48 coaches online • Server time: 20:12
* * * Did you know? The brightest star is debog with 2031 SPPs.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnomes are trash | Fumbbl Cup - Replays | Mega-Stars never wen... |
2009-02-05 15:05:05
38 votes, rating 2.6
38 votes, rating 2.6
Skill or unskill, luck or unluck? The ethernal dilemma...
For sure I'm not a good coach, and this I think is an honest premise...I'm trying to stop to widge about my losses, and to accept that here in FUMBBL there are many really able coaches. I found many good play callers here, and this entry is just to recognize their valour.
- But like a modern Amleto sometimes the ethernal question "luck or not luck, tactics or no tactics" enters in my mind and takes 5 mins of my time to reflect. In my near 100 games played here in fumbbl I have discovered that what JanMatthys said is true. This java version of the game is made not to give you any satysfaction. Doing completes with two AG3 linemen (even equipped by rerolls) is not sure -I dare sayng nearly impossible- two straight rolls at 3+ are a really difficult challenge. So the chances of turnover are much higher than in real bloodbowl. But this is just an example, and I have discovered that this is a good exercise to improve your decisioning skills and the choice of a good playng sequence, expecially for a player rusty like me after a couple of yrs of inactivity.
Concerning the tactical aspect, I recognize I saw many good teams, enginered by their coaches by combination of wisely choiced skills and sage gameplanning. But let me say that I saw very few things really worth to be be learned. I began to play bloodbowl more than 10yrs ago, between the 2nd and third edition. At the end of the day few things are changed since, and the main tactics used by teams are the same. In the previous editions of the game fouling paid much more because you had the 2SPP for a cas, but the stalling and fouling tactics are still the same and the more reditive. When the 4th and 5th edition of the game were produced, I had hoped that the game would have changed in this, but I was mistaken. They limited you not having combos like daunt/frenzy for anyone, and refused to give you the said 2SPP. But if some efforts were made to encourage the teams to have a playbook more varied, the main problem remain marked.
If you like to play ball, there will alwayes be a moment in which you'll be forced to escape from the cage and go to find your receiver. And single dicerolls are alwayes more risky than rolls based on the 2dices (look at cas, fouls,and so on). So to say, playng ball is still discouraging, and here win the player which is able to make the less possible number of rolls based on single dice.
For me who began to love the bloodbowl after loving NFL football this is frustrating. Every team should have a playbook (and even Dwarves should be able to score on a passing play, after some turns of ball possession). So...the ethernal dilemma remains. Are we sure is just a matter of skill? I do not see much skill in the freezing ball or fouling tactic (and in the previous editions of games I was known like a sort of PaulHicks, using the only team he did not took to glory...dwarves, regardless the fact that this permitted to me to win some local tournaments).
Returning to Paulhicks I really appreciated what he said in his question time about "his strategy", defining it poor, bashy, not brilliant, but reditive and fun. I do not want to condemn the stallers or the foulers. Stalling is a weapon,fouling is fun. I just think that the times I have really learnt something on the field was when I faced teams which shew me plays i never thought, skill combos which gave a team a peculiar structure, defensive and offensive systems not previously experimented.
I think the competitive mode of the ranked division, in which winning is more important to be highly rated is killing or limiting this...but this is just a wandering though, and hope nobody felt offended by this post.
For me, I wanna keep going, refusing to enroll DP in swift teams, and alwayes tryng to play face to face, managing the clock just to avoid to give one more chance to score, not to deny chances to score at all.
This edition permits it, so why not tryng to play, instead of non playng tactics?
- But like a modern Amleto sometimes the ethernal question "luck or not luck, tactics or no tactics" enters in my mind and takes 5 mins of my time to reflect. In my near 100 games played here in fumbbl I have discovered that what JanMatthys said is true. This java version of the game is made not to give you any satysfaction. Doing completes with two AG3 linemen (even equipped by rerolls) is not sure -I dare sayng nearly impossible- two straight rolls at 3+ are a really difficult challenge. So the chances of turnover are much higher than in real bloodbowl. But this is just an example, and I have discovered that this is a good exercise to improve your decisioning skills and the choice of a good playng sequence, expecially for a player rusty like me after a couple of yrs of inactivity.
Concerning the tactical aspect, I recognize I saw many good teams, enginered by their coaches by combination of wisely choiced skills and sage gameplanning. But let me say that I saw very few things really worth to be be learned. I began to play bloodbowl more than 10yrs ago, between the 2nd and third edition. At the end of the day few things are changed since, and the main tactics used by teams are the same. In the previous editions of the game fouling paid much more because you had the 2SPP for a cas, but the stalling and fouling tactics are still the same and the more reditive. When the 4th and 5th edition of the game were produced, I had hoped that the game would have changed in this, but I was mistaken. They limited you not having combos like daunt/frenzy for anyone, and refused to give you the said 2SPP. But if some efforts were made to encourage the teams to have a playbook more varied, the main problem remain marked.
If you like to play ball, there will alwayes be a moment in which you'll be forced to escape from the cage and go to find your receiver. And single dicerolls are alwayes more risky than rolls based on the 2dices (look at cas, fouls,and so on). So to say, playng ball is still discouraging, and here win the player which is able to make the less possible number of rolls based on single dice.
For me who began to love the bloodbowl after loving NFL football this is frustrating. Every team should have a playbook (and even Dwarves should be able to score on a passing play, after some turns of ball possession). So...the ethernal dilemma remains. Are we sure is just a matter of skill? I do not see much skill in the freezing ball or fouling tactic (and in the previous editions of games I was known like a sort of PaulHicks, using the only team he did not took to glory...dwarves, regardless the fact that this permitted to me to win some local tournaments).
Returning to Paulhicks I really appreciated what he said in his question time about "his strategy", defining it poor, bashy, not brilliant, but reditive and fun. I do not want to condemn the stallers or the foulers. Stalling is a weapon,fouling is fun. I just think that the times I have really learnt something on the field was when I faced teams which shew me plays i never thought, skill combos which gave a team a peculiar structure, defensive and offensive systems not previously experimented.
I think the competitive mode of the ranked division, in which winning is more important to be highly rated is killing or limiting this...but this is just a wandering though, and hope nobody felt offended by this post.
For me, I wanna keep going, refusing to enroll DP in swift teams, and alwayes tryng to play face to face, managing the clock just to avoid to give one more chance to score, not to deny chances to score at all.
This edition permits it, so why not tryng to play, instead of non playng tactics?
Comments
Posted by WindexChugger on 2009-02-05 15:19:04
haven't read it yet...if I get through it I'll comment afterwards. Dude...use paragraphs!
Posted by kloudfire on 2009-02-05 15:56:15
I suggest playing a leagues....and build a few teams that you just love playing....sometimes winning take a lot of effort.
Posted by Zombie69 on 2009-02-05 17:44:30
"So the chances of turnover are much higher than in real bloodbowl."
Only if in real Blood Bowl you use loaded dice. The client here uses a really good random number generator (one of the best), and if the chance of making a roll is supposed to be 1 in 3, it really will be 1 in 3.
But certainly the more rolls you make, the higher the chance of eventually failing one. This is just as true on the board game as it is on the java version. One of the things that set appart good coaches from average ones is that good ones know how to throw as few dice as possible, to minimize the risk of failure.
Having said that, if you want to makes passes and exciting plays with the ball, it's still possible for sure, and elves are great at it. So play elves for a while and see how that goes! Still, it's certainly best to avoid throwing a die whenever you can. :)
Only if in real Blood Bowl you use loaded dice. The client here uses a really good random number generator (one of the best), and if the chance of making a roll is supposed to be 1 in 3, it really will be 1 in 3.
But certainly the more rolls you make, the higher the chance of eventually failing one. This is just as true on the board game as it is on the java version. One of the things that set appart good coaches from average ones is that good ones know how to throw as few dice as possible, to minimize the risk of failure.
Having said that, if you want to makes passes and exciting plays with the ball, it's still possible for sure, and elves are great at it. So play elves for a while and see how that goes! Still, it's certainly best to avoid throwing a die whenever you can. :)
Posted by BVZRoma on 2009-02-05 17:46:24
I assure I do not use palmed dices...but is true that using a low amount of dices reduces the chances to fail. The fact is that this random dices generator (me seems, and maybe I'm failing in this) uses to produce more often very high rolls or very low rolls...when often a gameplan is based on average dices...I used to feel quite sure of playng a 3+ with RR on board...here is often a problem. That's all
Posted by McVily on 2009-02-05 18:10:20
You have 1/6 chances of rolling any number no matter what have you rolled before. Not so long i noticed 6 (1) in a row (armor roll, rerolled failed gfi, armor roll). So have I've seen deaths with all (6), ref call, and argue succeed. It's all possible, and have same probability (666666 is as probable as 123456).
What you miss here is human factor of throwing dice from hands, thats all. In time, you'll get better ;)
What you miss here is human factor of throwing dice from hands, thats all. In time, you'll get better ;)
Posted by Aargh on 2009-02-05 18:13:58
I think that's more your imagination than any flaw in the RNG. I haven't been keeping an exact log of my rolls so I have no proof to offer, but from what I can tell, in time the rolls average out to a very even spread even if it doesn't always look like it in every individual game.
The game uses the "Mersenne Twister" to generate it's random numbers. This algoryth may have it's flaws, but it is very good at generating random numbers. In fact, I'm willing to bet my right hand on the fact that the Mersenne Twister is more random than whatever dice you use in real life, since dice tend to have small imperfections in them that make them less random than they should be.
The game uses the "Mersenne Twister" to generate it's random numbers. This algoryth may have it's flaws, but it is very good at generating random numbers. In fact, I'm willing to bet my right hand on the fact that the Mersenne Twister is more random than whatever dice you use in real life, since dice tend to have small imperfections in them that make them less random than they should be.
Posted by westerner on 2009-02-05 18:32:43
>But let me say that I saw very few things really worth to be be learned.
I disagree with this.. if some coaches can win a significantly larger percentage of games then they must be doing something I'm not.
BB is a deep and subtle game, and after 250 matches I'm only starting to understand strategy, and it's not all about fouling and stalling. But it does take a while to progress up the learning curve, so give yourself time.
For example, the other day a better coach than me gave me an easy score in T7 when he could have tried to prevent it. Why? Because he had 2 positionals in KO box, and he wanted 2 rolls to get them out instead of 1. That's the kind of thing I'm able to learn from now, even though I'm not yet good enough to think of them myself.
Approach the game with an open mind and the humility to learn from others, and you will progress. You will get better if you try. :)
I disagree with this.. if some coaches can win a significantly larger percentage of games then they must be doing something I'm not.
BB is a deep and subtle game, and after 250 matches I'm only starting to understand strategy, and it's not all about fouling and stalling. But it does take a while to progress up the learning curve, so give yourself time.
For example, the other day a better coach than me gave me an easy score in T7 when he could have tried to prevent it. Why? Because he had 2 positionals in KO box, and he wanted 2 rolls to get them out instead of 1. That's the kind of thing I'm able to learn from now, even though I'm not yet good enough to think of them myself.
Approach the game with an open mind and the humility to learn from others, and you will progress. You will get better if you try. :)
Posted by McVily on 2009-02-05 18:46:34
About keeping log...well, there is log of dices for every match... open result folder and chose one of zips. In it you'll find .log file. At the end of log file you'll see totall amount of each dice number. Here's few examples:
D6: 1(177) 2(166) 3(161) 4(141) 5(153) 6(172) Total(970)
D6: 1(182) 2(190) 3(173) 4(171) 5(196) 6(172) Total(1084)
D6: 1(182) 2(213) 3(203) 4(198) 5(206) 6(193) Total(1195)
As you can see, there's no significant difference between rolls.
D6: 1(177) 2(166) 3(161) 4(141) 5(153) 6(172) Total(970)
D6: 1(182) 2(190) 3(173) 4(171) 5(196) 6(172) Total(1084)
D6: 1(182) 2(213) 3(203) 4(198) 5(206) 6(193) Total(1195)
As you can see, there's no significant difference between rolls.
Posted by Zombie69 on 2009-02-05 19:11:22
"I assure I do not use palmed dices...but is true that using a low amount of dices reduces the chances to fail. The fact is that this random dices generator (me seems, and maybe I'm failing in this) uses to produce more often very high rolls or very low rolls...when often a gameplan is based on average dices...I used to feel quite sure of playng a 3+ with RR on board...here is often a problem. That's all"
Never said you used palmed dice, i said loaded dice. Basically, no die in real life is perfect. And unless you use casino dice, your dice are probably very far from perfect. As a result, some dice will have a greater chance of rolling one thing, others another thing. From your comment, it looks like the dice you use on the board game have a better chance of rolling 3s and 4s. That actually gives you an unfair advantage, as most rolls in Blood Bowl are either 2+ or 3+, so a 3 is almost always good enough.
I can assure you that the random number generator here gives precisely 1 in 6 chance to each side of the die, which is something that few real life dice can claim.
Never said you used palmed dice, i said loaded dice. Basically, no die in real life is perfect. And unless you use casino dice, your dice are probably very far from perfect. As a result, some dice will have a greater chance of rolling one thing, others another thing. From your comment, it looks like the dice you use on the board game have a better chance of rolling 3s and 4s. That actually gives you an unfair advantage, as most rolls in Blood Bowl are either 2+ or 3+, so a 3 is almost always good enough.
I can assure you that the random number generator here gives precisely 1 in 6 chance to each side of the die, which is something that few real life dice can claim.
Posted by pythrr on 2009-02-05 19:50:37
whine whine blah blah next
Posted by Twonky on 2009-09-11 13:53:29
I once played a Ogre v Ogre game My first 6 moves were to move or block with an ogre the dice 1,1,1,1,1,1 I then moved a goblin tried to gfi 1, rr 2 extra square 1. You just got to suck it up and take the hurt