Register    Login    Forum    FAQ

Board index » Blood Bowl » Skills & Traits Queries




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 285 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 6:03 pm 
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 4:37 pm
Posts: 48
Sandwich wrote:
lunchmoney wrote:
Scrappa wrote:
Some things you can't take back, Lunchmoney! :(

Why would I take it back? Sandwich is broken.
:lol:

Its true :cry: :lol:


That depends. WHAT TYPE OF SANDWICH IS HE?!?!


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 6:50 pm 
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:03 am
Posts: 420
Wulfyn wrote:
This is not my word. I didn't make up where you can and cannot use ANOVA.

Sure you can. If you've got multiple datasets that can, themselves, be divided into groups then you could certainly perform an ANOVA on all the datasets to see if differences exist between them and if they do you can use post-hoc testing to find out where those differences exist... if there are more inter-group differences than intra-group differences you can say you've got evidence of, y'know, inter-group differences... and that's what I'm reading from Dode's statement.

Can you use other methods? Sure. Statistical methods are investigation tools and there are often many different ways to approach the same question. If you think Dode's analysis produced the wrong results then go take that data and produce a different result using the methods you think are more appropriate, and then present the alternate results with the justification for your method. That's how the world works.

Wulfyn wrote:
There are plenty of much cleverer people than me out there..

Not just out there.

Wulfyn wrote:
..who invented it, and a bit of research will give you the answer.

I'm not going to research your "nuh uh" statements, Wulfyn. It is not other people's responsibility to find support for your position. If you can't support your position then you're wasting your time stating it - plain and simple.

Wulfyn wrote:
I've tried explaining statistics to you before Mike, and I was just met with hostility, because that is your stock response to anything you don't like to hear.

I think you're projecting, my friend.

Wulfyn wrote:
Back many pages ago I showed the teams that had a significant increase in win %age according to my testing. Dode just dismissed it, as even though he agreed that CDs had a win %age in excess of what was expected he refused to believe this test. This is why he has largely abandoned his statistical approach in favour of games designers are right because they are in power.

I performed a statistical analysis and discovered my penis is significantly bigger than yours, Wulfyn. Now, you can choose to believe me or not believe me but it raises several important questions: first, do I really have access to the data necessary to make that claim? second, are my conclusions independently verifiable? third, what the hell does it really have to do with the topic?

Wulfyn wrote:
Tell me Mike, do you believe that games designers are right because they are in power?

You'll find I've already answered this question in relation to this topic... assuming you're listening rather than just waiting for your chance to speak, and assuming you understand any of what people are saying. I'll quote it to you once again:

VoodooMike (a month ago!) wrote:
In order for your argument to leave the realm of useless subjectivity you either need to ensure that no aspect of it is subjective, or that all subjective values used have been agreed upon by everyone. This is why we can say that the expected win%s are important: they're subjective, but they were laid out by the BBRC, so we can agree to use the game-developers' own numbers as a foundation. The win% data is objective - it won't change depending on who is working with it.

Read it until you understand it.

Nobody cares what your definition of broken is. If you want to convince anyone other than yourself that something is broken then you need to convince them it is broken by THEIR definition. In this argument you basically have two different schools of thought... you have people like Dode, Darkson, myself, and so on who say that in a universe of subjective definitions the one we can use as an anchor point is the definition set out by the creators of the game we're talking about... and we have your school of thought which is that everyone should rally around your definition "just 'cuz".

To date I've read no convincing reasons I should prefer your definition over the BBRC's. The BBRC is not "in power", they're simply the people who created the rules we're discussing and the rules accomplish what they set out to accomplish. Your declaration that they are "broken" is just a dramatic way of saying you don't agree with the BBRC... which is fine, but we're 20+ pages into you trying to insist everyone should care that you don't agree. It seems clear most people do not.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 7:15 pm 
Da Cynic
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!
Wulfyn rather than engage in a pointless back and forth because you lack company, I instead started my own thread seeking proof

No one has it

It is not broken, except in your head it seems

_________________
Image
Ikterus wrote:
But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 8:41 pm 
Emerging Star
Emerging Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:39 am
Posts: 460
Location: Norsca
voyagers_uk wrote:
Wulfyn rather than engage in a pointless back and forth because you lack company, I instead started my own thread seeking proof

No one has it

It is not broken, except in your head it seems


Hmm lets see:

Quote:
Name: Blågårdens BrætspilsKlub
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Number of seasons played: We did 3 seasons with schedule, other than that it is open format. (5 years going)
Do teams continue for multiple seasons: yes
Average number of players per season: 10-12
Majority Bias (Bash/Dash): Almost 50/50
Number of teams with a clawpomb player: In the 3 seasons with schedule, 1 Team, but there was others in open format
Win ratio by teams with clawpomb players: In the 3 seasons, the clawpomb team came in 2nd every time... In the open format a clawpomb team did win the Championship and was the scare of the pitch.
And not a statistic but league consensus of over-powered / balanced:

Clawpomb was considered overpowered.
3 AG5 gutter runners was considered overpowered.



It seems to be your head that sees what it want.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 10:49 pm 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:52 am
Posts: 186
Oddly enough this thread has caused me to change my opinion of CPOMB. I viewed it as a problem, but was undecided as to if it was broken.
After reading all of this thread, I will not call it broken. I am even unsure if it is a problem. My sedan can be working as intended, and I can wish it was a sports car. Because it is not a sports car does not mean it is broken. And I do not expect either one to be perfect. Nor does the state of not being broken prove the designers were perfect.

To me broken means "not working as intended." We actually have very little evidence of the complete sum of the designers' intent, but what we do have suggests CPOMB (and the game as a whole) is working as intended within reasonable expectations.

I still think it is a valid question to ask "Would the Blood Bowl community be better if CPOMB was nerfed?" This is obviously subjective and virtually impossible to prove. But, discussing the pros and cons could be productive. I did not play with aging. It seems that most people disliked it, and it was eventually changed. I have seen no evidence that aging was broken, but maybe CPOMB will change too.

If CPOMB was overpowered, I think finding overwhelming statistical evidence would not have taken this long to be presented. It is my own assumptions and definitions that "overpowered" would cause "overwhelming" evidence. YMMV

As attrition is part of the game, I think team distribution in perpetual leagues will always lean towards tougher teams and teams capable of beating tougher teams. Changing CPOMB might change the exact balance point, but not the overall tendency.

With online anonymity people are more likely to take pleasure from hurting others. This encourages dealing damage over the desire to win. Similar to the previous point, changing CPOMB might change the method of inflicting injury, but not the desire.

Part of my love for this game is the long term development of my players. I am affected emotionally when a valued player dies. But part of the process that I love so much is the risk. If there was no risk, league Blood Bowl would lose much of its value to me. As long as there is a method of removing my valued players, I will fear it. Changing the method will change the subject of the fear, but not the existence of the fear. And I don't want the fear gone anyway.

Even while writing this I become less convinced that CPOMB is a problem. I do think it is disliked by many though. Is there a better solution? I don't know, but I don't think simply nerfing CPOMB is it.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 12:03 am 
Da Cynic
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!
Sorry Bakunin

Maybe I wasn't clear, you have no proof that it is broken, you were able however to confirm that in your tabletop league both clawpomb and Ag5 gutter runners were deemed too powerful

Almost every other tabletop league that has commented disagrees with you based on their own statistics and experiences

I am not trying to say who is right/wrong... That is not my call as my voice would be as alone as those who cry "broken"

I am merely giving tabletop leagues the chance to put their story out there. Which is not something Wulfyn has done.

You have but you also countered with an equal dash problem.

I would say AG5 sure feet goblins are an issue. But really I am just saying I don't like them.

Why is it so hard for people to personalise their outbursts?

_________________
Image
Ikterus wrote:
But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 12:44 am 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:33 pm
Posts: 242
dode74 wrote:
Quote:
And this is where I say you are making a fallacious argument. Being in power does not make you right. You'd not accept that argument in any other circumstance.
I'd accept it in any circumstance where someone is creating something according to their own criteria, which is precisely what the game designers are doing. If I don't like what they've created then that's solely down to me.


So you think that all government/dictator laws are right because the government/dictator has the power to create laws according to their own criteria?


dode74 wrote:
No, I dismissed it because you chose an arbitrary metric. "Increase in win%" is not a metric by which the game is balanced, and you (or I) don't get to pick the metrics. You could "prove" anything is broken if you can pick your own metrics!


So you are dismissing that ClawPOMB might increase win% as being important?


dode74 wrote:
Nobody has said that "whatever the games designers did was right". That's Wulfyn's strawman. The designers choosing to make changes over various editions amounts to changing the colour, size or material of the die and nothing more: it's preference. Thing is, as the designers they have the ability - the authority - to act on that preference.


It is not a strawman, it is a necessary implication of what you have said. You think that ClawPOMB is fine because it was designed to have a 58% depitch rate on a successful block, as per you quoting Galak and others. However just because a rule has met this very narrow design brief does not necessarily mean that there are not unintended consequences that the designers have not seen.

So you are either saying that there can be unintended consequences (in which case you have to allow that there is the possibility that ClawPOMB may be broken no matter what the designers intended), or you have to say that it is impossible that there are unintended consequences in which case the designers have designed with perfection.

Do you allow for the possibility of unintended consequences in game design?


Last edited by Wulfyn on Fri May 27, 2016 1:08 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 12:48 am 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:33 pm
Posts: 242
VoodooMike wrote:
Wulfyn wrote:
This is not my word. I didn't make up where you can and cannot use ANOVA.

Sure you can. If you've got multiple datasets that can, themselves, be divided into groups then you could certainly perform an ANOVA on all the datasets to see if differences exist between them and if they do you can use post-hoc testing to find out where those differences exist... if there are more inter-group differences than intra-group differences you can say you've got evidence of, y'know, inter-group differences... and that's what I'm reading from Dode's statement.


So to be clear - you are saying that any datasets that can be divided into groups can legitimately and validly have ANOVA performed on them?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 1:52 am 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 1:52 am
Posts: 186
Wulfyn wrote:
So you are either saying that there can be unintended consequences (in which case you have to allow that there is the possibility that ClawPOMB may be broken no matter what the designers intended)

I'm not the person this was directed at, but whatever.
There can be unintended consequences. The game could be broken because of CPOMB. There just doesn't happen to be any data supporting that, other than the number of people who just don't like it.

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 7:22 am 
Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie

Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:55 pm
Posts: 2453
Location: Near Reading, UK
Quote:
So you think that all government/dictator laws are right because the government/dictator has the power to create laws according to their own criteria?
"Right" is a weasel word. If by "right" you mean "legitimate" then yes: they have the power of authority behind them. That doesn't make them necessarily morally right, but then you are holding them up against another standard: your own morals. Any moral judgement is necessarily subjective.
Quote:
So you are dismissing that ClawPOMB might increase win% as being important?
I don't need to dismiss it: it was never a criteria.
Quote:
it is a necessary implication of what you have said
Repeating the strawman does not make it any more right.
Quote:
You think that ClawPOMB is fine because it was designed to have a 58% depitch rate on a successful block
Wrong. I think it is fine because the teams' lifetime win%s can't be said to be outside the tier boundaries.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 8:01 am 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:33 pm
Posts: 242
dode74 wrote:
"Right" is a weasel word. If by "right" you mean "legitimate" then yes: they have the power of authority behind them. That doesn't make them necessarily morally right, but then you are holding them up against another standard: your own morals. Any moral judgement is necessarily subjective.


By "right" I mean "correct". It is not an attempt to be a weasel word, so sorry if it came across that way. I do not mean morally right and I do not mean legitimate. Nobody here is doubting that the BBRC had the legitimacy to create BB rules. I am trying to mirror your claim around games designers being correct because they have the authority. Because I think you are using a fallacious Appeal to Authority argument to say that there is no way I can be correct in my claims about ClawPOMB because I am not a games designer. If you are not saying that people in power to create things are always correct then you have to allow for the accidental creation of broken mechanics.


dode74 wrote:
I don't need to dismiss it: it was never a criteria.


So when a lot of other people here are saying that there is no evidence that ClawPOMB improves win% you are saying that they are looking at the wrong thing, and it does not matter how much ClawPOMB might improve win% as long as the lifetime win% of all teams of that race (regardless of whether or not they have ClawPOMB) is within the pre-defined boundaries?


dode74 wrote:
Repeating the strawman does not make it any more right.


So then answer the question - can a game rule have unintended consequences?


dode74 wrote:
Wrong. I think it is fine because the teams' lifetime win%s can't be said to be outside the tier boundaries.


And to repeat, by lifetime win% you mean all teams of that race regardless of whether they have ClawPOMB or how much ClawPOMB might improve them by?


Last edited by Wulfyn on Fri May 27, 2016 8:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 8:07 am 
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:33 pm
Posts: 242
CyberedElf wrote:
Wulfyn wrote:
So you are either saying that there can be unintended consequences (in which case you have to allow that there is the possibility that ClawPOMB may be broken no matter what the designers intended)

I'm not the person this was directed at, but whatever.
There can be unintended consequences. The game could be broken because of CPOMB. There just doesn't happen to be any data supporting that, other than the number of people who just don't like it.


I agree with the first part (we can discuss the second part in a bit). This is why I am surprised by dode's claims. At the moment it seems to me like his defence of an Appeal to Authority is that because the games designers have the power to create the game then the game mechanic cannot be broken if the mechanic meets their design criteria.

I think that this is not true, because games designers are not perfect, and so there can be unintended consequences. Dode is even refusing to look at how ClawPOMB might improve the win rate of a team. What's your thoughts on that? Would you say teams with ClawPOMB having a significant improvement on win% would constitute as evidence?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 9:12 am 
Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie

Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:55 pm
Posts: 2453
Location: Near Reading, UK
Quote:
By "right" I mean "correct".
Correct by what standard? How are you defining what "correct" is?
Quote:
I am trying to mirror your claim around games designers being correct because they have the authority. Because I think you are using a fallacious Appeal to Authority argument to say that there is no way I can be correct in my claims about ClawPOMB because I am not a games designer. If you are not saying that people in power to create things are always correct then you have to allow for the accidental creation of broken mechanics.
Then you've entirely misunderstood my argument. I am saying that they have the legitimacy to define the metrics and you do not.
Quote:
So when a lot of other people here are saying that there is no evidence that ClawPOMB improves win% you are saying that they are looking at the wrong thing, and it does not matter how much ClawPOMB might improve win% as long as the lifetime win% of all teams of that race (regardless of whether or not they have ClawPOMB) is within the pre-defined boundaries?
Nobody has data suggesting CPOMB improves win%, as far as I am aware.
And no, it's not "all teams of that race". It's "that race".
Quote:
can a game rule have unintended consequences?
Yes, but I've never said otherwise. Unintended consequences do not make a game broken unless it fails to meet the design criteria of the game designers, though. Any change to said consequences made by any future designers would be designer preference (the colour of the die wasn't quite how they liked it, from your Wulfyn's Die example) rather than addressing something which is broken because it does not meet the metrics (unintentionally loaded die). Ageing would be an example of that.
Quote:
by lifetime win% you mean all teams of that race regardless of whether they have ClawPOMB or how much ClawPOMB might improve them by?
It's not at per-team level, it's at racial level. You can't say Team A must win 45-55% of their matches because it fails to take coaching ability (for one) into account. The only thing you can say is that the race must win 45-55% of its matches. I didn't come up with that, the BBRC did.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 9:58 am 
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 4:37 pm
Posts: 48
I once faced Robin Cruddace's Howling Griffins and we got to talking.

He said, "Some people's hobby is playing with toy soldiers. Some people like to sit around on the Internet and pick fights or try mental penis measuring contests."

That stuck with me and I am reminded of that as I read this thread.

On topic: From what I've gathered - some people dislike this combo, some do not.

Wulfyn - you're basically looking to change this, right? Why not start a league where this combo is improved as you see fit, then take the same players and reinstate the same old rules. Encourage people to take the combo and present your findings, and a conclusion about what you found. The more people involved, the more legitimate your claims regardless.

I'm willing to help if I can find a league where I'm moving. This is about improving a game we all love, right? The more of us who try it, the more likely the correct conclusion is found.

Otherwise, this thread will end up being 10000 pages arguing over what the definition of "is" is.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why ClawPOMB is broken
 Post Posted: Fri May 27, 2016 10:14 am 
Da Cynic
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Nice Red Uniforms and Fanatical devotion to the Pope!
Ok, I think we have chewed enough bile on this subject now

The point is unproven and has sunk to a low of arguing semantics

By all means continue discussions via private message or work on the proof that is required to convince people

Please avoid just restarting the thread just to bicker

_________________
Image
Ikterus wrote:
But for the record, play Voyagers_UK if you have the chance. He's cursed! :P


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 285 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

Board index » Blood Bowl » Skills & Traits Queries


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to: