39 coaches online • Server time: 09:45
* * * Did you know? There are 426706 active teams in FUMBBL.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnomes are trash | Fumbbl Cup - Replays | Mega-Stars never wen... |
2016-01-12 10:29:29
20 votes, rating 4.9
20 votes, rating 4.9
Thresholds of mastering Blood Bowl
This has been on my mind for a while. Most of it I actually learned from others, but I've been piecing it together in my head. The way I see it, there are several thresholds to overcome on the way to mastering Blood Bowl. Overcoming them is of course a gradual process, and unfortunately also a reversible one.
1. Learning the rules
Almost everyone on Fumbbl knows the rules, more or less. But a lot of people, both on Fumbbl and in Tabletop, quit because they just can't be bothered to learn all the rules. (When I joined Fumbbl to play in a private league, they made me play the first game of the league as my first game ever on Fumbbl. I didn't know the client and I didn't know the rules. And those were LRB4 times, both the client and the rules pack are easier now.)
2. Understanding team building and the meta game
On Fumbbl there are a lot of successful teams you can look at. Generally there are a lot of guides online, or people who can tell you which skills are important and which are not, which teams are good at what level, etc. Some coaches embrace that realization and try to get favourable match-ups to compensate their underdeveloped coaching skill; some even get stuck there. Others, appalled, do the opposite and start playing tier 2 or tier 3 rosters, or sub-optimal motto builds. Yet others continue with a balanced approach, which is probably the quickest route to the next level. (I played some 30 games with min-maxed Norse in the old Box but really I tired of it after 20, and started building them up and throwing them in tourneys.)
3. Understanding probabilities and risk avoidance
This is a hard one. At some point you start understanding that many of your plays are pretty risky. Online articles or the action calculator can help with this. Now you'll try to avoid those risks but you haven't developed the skill set yet to know what to do instead. So while you will feel your understanding of the game has improved, and it has, your results will probably even get worse, because those silly risky things you used to do? Some of the time they worked, and you won matches because of it. You will have to pass the next threshold before you see a real improvement. (I spent some very frustrating time at that level and almost quit, until I resolved to invest more effort into becoming better.)
4. Understanding positioning and risk-reward-ratio
What you now need is the eye for the position. You will need practice, and analysis, to overcome this threshold. On Fumbbl, the possibility to spec and watch replays can help with that a lot. It starts with things like building a cage, not giving away easy surfs, protecting your best players or putting your Guard where you need it. It proceeds to MA8 one turners, setting up Frenzy traps, protecting the ball from Gazers or Leapers on offence, etc. Essentially, the first three stages were acquiring the tools, and now you are actually putting them to use. And if you are able to read a position, you are also able to understand risk-reward-ratios, so you can make a reasonable decision of when you need to take a calculated risk. (I spent a lot of time watching my own replays and analysing what I could have done better in crucial turns that didn't go my way. One gauge is whether you manage to play a safe stall when you have superior numbers. When I was able to do this against top coaches I knew I had passed a threshold.)
5. Developing a game plan and controlling the pitch and clock
If the fourth stage is learning to use the tools, the fifth stage is actually deciding what you want to use the tools for. You go from "score T8" on offence and "prevent score/get ball" on defence to a more sophisticated game plan. It's about understanding where you want to be two turns from now, where your opponent wants you to be, where you want your opponent to be… when do you force the score and when do you abandon the drive entirely… how to manage rerolls… sometimes in T3 of the 1st half it will be important whether there is an overtime or not… how good is the other coach and how does that affect my positioning decisions… when two good coaches play, the game becomes less about the current turn, and more about the next turn and the turns that come after. (I didn't really realize this threshold was there for some time, so I kept focussing on getting one single turn exactly right. And of course, I still don't. But at some point I looked up and I realized that I now, finally, had enough control of my play that I could approach the next level, and there was an instant improvement. Unfortunately, it didn't last, as I'm currently playing less frequently and am often too tired to make the effort.)
6. And beyond?
Well, these are the thresholds I've discovered so far. Maybe the rest is just individual style, talent, and playing a couple thousand more matches. Or maybe there is another threshold that I am as yet unaware of?
1. Learning the rules
Almost everyone on Fumbbl knows the rules, more or less. But a lot of people, both on Fumbbl and in Tabletop, quit because they just can't be bothered to learn all the rules. (When I joined Fumbbl to play in a private league, they made me play the first game of the league as my first game ever on Fumbbl. I didn't know the client and I didn't know the rules. And those were LRB4 times, both the client and the rules pack are easier now.)
2. Understanding team building and the meta game
On Fumbbl there are a lot of successful teams you can look at. Generally there are a lot of guides online, or people who can tell you which skills are important and which are not, which teams are good at what level, etc. Some coaches embrace that realization and try to get favourable match-ups to compensate their underdeveloped coaching skill; some even get stuck there. Others, appalled, do the opposite and start playing tier 2 or tier 3 rosters, or sub-optimal motto builds. Yet others continue with a balanced approach, which is probably the quickest route to the next level. (I played some 30 games with min-maxed Norse in the old Box but really I tired of it after 20, and started building them up and throwing them in tourneys.)
3. Understanding probabilities and risk avoidance
This is a hard one. At some point you start understanding that many of your plays are pretty risky. Online articles or the action calculator can help with this. Now you'll try to avoid those risks but you haven't developed the skill set yet to know what to do instead. So while you will feel your understanding of the game has improved, and it has, your results will probably even get worse, because those silly risky things you used to do? Some of the time they worked, and you won matches because of it. You will have to pass the next threshold before you see a real improvement. (I spent some very frustrating time at that level and almost quit, until I resolved to invest more effort into becoming better.)
4. Understanding positioning and risk-reward-ratio
What you now need is the eye for the position. You will need practice, and analysis, to overcome this threshold. On Fumbbl, the possibility to spec and watch replays can help with that a lot. It starts with things like building a cage, not giving away easy surfs, protecting your best players or putting your Guard where you need it. It proceeds to MA8 one turners, setting up Frenzy traps, protecting the ball from Gazers or Leapers on offence, etc. Essentially, the first three stages were acquiring the tools, and now you are actually putting them to use. And if you are able to read a position, you are also able to understand risk-reward-ratios, so you can make a reasonable decision of when you need to take a calculated risk. (I spent a lot of time watching my own replays and analysing what I could have done better in crucial turns that didn't go my way. One gauge is whether you manage to play a safe stall when you have superior numbers. When I was able to do this against top coaches I knew I had passed a threshold.)
5. Developing a game plan and controlling the pitch and clock
If the fourth stage is learning to use the tools, the fifth stage is actually deciding what you want to use the tools for. You go from "score T8" on offence and "prevent score/get ball" on defence to a more sophisticated game plan. It's about understanding where you want to be two turns from now, where your opponent wants you to be, where you want your opponent to be… when do you force the score and when do you abandon the drive entirely… how to manage rerolls… sometimes in T3 of the 1st half it will be important whether there is an overtime or not… how good is the other coach and how does that affect my positioning decisions… when two good coaches play, the game becomes less about the current turn, and more about the next turn and the turns that come after. (I didn't really realize this threshold was there for some time, so I kept focussing on getting one single turn exactly right. And of course, I still don't. But at some point I looked up and I realized that I now, finally, had enough control of my play that I could approach the next level, and there was an instant improvement. Unfortunately, it didn't last, as I'm currently playing less frequently and am often too tired to make the effort.)
6. And beyond?
Well, these are the thresholds I've discovered so far. Maybe the rest is just individual style, talent, and playing a couple thousand more matches. Or maybe there is another threshold that I am as yet unaware of?
Comments
Posted by Chainsaw on 2016-01-12 10:33:26
> when do you abandon the drive entirely…
You will never enter Valhalla, dishonourable one!
You will never enter Valhalla, dishonourable one!
Posted by harvestmouse on 2016-01-12 10:44:23
"Yet others continue with a balanced approach, which is probably the quickest route to the next level. (I played some 30 games with min-maxed Norse in the old Box but really I tired of it after 20"
This is a balanced approach? You polluted a gaming environment for 30 games and a 3rd of which you weren't even enjoying it yourself. Well done sir, give yourself a pat on the back for stopping.
Personally, I wouldn't consider your approach balanced. Just as you wouldn't consider my approach balanced. You're extremely competitive, so your opinion is biased on the matter of balance.
This is a balanced approach? You polluted a gaming environment for 30 games and a 3rd of which you weren't even enjoying it yourself. Well done sir, give yourself a pat on the back for stopping.
Personally, I wouldn't consider your approach balanced. Just as you wouldn't consider my approach balanced. You're extremely competitive, so your opinion is biased on the matter of balance.
Posted by Harad on 2016-01-12 10:54:58
I'm not sure I've given it enough thought to claim that these are 'thresholds' but there are a few other perspectives that you may well touch on in the above that I think have helped me (the first may be a threshold and the third may be a way to achieve some of the thresholds whilst the second is just mindset):
1. Opposition coach. I think one starts to realise that the optimal play against different coaches is different. Against a weaker coach it can often be the right play to wait for a better chance or to simply set them positions in which they are likely to make bad choices. Against a stronger coach you might have to take the only chance you get. What would that coach least like it if I did?
2. The dice are the dice. 'All that we have to do is decide what to do with the dice that are given to us'. I have found it helpful to change my perspective from rolling for chances. More like contract bridge, we all, eventually, effectively play the same hands. So what differentiates one coach from another is if they can get more out of the same dice. The dice are different in one game but in the long run they are the same.
3. Handicap. Playing bad races helps. Once you've worried about getting the positioning right on some of the weaker races it becomes much easier do so with the stronger ones.
1. Opposition coach. I think one starts to realise that the optimal play against different coaches is different. Against a weaker coach it can often be the right play to wait for a better chance or to simply set them positions in which they are likely to make bad choices. Against a stronger coach you might have to take the only chance you get. What would that coach least like it if I did?
2. The dice are the dice. 'All that we have to do is decide what to do with the dice that are given to us'. I have found it helpful to change my perspective from rolling for chances. More like contract bridge, we all, eventually, effectively play the same hands. So what differentiates one coach from another is if they can get more out of the same dice. The dice are different in one game but in the long run they are the same.
3. Handicap. Playing bad races helps. Once you've worried about getting the positioning right on some of the weaker races it becomes much easier do so with the stronger ones.
Posted by bghandras on 2016-01-12 10:58:52
Where would playing the matchup and the dice go? Let me explain. Assuming average dice, in the given matchup there is a likelyhood of scoreing / not scoring on any given drive. My question relates the knowledge of this, the traps setting up to manipulate the opponent, meanwhile testing whether he knows this.
Then as dice develops, it increases or decreases those chances, and how you react to it.
I am not confident saying this is a new level, but also not evident to me where to fit in.
Then as dice develops, it increases or decreases those chances, and how you react to it.
I am not confident saying this is a new level, but also not evident to me where to fit in.
Posted by Harad on 2016-01-12 11:06:59
To bghandras' point and as an extension of mine there is also skill in ascertaining how good the opponent is. On Fumbbl you often have a good idea of your opponent's skills but this is not always the case and you need to find out to determine the best strategy. I think it is a skill to be able to analyse your opponent's play and determine how good they are. Perhaps an example of this is that I have a winning record against several of the coaches I've played against who I think are better than me.
Posted by Wreckage on 2016-01-12 11:11:38
It irritates me a bit that you put the metagame before learning the actual odds.
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:18:51
@ harvestmouse: Well look, the righteous avenger is back. If you stopped to read charitably for a moment, you'd realize that I listed three different approaches, then I explained what I personally did. I left it to others to judge where on the scale I fall. Instead of accusing others of polluting the site, maybe you should consider what you yourself are doing with your constant negativity.
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:20:55
@ Wreckage: Well in actuality it all happens in parallel, but my line of reasoning was that you can learn the meta game basically purely by immitation, while learning the odds requires understanding how it works.
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:24:43
@ bghandras + Harad: The subtleties of how to play vs. different skill levels in the other coach, setting up traps, testing them etc. would fall within my 5th stage. At the fourth stage you are still mainly focussed on your own play, and the idea that you can actually make your opponent do what you want them to do is part of passing the 5th threshold.
Posted by bghandras on 2016-01-12 11:25:34
Toö be fair the difference between 1d block and 2d block is huge, but the diference between blockless 1d block, and -2d block with block skill is not as much, as far as the chance of immediate turnover is concerned, and this latter difference may actually be learned after the meta.
Posted by bghandras on 2016-01-12 11:26:56
@Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:24:43
My specific question was where you rate the knowledge of the typical drive with average dice in each and every possible matchup at every TV level(millions of combinations) fit in.
My specific question was where you rate the knowledge of the typical drive with average dice in each and every possible matchup at every TV level(millions of combinations) fit in.
Posted by coombz on 2016-01-12 11:32:58
take me over the threshold
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:33:13
You mean the Rock, Scissors, Paper on every scale, basically?
Well of course everyone has some idea of that, but to begin to understand it on a large scale and to be able to actually draw conclusions and implement them, I would certainly rate part of the 5th level. Are you getting at whether there is a 6th level when you really master that equation? If so, I haven't reached it yet. :-)
Well of course everyone has some idea of that, but to begin to understand it on a large scale and to be able to actually draw conclusions and implement them, I would certainly rate part of the 5th level. Are you getting at whether there is a 6th level when you really master that equation? If so, I haven't reached it yet. :-)
Posted by bghandras on 2016-01-12 11:42:16
I have no clue if it is a next level. I am aspiring to map it for low and mid TV for tier 1 races, and havent completed that. Having played 1500-ish games in contrast to the probabilities of millions, i cant claim having approached any decent sample size.
So i can see it both fitting in (as application to xour points above), and also as a new layer.
So i can see it both fitting in (as application to xour points above), and also as a new layer.
Posted by Harad on 2016-01-12 11:47:27
Isn't it a much more advanced level knowledge of the probabilities?
A beginner should be able to tell you the probability of making an AG3 dodge out of a tackle zone.
As the situation becomes more complex it gets to the stage where a computer would struggle to calculate the probabilities. At this level the heuristic appreciation of probability takes over. In theory one could calculate the probability but in reality it's a perception of probabilities.
A beginner should be able to tell you the probability of making an AG3 dodge out of a tackle zone.
As the situation becomes more complex it gets to the stage where a computer would struggle to calculate the probabilities. At this level the heuristic appreciation of probability takes over. In theory one could calculate the probability but in reality it's a perception of probabilities.
Posted by Throweck on 2016-01-12 11:50:12
Probably ;p
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 11:50:44
How much of it is only experience though, as opposed to a deeper understanding?
Posted by Harad on 2016-01-12 11:57:26
I think you can arrive at it in either direction. Some people will approach it mathematically and their uncertainties are introduced by the limitations of mathematical methods whilst others approach it heuristically and their uncertainties are introduced by the limitations of biases.
I think you could master this aspect very early on by a deep mathematical appreciation but suspect most get there through experience.
I think you could master this aspect very early on by a deep mathematical appreciation but suspect most get there through experience.
Posted by bghandras on 2016-01-12 12:01:46
"How much of it is only experience though, as opposed to a deeper understanding?"
I think both are needed. Sample size does not replace evaluation. It is just necessary to feed into it, thus decrease the perceived randomness in both heuristical and mathematical approach.
I think both are needed. Sample size does not replace evaluation. It is just necessary to feed into it, thus decrease the perceived randomness in both heuristical and mathematical approach.
Posted by Patator on 2016-01-12 12:02:59
I think you missed the first step of all :
- Bloodbowl is a game and we play it to enjoy it. So you should try to enjoy it most of the time. It s not about enjoying win but about enjoying play. Play means loosing to. Off course you try to win but the level of fun shouldnt be too much dependant on winning.
I had a dream where snakes where the ultimate humour :-)
- Bloodbowl is a game and we play it to enjoy it. So you should try to enjoy it most of the time. It s not about enjoying win but about enjoying play. Play means loosing to. Off course you try to win but the level of fun shouldnt be too much dependant on winning.
I had a dream where snakes where the ultimate humour :-)
Posted by p4m on 2016-01-12 12:21:21
i 2nd Patator to a degree. it's a game and we can loose cos it's a dice game, but we play to win and you should treat your opponent the same way.
learning the meta is somewhat deeper as you put it on your list, it's not about what combo is a great killer or how to minmax something, it's also what skills you need to have a veriety of opponents you can play vs. What races are favoured over the other and why... learning the meta is something you don't have to learn before the odds. It's more a part of you 5th point or even 6th ;)
learning the meta is somewhat deeper as you put it on your list, it's not about what combo is a great killer or how to minmax something, it's also what skills you need to have a veriety of opponents you can play vs. What races are favoured over the other and why... learning the meta is something you don't have to learn before the odds. It's more a part of you 5th point or even 6th ;)
Posted by Wreckage on 2016-01-12 12:25:25
Harad, some great insight from you. Made me actually look you up. :)
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 12:40:51
@ p4m: Yeah with all of these of course you continue to improve all the time. What I mean by threshold is simply that you reach a certain level of awareness where you can actually use that thing in your favour. But as Wreckage also pointed out, my 2nd and 3rd level are not really in a mandatory order, you don't need the one before you get the other, though you need both of them to get to the 4th level. My observation on Fumbbl is that most coaches master the 2nd level before the 3rd, and some stay on the 2nd level without mastering the 3rd infinitely. Well. Everybody on Fumbbl learns to do 2d blocks and not to dodge with AG2. But what the actual odds of an AG2 dodge are, or of bringing down a Blodger ond a 2d block? My guess is that most coaches figure that out after they learn the basics of team building and matchmaking.
Posted by Harad on 2016-01-12 12:52:49
Oh wreckage I blush :)
To continue the love in, I learned a lot from your writings.
Always happy to try to contribute although I know that there will be rubbish mixed in with anything useful I have to say.
What I think is relevant is that my CR progression shows a slow upwards slope over my time here. CR is flawed but it does give me some evidence that I managed to convert my theoretical view of how I could improve from a very mediocre coach to a slightly better one into reality.
I also second the observations about it being a game of fun :)
To continue the love in, I learned a lot from your writings.
Always happy to try to contribute although I know that there will be rubbish mixed in with anything useful I have to say.
What I think is relevant is that my CR progression shows a slow upwards slope over my time here. CR is flawed but it does give me some evidence that I managed to convert my theoretical view of how I could improve from a very mediocre coach to a slightly better one into reality.
I also second the observations about it being a game of fun :)
Posted by Strider84 on 2016-01-12 12:54:19
The problem with the mathematical approach is you need some variable/weight ond different positions where your team can be at the end of a turn. E.g is it worth doing 2gfi to have the cage one spac3 deeper on turn 5. In order to weigh that heurestic aproaches are needed because there are so many different possibilities how your opponent can play his defense. Thats why an ai can never be as good as. Human player except if programmed with neural nets and trained for a couple million games
Posted by Wreckage on 2016-01-12 13:00:40
It's very hard to tell how the appreciation for depth goes. Some steps can be learned or experienced from gaming in general. But in some ways experience in other games can also be a hinderance to success in Blood Bowl.
For instance a 55% chance in a game where success isn't critical to advance is a reasonably solid thing. If you come from a game where there is no detrimental effect to failure like there is in BB, you may have a harder time to learn how to stay within the scope of the very high success chance actions.
If on the other hand you go into the game unbiased and simply learn it through experience, you'll develop more quickly an intuitive understanding that a a 1/9 fail-chance does not usually mean that you get to usually do 8 successful actions first. And that the 1/9 fail chance can occur anywhere but probably around half way through.
Speaking of which this reminds me of another great realization I had only a couple of years into the game. I think it's very hard to really put these sorts of experiences in any order since it can be a very different level of debth and understanding you learn about any of these aspects any given point.
For a while I was stuggeling how to deal with the dilemma that you can do very solid planning and still end up in situations that are completely ruining your game on the off chance that they fail.
And this is in fact one of the things that can really make me aspire once in a while in this game:
Early on some coach will probably tell you that you have to plan for failure. The problem with planning for failure is that it makes you exceedingly overcautious. You have to set yourself certain minimal objectives in your turn and if you choose an objective that is not sufficient to protect yourself, your opponent will be able to overpower you in spite of you reaching your goals. This is something that really shouldn't happen. A goal should be sufficiently effective for your opponent not to gain an advantage on you.
At the same time setting yourself ambitious goals and failing half way through is not only likely to occur it will often leave you in a terrible place. So what do you do?
You account for the probability of success and failure in accordance to their likelyness to occur in your positioning. Which means you plan for failure AND success at the same time. You have to basically assess that either event could happen and be ready for it. Rather than being so narrow minded to think of the game as a strategy game with one possible likely outcome that could fail (in which case it is just bad luck).
To word it differently: The chance that after a dodge you either fail and go on the ground with all its implactions OR that you escape and are able to go somewhere else is 100%.
For instance a 55% chance in a game where success isn't critical to advance is a reasonably solid thing. If you come from a game where there is no detrimental effect to failure like there is in BB, you may have a harder time to learn how to stay within the scope of the very high success chance actions.
If on the other hand you go into the game unbiased and simply learn it through experience, you'll develop more quickly an intuitive understanding that a a 1/9 fail-chance does not usually mean that you get to usually do 8 successful actions first. And that the 1/9 fail chance can occur anywhere but probably around half way through.
Speaking of which this reminds me of another great realization I had only a couple of years into the game. I think it's very hard to really put these sorts of experiences in any order since it can be a very different level of debth and understanding you learn about any of these aspects any given point.
For a while I was stuggeling how to deal with the dilemma that you can do very solid planning and still end up in situations that are completely ruining your game on the off chance that they fail.
And this is in fact one of the things that can really make me aspire once in a while in this game:
Early on some coach will probably tell you that you have to plan for failure. The problem with planning for failure is that it makes you exceedingly overcautious. You have to set yourself certain minimal objectives in your turn and if you choose an objective that is not sufficient to protect yourself, your opponent will be able to overpower you in spite of you reaching your goals. This is something that really shouldn't happen. A goal should be sufficiently effective for your opponent not to gain an advantage on you.
At the same time setting yourself ambitious goals and failing half way through is not only likely to occur it will often leave you in a terrible place. So what do you do?
You account for the probability of success and failure in accordance to their likelyness to occur in your positioning. Which means you plan for failure AND success at the same time. You have to basically assess that either event could happen and be ready for it. Rather than being so narrow minded to think of the game as a strategy game with one possible likely outcome that could fail (in which case it is just bad luck).
To word it differently: The chance that after a dodge you either fail and go on the ground with all its implactions OR that you escape and are able to go somewhere else is 100%.
Posted by Verminardo on 2016-01-12 13:13:20
Good stuff people, keep it coming! :-)
Posted by Wreckage on 2016-01-12 13:25:08
@strider , I think Garions BB AI was the first AI I have ever seen and it was a very interesting experience for me.
It wasn't at all like something I would have imagined. It didn't anticipate opponent turns or actions in any way. It was rather build around prioritization of the own actions. Ball cover for instance would have a very high probability assigned, making certain players act in a certain way until it was established.
Blocks would be prioritized when they were likely to succeed and so on. But there wasn't even a general utilization of odds, as in Garion didn't tell the computer what the actual odds of those actions were. It was rather a human approach to behavior.
Basically the AI would assess at the beginning of the turn what the state of the game was and then apply the appropriate actions.
There are of course lots of limitations to what such an AI can do.
I thouhgt it astounding tho how decent the AI was overall at protecting and charging the ball. Its biggest limitation was probably turn time management. It had no concept of when to stall and when to score. It could end movement of the carrier 2 squares before the end zone in turn 8 to not take the risk of a turnover from a GFI. :)
It wasn't at all like something I would have imagined. It didn't anticipate opponent turns or actions in any way. It was rather build around prioritization of the own actions. Ball cover for instance would have a very high probability assigned, making certain players act in a certain way until it was established.
Blocks would be prioritized when they were likely to succeed and so on. But there wasn't even a general utilization of odds, as in Garion didn't tell the computer what the actual odds of those actions were. It was rather a human approach to behavior.
Basically the AI would assess at the beginning of the turn what the state of the game was and then apply the appropriate actions.
There are of course lots of limitations to what such an AI can do.
I thouhgt it astounding tho how decent the AI was overall at protecting and charging the ball. Its biggest limitation was probably turn time management. It had no concept of when to stall and when to score. It could end movement of the carrier 2 squares before the end zone in turn 8 to not take the risk of a turnover from a GFI. :)
Posted by awambawamb on 2016-01-12 13:39:24
how can you really "master" the aleatory result of the dice?
you play for the thrill of that 5+ 3+ 2+ 3+ 2+ 2+ sequence to snatch a ball in a couple of TZs, pass it and score or for the warhammerish, casualty-related aspect of the game that give you the illusion to be blessed somehow and you've been "able" to overcome an obstacle.
You may win while being beaten, and it's fine. You may be the losing butcher and that's fine too. In some matches, tho, everything goes totally wrong and there is little to do - no POW! on the dices, opponents armor that cannot even be pierced and that's it. Both the *blood* and the *bowl* goes to your opponent. But this could happen to you too so you keep playing until the luck turns around and you get to be on the other side.
All those lists of "do" and "don't" are utter BS - you can't really develop a strategy unless you are sure to roll like 3dB every block (and even then I've seen 6 skulls popping up). Basically almost every action requires rolling a dice and therefore it WILL fail, sooner or later; some failures are not a turnover and can suck some 1s, but we are bound to failure nonetheless.
Mastering BB is all about mastering how much lsing you can take, and how big is your smile when you meet assholes on the field. In that case, take screenshots. Every. Fucking. Minute.
Or they will pull stunts around you and give you a terrible day.
you play for the thrill of that 5+ 3+ 2+ 3+ 2+ 2+ sequence to snatch a ball in a couple of TZs, pass it and score or for the warhammerish, casualty-related aspect of the game that give you the illusion to be blessed somehow and you've been "able" to overcome an obstacle.
You may win while being beaten, and it's fine. You may be the losing butcher and that's fine too. In some matches, tho, everything goes totally wrong and there is little to do - no POW! on the dices, opponents armor that cannot even be pierced and that's it. Both the *blood* and the *bowl* goes to your opponent. But this could happen to you too so you keep playing until the luck turns around and you get to be on the other side.
All those lists of "do" and "don't" are utter BS - you can't really develop a strategy unless you are sure to roll like 3dB every block (and even then I've seen 6 skulls popping up). Basically almost every action requires rolling a dice and therefore it WILL fail, sooner or later; some failures are not a turnover and can suck some 1s, but we are bound to failure nonetheless.
Mastering BB is all about mastering how much lsing you can take, and how big is your smile when you meet assholes on the field. In that case, take screenshots. Every. Fucking. Minute.
Or they will pull stunts around you and give you a terrible day.
Posted by Royston on 2016-01-12 13:51:46
Crap. Around 27 years of playing Bloodbowl and I'm still on No. 1.
Posted by Uedder on 2016-01-12 14:22:39
Too much to read in the comments.
I'd add BB zen to the list. Keeping a cool head even when things go wrong is one of the most important traits of a good coach, imo.
I'd add BB zen to the list. Keeping a cool head even when things go wrong is one of the most important traits of a good coach, imo.
Posted by thoralf on 2016-01-12 23:21:21
"Basically almost every action requires rolling a dice and therefore it WILL fail, sooner or later; some failures are not a turnover and can suck some 1s, but we are bound to failure nonetheless."
And yet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Magriel
And yet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Magriel
Posted by fidius on 2016-01-13 00:08:50
One aspect I struggle with is the "strength lockdown" -- where Strength teams step up into contact in a combination of ST4 and Guard which is impossible to unlock and requires -2d and/or dodging away to extricate from. Step 4 (Positioning) I guess. It strikes me as a mathematical gift to be able to put these in place on the fly. I suspect I will never master this aspect -- I'm pretty good with math but not nearly as good as the top tier among us. Some practice with Strength teams would help me I suppose.
Step 3 (Risk) is accurate, but is half mindset, half calculation. The mindset is the Zen, the patience. Not forcing plays, being patient on defense, and then knowing when to pounce.
Step 5 (Pace) is indeed the difference between good players and great ones. Unfortunately it's also highly irritating to play against stallers, and as such you don't see "pace management" in TT as much, except in tournaments and playoffs (at least in NA). In my view making your opponent miserable is just rude. I locked one of my friends out of an Eclipse game a few years back, and while he took it well, he was a 2 hour spectator and I felt bad. BB has an implicit social contract that is abandoned by some (many) in online play. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm more than happy to never reach Step 5. Although I do acknowledge that there are ways to manage pace that don't feel like stalling -- I guess this is the trick.
Step 3 (Risk) is accurate, but is half mindset, half calculation. The mindset is the Zen, the patience. Not forcing plays, being patient on defense, and then knowing when to pounce.
Step 5 (Pace) is indeed the difference between good players and great ones. Unfortunately it's also highly irritating to play against stallers, and as such you don't see "pace management" in TT as much, except in tournaments and playoffs (at least in NA). In my view making your opponent miserable is just rude. I locked one of my friends out of an Eclipse game a few years back, and while he took it well, he was a 2 hour spectator and I felt bad. BB has an implicit social contract that is abandoned by some (many) in online play. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm more than happy to never reach Step 5. Although I do acknowledge that there are ways to manage pace that don't feel like stalling -- I guess this is the trick.
Posted by happygrue on 2016-01-13 00:55:25
The old quote about the game of Go comes to mind, here is one version of it:
"The board is a mirror of the mind of the players as the moments pass. When a master studies the record of a game he can tell at what point greed overtook the pupil, when he became tired, when he fell into stupidity, and when the maid came by with tea."
Of course, BB is not Go. Sometimes the best move actually goes unrewarded and sloppy play wins out. However, managing the risk and watching a high level coach controlling their own emotion at the game enough to see past "on-tilt moves" is really fun to see. Every game I look back on some moment and realize something was clouding my judgement that I let get in the way. It's good to have room to grow!
As for mastering the game... anyone who says they have is due for a 2-0 beatdown by rookie flings. :D
"The board is a mirror of the mind of the players as the moments pass. When a master studies the record of a game he can tell at what point greed overtook the pupil, when he became tired, when he fell into stupidity, and when the maid came by with tea."
Of course, BB is not Go. Sometimes the best move actually goes unrewarded and sloppy play wins out. However, managing the risk and watching a high level coach controlling their own emotion at the game enough to see past "on-tilt moves" is really fun to see. Every game I look back on some moment and realize something was clouding my judgement that I let get in the way. It's good to have room to grow!
As for mastering the game... anyone who says they have is due for a 2-0 beatdown by rookie flings. :D
Posted by Dalfort on 2016-01-13 14:49:41
Rated at the current threshold of my game... 3