New Strength Skill

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 2:32 am

Dark Lord wrote:Actually Sean, if you look Pariah claims that he doesn't know about the MBBL 2 in his first post and secondly somebody else said that he thought Galak would pop and say it worked fine but his "blood bowl sense was tingling."

Actually I was quite glad for Sean's comments. There are light years of difference between Mestari's comments and Pariah at the beginning of this whole mess.

Mestari's comment was that I would pop in and say its fine .... why did Mestari say this ... because he knows that the MBBL2 squashes the stuff that doesn't work and throws it out the window. IE his post about the MBBL2's experience came from a favorable root.

Pariah's comment is easy translated to: I never fix bad rules in the MBBL so even if the skill was a bad idea, I probably would have left it in the MBBL2. IE his post about me commenting about the MBBL2's experience came from a negative root.

Light and day difference. Mestari's comment is correct. My experience in the skill from the MBBL2 is that it has not been a problem after two years of use. Would it work outside the MBBL2 ... don't know.

Pariah's comment isn't correct. Stiff Arm would have been long removed from the MBBL2 if it didn't work. I don't leave cr*p in my leagues.

World of difference, Dark Lord, ... world of difference. And I appreciate Sean trying to help me explain it all.

Galak

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 2:45 am

Actually, I think that you often insinuate rules would work outside of the MBBL2 without ever saying so directly. Many times a rookie coach will say something about a x-skill, or come up with some odd ball team and you'll chime in with "We have used it for years with no complaints."

You never tell the poor chap that you used it in a PBeM league that has loads of teams and other experimentalwho only a play a few games each season.

That is usually conviently left out.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 3:32 am

What the hell did the MBBL2 and the 4 other leagues that use those rules ever do to you Pariah .... geesch.

Again ... I don't recall saying anything when you used to say on BBC that such and such worked in your leagues which had several house rules favoring open brutality. I trust every person to be able to understand what their life experience tells them. I'm sorry we disagree on what my life experience tells me.

As for the topic at hand, I'll repeat the EXACT same thing one more time with the extra words that you apparantly need me to say:

"The MBBL2 has used Stiff Arm as an Agility skill for 2 1/2 league seasons which means 15 games total to date. The MBBL2 is a PBeM league and has several house rules. In this environment, Stiff Arm has proven to be balanced and without issue as a skill. I'm not sure if it would be the same in an LRB league, but I suspect that it would be very close to balanced."

Happy now, Pariah.

Galak

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 7:36 am

The discussion has taken a few leaps onwards while I haven't been watching...

Stiff Arm:
The two years of testing is a very strong argument for the case that the skill is balanced. However, I still have doubts whether it could be abused if used excessively. No-one in Galak's league has yet done so, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it couldn't be abused. When taken only now and then it seems ok.

Example:
From the Piling on in it's current incarnation is easy to conclude that if you take it to many players you should be able to create a very inbalancing team.
Stiff arm isn't so obviously abusable as Piling on, but it could be.
Having seen many an elf team where the opponent only has one block (ie. the blitz) per turn, and given the fact that elven linemen are the only linemen that can be reliably and easily taken to 2 skills this does seem, IMO, a possibly abusable skill.

EXP system:
Galak: You mentioned that it gets 50/50 support somewhere. May I ask what was the poll question and what were the options available to those who answered?
(I'm not suggesting that the question was "Would you like to see EXP as an official system OR do you abuse animals" but I'd still like to see the questions and options

)

Yes, and I would like stress that my comments should be detached from those of Pariahs' in this thread. The fact that I have the beforementioned reservation about Stiff Arm doesn't mean I agree with Pariah's standpoint on certain issues discussed in this thread.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 10:59 am

Mestari wrote: and given the fact that elven linemen are the only linemen that can be reliably and easily taken to 2 skills this does seem, IMO, a possibly abusable skill.

Agreed ... it might need to be a trait if it was a new LRB item. Like I said, I can only comment on what I've seen over the 15 games played.

EXP system:
Galak: You mentioned that it gets 50/50 support somewhere. May I ask what was the poll question and what were the options available to those who answered?

The 50/50 is the MBBL response about EXP, ie a league that is currently playing with the rules. From the coaches that have talked to me half like it and half don't.

The other is the current vote in the MBBL2 for what aging system to use as of right now ... 19 coaches have voted:

Code: Select all

The MBBL2 will be dropping skill based aging before Round 4 of Season 3. Which method should replace it? All systems below will still have MVPs given at one per game. 
1) EXP aging using the SI table and starting at 7 EXP  
2) EXP aging using the SI table with no MNG effects starting at 6 EXP  
3) EXP Aging using the SI table using a D8 instead of a D6, aging starting at 8 EXP  
4) Roll for aging every 20 SPPs, D6 roll, 1-3=-1 AV, 4-5=Niggle, 6=No effect

1, 2, and 4 have 5 votes a piece. 3 has 4 votes. So at least when offer an EXP system or option #4 ... I have 75% ish of my league picking the EXP system. Could me #4 is flawed ... I don't know.

Galak

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 12:22 pm

GalakStarscraper wrote: Agreed ... it might need to be a trait if it was a new LRB item. Like I said, I can only comment on what I've seen over the 15 games played.

A reasonable standpoint. Should such a situation ever arise (and someone would be interested in my opinion on the subject) I would support giving it experimental status. Most of the other skills you have (especially kickoff return) could be practically made official right away.

The EXP system:

From the point of view of a mathematician and a scientist, you could hardly call those results unbiased.
What I'm trying to say is that it's misinformation if you say that 75% of coaches support the exp-system if you only gave them one alternative system to choose from. Also the like/notlike-survey lacks the option "would you like something else more?".
IIRC you've said that you analyse data as your job or something like that? Surely you then realise that using the above data as an argument as you have is pretty clearly in the realm of misinformation as the setup of the polls and queries is biased.

Luckily for the exp-system it has support where it counts, as I have seen relatively little support for it elsewhere.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 12:45 pm

Mestari wrote:IIRC you've said that you analyse data as your job or something like that? Surely you then realise that using the above data as an argument as you have is pretty clearly in the realm of misinformation as the setup of the polls and queries is biased.

Yes, I do ... I'll say again ... I don't care. Just get rid of skill based aging. The 20 SPP wear down aging method that is an option for the MBBL2 is just as good in my opinion.

Zombie's is the only fairly unbiased poll I've seen. But what I'm trying to say is that among the folks who are actually testing it when I simply asked do you like it? I got 50% yes answers. That's not a mandate, its not statistical, but its a far cry for some of the numbers folks are throwing around about its universal dislike.

I think I know how Pariah feels somedays ..... I don't care what aging is used, I'm not married to one. Not TR caps, not salary caps, not appearance fees, and not skill based as I truely believe in my heart that none of these are functional options. I'm wide open to the other options.

Galak

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 12:46 pm

Mestari wrote:Luckily for the exp-system it has support where it counts, as I have seen relatively little support for it elsewhere.

We all read what we want I think is what it comes down to ... last I read game based aging was leading Zombie's aging base method poll.

Galak

Dark Lord (retired) · Post by **Dark Lord (retired)** » Mon Apr 14, 2003 9:05 pm

I definitely don't understand the # of games played thing. What does the number of games played have to do with the strength of the player or the team? Doesn't make sense to me. And the people who call it realistic must live in some sort of fast motion world people die of old age at 10 years old. I don't like the way the works either. A lineman probably isn't a threat even after 30 games but a blizter is a pain after 15. Not to mention all teams progress at different rates. Dwarves and chaos progress relatively slowly when compared to skaven or elves. Why should they age after the same # of games? If anyone can explain it to me I'd be happy to listen because I think I'm missing something. The system that works for every 20 points looks okay though!