Another day with Claw, sad...

I talked to a guy about the reduced fun to play at higher TVs (1900+ ish). He told me that when he faced a team with alot of claws, mighty blows and pile on he bought a magician and threw a fireball on the opponent, then conceded the match. So why does many, 95%??, don't want to play on high TV? It's abit sad really.

One guy said that with the killer combos it's like flipping a coin if your player gets wasted, and it's not very far off. With less players on the field of course for each loss you get a higher chance of touch downs vs you and a higher chance of not scoring. So damage really helps!

Yesterday I played with a TV 1700ish team and was matched vs a TV 1940ish team, mixed cabalvision leauge. The opponent had grinded his mix team with alot of dwarfs with claws, and some more stuff. Damage combos, he had taken some losses, but it was for a reason. Now he is ready to get the candy! To devestate other teams, see how enemys conceds in every 2nd game or so. Well he barley made 2-1 victory in the very last turn. But guess how many players I had left on the pitch? Two permanent injuries++

Is it the damage combo that is bad? Well for me I think it's claws that is the worst. Why have armor in the game when you can't play on higher TV? Armor is suddenly useless. Sad. Just sad. And now Cyanide destroyed the resurrection mode. But it did matter very little. Since there are no official Cabalvisions leauges with resurrection mode and/or no kick offs... I can't play what I want anyway, GG! I suggested on some forums that several things could be done with the claw skill, have it reduce armor by 1 but not below 7, or make a counter strenght skill, reinforced armor skill, so you at least could take a skill that nullified claws.

And... in a championship would it not be correct to play the championship without kick-off events? Since kick-off events just adds major random elements. Guess you shot yourself in the foot, opening the Pandoras box?, with that mode?...

last edited by DrBlitz

I think the claw bomb etc is a bit op. The idea of the game is not to play 20 or 30 games just building to this as remember this game was built as a tabletop game and it would take you years to do that. Unfortunately with this being a pc game you get the inevitable min maxers. They will play games and sack players till they get the combination they need etc. Just today i played a guy with an ogre with +2MA, ive played a guy with 2 st5 orcs and other pretty rare things

In reality you couldnt afford to lose so many games just with the objective of being destructive but it works in this game. The only way around it is to play a "proper" league where it would take them multiple seasons to build to this and they would get bored of losing.

Saying all that its not so bad in the cabalvision Champion ladder, i have seen players working towards it but they are few and far between. If you really wanted to you could conceed to them and still stay under your 5 conceeds. Also if you are skaven like im playing at the moment, suddenly they have a few thousand of team value which does nothing vs me. So they are paying in those games.

That said the claw mighty blow pile on is a bit single purpose and doesnt always work, as you said you beat the guy. Also i find if you start killing their players they usually quit as claw mpo players are usually a bit soft in the head. 🤸🏾

I lost 1-2 in the final turn. Maybe just plain luck I hold out so long. What could I do with 4 players left on the field?

Well he had 4 chaos dwarfs with claws, at least one of them strength 4 of course. And his TV was under 2000, so he could reek up lower TV teams bad. Like you said he probably kept deleting players to get the killer team he wanted and keeping TV down.

What you say is true. For online play in the non-tournament official Cabalvision leauge you have guys which just build up doom teams with claw damage combos and every time they search for a match they wait like sharks for a lonely fish to come by. Basicly it takes the fun away from non killer doom teams to play many games. And the worst thing is claws skill, it's the main "problem".

I wish Cyanide could do something about this problem... That's why I strongly fight for a OFFICIAL Cabalvision leauge with real resurrection mode (you get to keep spp and money).

last edited by DrBlitz

I don't want to come across wrong here, but this is a conversation which has been had many, many times over the years. Ultimately there isn't a problem on average overall but there can be games where the variance involved in the killstack means it goes very far one way or the other. We notice particularly those games where you end up with very few players remaining, but notice less often those games where you take few or no casualties. That's at least in part due to the long-term effect of some casualty results. If the problem is variance then the issue lies not with claw but with PO.

Now, one of the problems with what you term "the non-tournament official Cabalvision league" is concessions. People concede to killer teams all the time simply because they don't want to take the casualties. That means such teams get a free ride: double the cash and SPP for doing nothing: all reward and no risk. That makes them an attractive proposition in such environments and, given the free ride they get, it's unsurprising to find the upper TV echelons packed with them. You don't see the same sort of issue in perpetual scheduled leagues not because of longevity (there are BB1 leagues which have been going for 8 years) but because you don't have the concession issue: all teams are forced to fight for their development.

Your "rez" solution for a perpetual league might work, but you'd still have the same problem with respect to concessions and easy teambuilding. People might concede less if they think they won't take any permanent casualties, but it will still happen because those occasional games where the killstack works every time stick in the mind and aren't as much fun as your average game. I'd not be averse to such an environment, but would prefer it if concessions were treated as normal wins for the winner (i.e. normal SPP and winnings) and as concessions for the loser (no SPP/winnings), and if some sort of longer term attrition which works evenly for races were in place. That could be ageing, seasons, whatever.

Of course, when I know my team will not take permanent damage/injuries, then I don't need to concede but play the match to end. And then see if I can outsmart the doomstack and win. Current state with the "non-tournament" Cabalvision... most people stop playing their team when they face the doomstack teams, or make one themselves. I think this is a big problem for Blood bowl, and having one or two resurrection modes would make the game more fun to grind your team up. But as I said, most important is to have a official Cabalvision resurrection leauge (with spp and money gain), but add aging. Common Cyanide??

Master dode74: "People might concede less"?? Of course it will go down alot...

last edited by DrBlitz

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

Master dode74: "People might concede less"?? Of course it will go down alot...

Be careful not to ascribe your own motivations to others. You might be motivated by "permanent damage", but others are motivated by other things such as "this game won't be fun". The other thing is many (and it seems "most") people concede simply because they have a bit of bad luck, and that will be totally unaffected by rez or any other change. So there will be a reduction, but I don't know about "a lot".

to back what dode just said , "I also concede when the game is not going to be fun or totally unbalanced" . I have no shame in doing so nor admiting it no matter what the purist are going to say. I have limited time , a busy life so if (and when) i m free it is not to waste 2 hours to play punching ball for someone else. I don't even bother these days. My personnal solution is to not play beyond a certain level of tv unless of course i have a chaos race to be able to balance the odds. But even tho there is no much fun repeating the same games over and over after a while. I like diversity and i found it best between 1200 to 1600 tv ...

last edited by dragonloup

@dragonloup said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

to back what dode just said , "I also concede when the game is not going to be fun or totally unbalanced" . I have no shame in doing so nor admiting it no matter what the purist are going to say. I have limited time , a busy life so if (and when) i m free it is not to waste 2 hours to play punching ball for someone else.

Nothing wrong with that.
That's why both Open and Champion Ladders exist.

To stay on topic, I have absolutely no issue with Claw, even if associated with Mighty Blow and Pile On.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

Master dode74: "People might concede less"?? Of course it will go down alot...

We can't really say until we have a bunch of data from a rez league, and even then we'll have plenty of people questioning whether it can be generalized to COL.

We do know that casualties have a strong relationship with concessions... if we look at casualties taken and its relationship to the duration of a match (which is understandably shorter when someone concedes) we can make a "casualties taken per minute" measure.. regression tells us that for every unit that goes up a coach is 31,450 times more likely to concede. Now, obviously that value never reaches 1... nobody is soaking one casualty every minute of the game... but that's a big jump. If we toss in deaths per minute as well we see that a coach is 8,750 times more likely to concede for each of those casualties that is a death.

The problem is, of course, that we don't have any way to know if that's a long-term attrition aversion, or if it's a short-term attrition aversion. Are people conceding to avoid more team damage, or conceding to avoid finishing a game where they've taken casualties? Any answer to that would be nothing but guesswork without further data from large-scale rez leagues.

Just to add to this, i dont want to generalise all Chaos players as there are a lot of honourable ones but i find Chaos players concede the most if something is not going their way.

Just now i had a chaos player face off against my humans and he lost the ball on his drive and took a KO. He quit immediately before i could score, and then loading into another game to play i got him again with a freshly made chaos team. He conceded on load in.

This is the issue if you make a team to bash people you should be willing to play through as others often do with you. Its not fair to pick a team to destroy teams (which is part of the game) but then quit when it happens to you which seems to be the case a huge amount of times.

I guess its because people who want to be the ones doing the damage pick chaos, and when they are not in that position they dont enjoy the game. Which weirdly makes me wonder why do they play chaos, if they think it is so annoying to be bashed themselves!

:wrestlers_tone2:

This is not a new discussion. First of all, most don't like to lose games. The aversion to lose is really really strong in the general public. One of the reasons many avoid competitions in any form... the internet lowered this aversion abit since you can play with a nickname, and the loss/concede/etc are not that "linked" to your identity. Losing 4 players in the 4 first turns, of course, often will RUB the loss dismay really bad. People really don't like to see that they are losing for next 30 more min or more remaining, so they conceds if they can. However if they play a agi 4 team and are not afraid of deaths and permanent injuries (resurrection mode) many want to play on and make those cool goals everybody knows a agi 4+ team can make.

Why you need numbers/stats? When a player has used his apo, or serveral deaths/permanent injuries have been taken... the concedes rate increase. When I met a team with 4 guys with claws, and I have a TV 1710 team... There should at least be a skill you can take that nullifes claws! Many players like to grind their guys and don't like to lose them. Not very strange. Again, it's very sad I can't play my team longer than TV 1900 something without really big fear of losing my team, and losing on top of that!

The "official" Cabalvisions leauges are the ones with most players. I really think they should also have an ongoing resurrection leauge. Makes sense!

.

last edited by DrBlitz

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

Why you need numbers/stats? When a player has used his apo, or serveral deaths/permanent injuries have been taken... the concedes rate increase.

First, the question has never been "are people more likely to concede if they suffer casualties?" the question is "would they concede less if those casualties didn't lead to long-term team damage?" and we can't answer that second one using data from a full attrition environment.

Second, you didn't actually give any relevant numbers or stats. Hand-waving is not a number.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

The "official" Cabalvisions leauges are the ones with most players. I really think they should also have an ongoing resurrection leauge. Makes sense!

If it would increase the amount of participation and decrease the proportion of concessions then it would make sense... but there's no evidence to say it would at this point. You feeling that it would is not evidence.

I would like that unused apothecaries could be used at the end of the match in players with perm injuries/deaths. This would reduce CLAWPOMB's attrition.

Also, being able to rerroll apo results and/or automatically throw again when Apo get the same original result would reduce attrition too

The problem with using Apos as your determinant is that it actually buffs teams which take fewer injuries relatively more than those which take more injuries. If you take 1 cas and have 1 apo there is the potential for a 100% recovery rate, whereas if you take 5 cas the best case is 20%.

An idea I have proposed before is a stadium enhancement:

  • Medical Team - Any non-BH injuries remaining after the match can be rerolled unless they have already used an Apo during the match.

That way you get a 50% average recovery rate with the potential to be up to 100% regardless of how many cas you've taken.

VoodoMike, we both know, not maybe, but know.... that if you play a team with alot of agi 4+ guys, you don't need alot of players to make a goal. If you have a bunch of dwarfs with agi 3 and no dodge, and only 4-5 left on pitch, you can usually only wait until more gets removed from the pitch and you can't do s.....

A player with agi 4+ team would most likely play on even if high losses since he know he actually can score and maybe win or draw. You don't need stats to understand that a resurrection mode would make alot more players with agi 4+ teams to go on and fight, even if taking losses. Only a person of low IQ don't understand this? You got low IQ bro?? tell me? God I hate internet-Trolls!

You grind a team and they get skilled and you can do new combos and you feel really fun to make this custom team, THEN, when your team hit a certain TV, your team gets beat to pulp and you can't develop the team like you want. And this is really really sad. Oh common with your more, we need to see more stats to understand many people feel this way. You see it yourself, "I like to stick to lower TVs" comments. We know why, the game and lack of interest to make a real Cabalvision ressurrection league is the problem.

last edited by DrBlitz

Can i suggest something? . Not sure if it is a good idea or not , but why not implement some sort of "custom resurrection mode" in COL. Where any long term injury/death is converted in miss next game only so they would be not long term injury but still some sort of consequence to the match. A middle ground in other words. I suspect implementing a REZ mode would possibly allow more diversity at higher tv if the don t get your team totally destroyed as you can try your luck without consequence.

@Voodoomike: I have a question that i beleive can be related to that. What is the percentage of teams who get players to retire? I would assume ( if we go by this thread) that once a team ( chaos races aside) reach a certain tv level people stop playing with them as they can t really be competitive , or they simply get destroyed beyond repair.

last edited by dragonloup

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

VoodoMike, we both know, not maybe, but know...

Heh, that is a lead up to some prodigious hand-waving... lets put it to you this way, champ: people like you are content to "know" with your hearts while people like me - and y'know, most people with an education - are only content to "know" things using demonstrable facts.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

A player with agi 4+ team would most likely play on even if high losses since he know he actually can score and maybe win or draw. You don't need stats to understand that a resurrection mode would make alot more players with agi 4+ teams to go on and fight, even if taking losses. Only a person of low IQ don't understand this? You got low IQ bro?? tell me? God I hate internet-Trolls!

That might end up being the case, but it is only one possible explanation for what we've seen. Try to understand this: just because something makes sense to you doesn't mean it is true. That's a fundamental fact we try to teach children during their time in the education system.. but frequently fail to do (clearly).

Let me repeat the issue for you slowly, since you didn't seem to "get it" the first time: while we know from the data that casualties taken increase the likelihood of concession, we don't know that the concessions are due to long-term attrition avoidance. A valid alternative interpretation is that people don't think the game will be fun when they lack access to one or more of their pieces. In the former case rez would help, in the latter case rez would do nothing.

We see from the data that the rate of sustaining casualties is especially predictive of concession... yet, the rate of sustaining actual deaths is considerably less so. That means that most of the players being removed are still going to be available to use in future games, just as they would be under rez... yet agility teams still top the concession rates, and dwarf teams are still the roster with the lowest concession rate. It doesn't support your "if it were rez then agility would concede less because they wouldn't be losing their players in the long term" theory.

So... your idea is "what I say is true based on... if you don't think its true you're a poo-poo head" my idea is "lets wait for some data from a rez league and contrast it with COL". Until there's facts... of the verifiable sort, not the forcefully declared by some dumbass sort, I plan to reserve judgment on what is or is not true.

@dragonloup said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

@Voodoomike: I have a question that i beleive can be related to that. What is the percentage of teams who get players to retire? I would assume ( if we go by this thread) that once a team ( chaos races aside) reach a certain tv level people stop playing with them as they can t really be competitive , or they simply get destroyed beyond repair.

Match data doesn't cover what people do between matches, obviously. We don't know about their choices to drop players or how they relate to future matches. At best we can make estimations based on changes in TV... and that wouldn't help if it were the last game they played since there'd be no next game to compare the TV with.

What the hell is this crap? Well you finally proved you are a internet-troll.

My education is probably higher than yours. I am a strategy master with outstanding results in many online strategy games.

Ok bud, lists your achievements in strategy games and I list mine. If yours are shit compared to me. We know who the shit is here. Common now bud, give list and I type mine.

Everybody with IQ higher than a rubberduck would understand what I am writing. But we all know the goal for internet-trolls. Well you got it. Now give me list and I give mine. I can even provide some screenshots and stuff, just to undress you totally for who you are. Will give me alot of pleasure.

last edited by DrBlitz

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

My education is probably higher than yours. I am a strategy master with outstanding results in many online strategy games.

Congratulations on your awesome self-declared accomplishments. Unless you're a verified oracle none of that matters when there is no data/evidence to support your theories about how things would change in the future if a change were made that hasn't been made in any such environment before.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

Ok bud, lists your achievements in strategy games and I list mine. If yours are shit compared to me. We know who the shit is here. Common now bud, give list and I type mine.

Achievements in strategy games... boy, I'd have to check that very prominent section of my CV! BB2 is a strategy game but what we're talking about is not: you're using personal anecdote and belief without supporting evidence to predict the shift in population behaviour based on an alteration to the play environment that has never been made before.

So, as fun as dueling appeals to authority would be, I'm going to stand by the evidence... or rather, the lack of evidence... to say "we can't be certain one way or another". You believe we can... and that makes you wrong. There isn't even a debate. Now, to be clear.. rez may or may not make a big difference in concession rates, but just because one narrative supports it doesn't mean other narratives do not. Which narrative is correct? No way to tell currently, even if you want to be an unceasing dickhead on the topic.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

Everybody with IQ higher than a rubberduck would understand what I am writing.

..and yet this has been a debate for years among people who, by dint of being able to spell and use a computer, obviously have IQs high enough to feed and clothe themselves. Again, this isn't an argument against rez, it's an argument against declaring unsubstantiated theory as fact.

@DrBlitz said in Another day with Claw, sad...:

I can even provide some screenshots and stuff, just to undress you totally for who you are. Will give me alot of pleasure.

Screenshots of yourself predicting future human behaviour patterns? That'd be awesome. Far more awesome than you taking pleasure at undressing me.

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.