play in next match) could also be a way to balance the Low AV team disadvantage.
As said in the beginning I am in no way as experienced as some of you, but I would be happy to hear your remarks. |
|
|
Jayward
Joined: Dec 22, 2020
|
| Posted:
Aug 21, 2024 - 14:04 |
|
Yeah, attrition can be a real bummer. Players don't 'die' as often in BB2020; death is death, and most stat busts are death, but NI aren't automatic fires any more. You are more likely to miss the next game, though, and I'm sure we've all had the death spiral from being down positionals.
It'll never happen, but I'd love to see Miss Next Game be removed, and have stat busts convert to Niggling Injuries after one game. So if your star blitzer gets a MV bust he can still play the next game in his crippled state and then be okay again (albeit one step closer to death because of the NI).
I think it would soften attrition for the squishier teams, and lessen the times where you have a team-ender of a game through lost positionals. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Chorfs, No Tackle?! ...
Search
