Humans - Theoretical LRB7 Discussion

bouncergriim · Post by **bouncergriim** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:58 pm

I see the points, I was unaware of the succeessfl human fluff. I just pictured other teams getting even with humans on the pitch.

Not that this is really related (and this is just my opinions and musings) What is the win precentage of humans in WFB tournies and how does it compare to humans in BB. I know they are not the same worlds and I know this is a can of worms, but I was curious.

In summary, I like humans how they are and have always been. I like keeping the same for consistancy.

bjorn9486 · Post by **bjorn9486** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:59 pm

bouncergriim wrote:Not that this is really related (and this is just my opinions and musings) What is the win precentage of humans in WFB tournies and how does it compare to humans in BB. I know they are not the same worlds and I know this is a can of worms, but I was curious.

In WFB, I play(ed) Empire(Humans) at the time and my Opponent was mostly Lizzardmen, ocasionally High Elf. Out of the probably 2 dozen or so games we played, I won once. Empire IMHO suck and the whole army should be thrown out and re-done. It frustrates me to even think about it and I havn't played in probably 3 years.

I coached humans in BB in our last league, LRB5 with slight homerules, but nothing game breaking. I would say my ratio(W-T-L) was 2-1.5-1, meaning I did well as humans, but I wasn't as good as the guy playing Woodelf.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Wed Mar 11, 2009 5:20 pm

I haven't played WFB in a long time, but in the old days, each roster was always better than the last, so the core armies (Empire, Orcs, Dwarfs) always felt sort of second-rate. Not that people couldn't win with them, but that the more recent rosters had crazy cheese, and the old ones had to make do on the fundamentals. Common trap: you want people to buy the new stuff, which encourages you to bloat your core game. 1st ed. AD&D and Rifts are the classic old-school examples of games that got really beat up by this tendency.

BB has, to its credit, taken the opposite tack, striving for balance but when in doubt underpowering the weird stuff. This is because there isn't much of a profit motive going on, so there's no pressure to sell the next hot new team. If this game ever got picked up for real, you'd see the bloat come in. Back when the "specialist" games were supported, we got little tastes of that in the major supplements to BB3 (DeathZone) and Necro (Outlanders), in particular.

Gropah · Post by **Gropah** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 12:53 pm

mattgslater wrote:I haven't played WFB in a long time, but in the old days, each roster was always better than the last, so the core armies (Empire, Orcs, Dwarfs) always felt sort of second-rate. Not that people couldn't win with them, but that the more recent rosters had crazy cheese, and the old ones had to make do on the fundamentals.

Power creep, wouldn't be a GW game without it

mattgslater wrote:BB has, to its credit, taken the opposite tack, striving for balance but when in doubt underpowering the weird stuff.

Although not much, especially in comparison to WFB or 40k, new teams and revamped teams and tweaked teams have left humans where they started - meaning they are worse off now compared to earlier editions (ref: Power creep). I think it's really sad Humans are so solid low(est) Tier 1. They should be more of a benchmark team IMO.

bouncergriimIn wrote:summary, I like humans how they are and have always been. I like keeping the same for consistancy.

That's not entirely true though, Humans have not been nerfed but on the other hand they've got no love either. Also the Human team performance REALLY goes against the fluff...

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:04 pm

Gropah wrote:
bouncergriimIn wrote:summary, I like humans how they are and have always been. I like keeping the same for consistancy.
That's not entirely true though, Humans have not been nerfed but on the other hand they've got no love either. Also the Human team performance REALLY goes against the fluff...

Well, they have (Ogre changes for one), but not on their own.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:06 pm

I don't think Humans are at the bottom of Tier 1: they're better than Chaos and it's not at all clear that they're inferior to Dark Elves or Amazons. I do think they're down in the pack somewhere, and the big guns (Woodies, Orcs, Dwarfs) are more powerful.

Gropah · Post by **Gropah** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:34 pm

Darkson wrote:
Gropah wrote:
bouncergriimIn wrote:summary, I like humans how they are and have always been. I like keeping the same for consistancy.
That's not entirely true though, Humans have not been nerfed but on the other hand they've got no love either. Also the Human team performance REALLY goes against the fluff...
Well, they have (Ogre changes for one), but not on their own.

You are correct Sir!

@mattgslater:
Where's Plasmoids and his stats when you need it? I'd prefer empirical evidence, if nothing else to make sure I'm not talking out of my ass stating Humans are low Tier 1

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:29 pm

Plasmoids website got cancelled.
Plasmoid bought a new webhotel today.
The whole thing should be up again tomorrow - but yeah, with lots of games, I think humans were just over the 45% cutoff point.

Cheers
Martin

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 4:18 pm

plasmoid wrote: The whole thing should be up again tomorrow - but yeah, with lots of games, I think humans were just over the 45% cutoff point.

Cheers
Martin

That was my impression... Humans are pretty good right out the box with all rookies, and in all other formats they're various shades of mediocre-but-competitive.

WildAnimal · Post by **WildAnimal** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:05 pm

Are 80k Blitzers and AV8 Catchers enough to make them that much better?

purdindas · Post by **purdindas** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:40 pm

WildAnimal wrote:Are 80k Blitzers and AV8 Catchers enough to make them that much better?

I think someone needs to play test this. What price would the catchers be in this case? Does 100k sound to much or do you think we could get away with 90k?

My schedule is a bit tight at the minute or else I would try them out.

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:56 pm

I have found humans wanting at high TV, but excellent at low TV. Orcs, on the other hand, are excellent throughout.

But in this case, I think we have to understand that all of the data is skewed for both teams. The truth is, they are starter teams, and most leagues will steer newbies towards them, and almost everyone has the minis. Plus the Blood Bowl background is based around both teams to some degree...

I would say it's not even logically arguable- a higher percentage of rookie teams play humans and orcs than any other race. This HAS to drag down their winning percentage. I would also assume that dwarves have this same issue (but maybe not as bad- dwarves can be so frustrating to learn with.) Elves, I'm not so sure about, as there are 4 rosters to spread the newbies around on.

So 45% from that perspective may be nothing to worry about. If there was some way to correct the data for "at the moment coaching prowess" we'd really have something.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:56 pm

The thing is... all the players are about right individually, and the team gets a discount on TRRs. It's not a price thing. 80k is too cheap for the Human Blitzer, who is already a better deal (in context) than the High/Dark Elf Blitzer.

Why not split the Catcher up into two 0-2 positions? Keep one as is, and give the other MA7, ST3 and no Catch, and call him a Runner (essentially a Ghoul). That way, the team has A access on a ST3 player, as well as 0-4 S access guys who start with Block. He's a little better than a Ghoul, but if you made him 80k and knocked the Ogre down to 130k, it wouldn't be an undue hardship.

Alternatively, keep everybody as is, but give Human Blitzers GAS/P. Never mind. That's kind of scary....

bjorn9486 · Post by **bjorn9486** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:20 pm

mattgslater wrote:Alternatively, keep everybody as is, but give Human Blitzers GAS/P. Never mind. That's kind of scary....

Agree, I play humans and even I think that is the wrong way to go.

Al the Trowel · Post by **Al the Trowel** » Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:29 pm

Jural wrote:I have found humans wanting at high TV, but excellent at low TV. Orcs, on the other hand, are excellent throughout.

But in this case, I think we have to understand that all of the data is skewed for both teams. The truth is, they are starter teams, and most leagues will steer newbies towards them, and almost everyone has the minis. Plus the Blood Bowl background is based around both teams to some degree...

I would say it's not even logically arguable- a higher percentage of rookie teams play humans and orcs than any other race. This HAS to drag down their winning percentage. I would also assume that dwarves have this same issue (but maybe not as bad- dwarves can be so frustrating to learn with.) Elves, I'm not so sure about, as there are 4 rosters to spread the newbies around on.

So 45% from that perspective may be nothing to worry about. If there was some way to correct the data for "at the moment coaching prowess" we'd really have something.

I'm sure there is an element of truth in this but I don't think we need to normalise the data for coaching prowess. You say yourself that newbies are steered towards Humans and Orcs - but one is low tier 1 and the other is high tier 1.

If newbie coaching was such an issue Orc results would have to be skewed down too. That would imply that Orcs are massively overpowered. But that's another debate.

I think that the reported results combined with anecdotal evidence from experienced coaches is a good enough case to say that Humans are too weak for a tier 1 team.

Back onto what could be done - I would hate to see position bloat on the roster. They don't need a blocker or a runner - advancement options allow coaches to specialise existing players into these rolls. All that they need is a minor tweak to compensate for the early game bonus all the other teams got when the rules broke the link between fan factor and income.

I think that AV 8 catchers at either no cost change or a small increase to 80k and then 80k for the blitzers are small tweaks that will have an immediate impact. The team will have more depth on the starting roster most likely starting with 12 players, apo and 3 RR. That would make them more resilient in early games, particularly with AV 8 across the board. They would also be more competitive because they are likely to keep 11 on the pitch. Extra resilience would also help with development since it reduces the likelihood of player turnover.

These changes may seem like baby steps, but they would avoid power creep or roster breaking unintended consequences.