Hi Dode,
If I were feeling a little less charitable I might suggest that it was dishonest.
Yes, you do like to throw that around. Doesn't bother me as much as it used to. But I like the way you manage to imply dishonesty while pretending you didn't. It certainly is a bit of a classic.
I should also note that the assumption that I'd claim that this house rule was supported by mathematically sound data is all yours.
If you want to "shrug off" results then you need to show there is a reason to do so.
You seem to have misread me. I did not wish to say that
I could just ignore all existing Khorne data.
I was trying to say that I don't think using data for NTBB(2013) has convinced anyone of anything.
For example, the box data shows Amazons to perform outside of tier 1 in their entire lifetime. And that's a lot of data. A problem? No, it's just a box/meta thing.
So if jumping through hoops gets me nothing, then maybe to hell with the hoops.
If you can't say it is broken then you don't fix it. Imagine if you took your car for a checkup to a mechanic who said "I can't say that the gearbox is broken, but I'm going to fix it anyway."
Important distincion between 'if it ain't broken, don't fix it' and 'if you can't prove that it is broken then you shouldn't fix it'.
I'm not overly thrilled by your car mechanic analogy. Because we do have a hint that they perform very low in tier 1.
But imagine this then: A guy goes to the mechanic. His brakes make a suspicious noise. He can't prove that they are broken. Neither can his mechanic. So he drives on with the noise for 5 years. As it happens, the brakes fail, the car then careens off a Cliff, and he dies in the explosion. His widow takes the burned out car to the mechanic. He thinks a while before he says - we have proof your brakes are broken.
That doesn't mean you get to ignore it if you want to claim to have NTBB (or whatever) based on data.
I already stated that I am considering a house rule. Perhaps. For a the roster I'm currently house ruling into my League.
If I add the roster and the house rule to NTBB, then I've already stated that I'd list that particular rule as iffy - i.e. not on a solid statistical foundation.
Of course, you could just abandon all use of data at all and simply try to sell NTBB on opinion and anecdote alone. That's fine, but not particularly convincing for many people, and you want to convince as many as possible.
I trust I can make a clear distincion on the site between NTBB proper, and a particular house rule to a house ruled roster. We'll see, I suppose.
And I'm not sure I
'want to convince as many people as possible'. Those are definately your Words.
I've stated many times that I know these rules aren't for everyone.
I've also stated that I hope they will appeal to people who already see the game the same way as I do.
I think that chances of
convincing anyone of anything is pretty slim.
I've given you plenty before. What more do you need?
Ideally, I'd like the things I listed in the very post you're quoting.
I'd be very interested to get the best possible information for my house rule.
But yes, I can track for TV bands with FOL data. I could for OCC with a bit of work, too.
I'd appriciate it. But since it is only any good to me, I can understand if you'd rather skip the extra work.
Coincidentally, in the NTBBL they are a touch below 45%, but maybe that's because most of our Khorne teams have only played around 6 games or so. Indeed the only one with a positive record is the one with the most games played.
[Oh, if you bother to check, we have a bug that on occasion assigns a tie that hasn't been played.]
Since Juggs is clearly a member of the set "all skills" and is not mentioned in the exceptions then it is quite clearly a 20k skill whether you like it or not.
Yes, and I remember how you described just how much careful consideration must have gone into the guide.
As it happens, there is a lot of retro-fitting in that document. Gems like VVL+Leap for 5K on a lineman isn't the result of careful analysis, but rather of Slann linemen being more expensive until player feedback killed that off.
I much prefer to think for myself.
When some of the least popular skills in the game like Pro and Pass Block get listed at 20K, (because they are members of the set "all skills" then I won't pretend it makes sense).
So you could reasonably within the guide reduce the cost of either the Heralds or the Letters, but not both.
Well, other than taking the guide with a grain of salt, I could take Letters down 10K.
Or Heralds an Rerolls 10K each (since the guide doesn't consider rerolls).
Or 10K off rerolls and Regen on the Heralds
On Cyanide it's official.
I thought you meant to imply the same thing with the word 'official' as everyone else here: GW official - i.e. officially part of Blood Bowl.
Coaches on Cyanide might wrongly think that it is GW official. But it isn't. It is Cyanide's very own house rule roster.
Cheers
Martin
PS - Crimsonsun: You've seem to get great mileage out of Juggernaut. Kudos! I wonder though - would you generally dedicate 140TV/7-skill-picks to it? I know I wouldn't - even if I have taken a jugger or two in the past
because it is self evident that all skills are not created equally.
