Playing an AI match this evening; Dwarves (me) vs. Halflings. Start of turn 8 with my ball carrier one step away from the TD with no defence in sight...
For my first action of the turn, my Lv.3 Dwarf Slayer lines up an unassisted block on a Lv2. Halfling (with catch, so no help there). This is a 2DB block...
I had to check the tables to see just how badly Nuffle has done me here. Apparently I am one of the 0.08%!
I still came away with a 2-0 win, but couldn't quite believe this. As a newbie I thought I'd check and share this to somehow validate that I hadn't completely screwed up my action order or something! Apparently I had a 93.8% chance of a successful knock-down using a RR, but I am still not sure how Frenzy would have played into it had I got a knockback after my first RR!
It sounds uncommon to roll 2 double skulls in a row but it really isn't. You just got it at a bad time.
The chance of rolling a double skull is 1 in 36.
Playing as dwarves you can expect to roll 2 of them in each match as you throw a lot of blocks.
Most of them will be rerolled so you are OK.
However 1 in every 36 will be followed by another double skull.
That means on average 1 in every 18 games you will have 4 skulls in a row.
Throwing blocks before you walk in the TD is a risk so consider how much you need the TD before doing it.
1st half against AI flings I would as you are likely to win anyway.
With block I would have taken any result other than dub skulls on the RR, so a 35/36, or 97% chance of a non-turnover roll (not factoring frenzy). Them's the dice though!
Kaz, with a bash team I was thinking any 'safe' chances to try and cause injury just before HT was a fairly OK strategy, especially as everyone has block. Evidently not this time I guess!
tys123, I'm not sure I follow your logic on the 1/18 games thing, but I guess it depends on how many blocks I throw in games. With a RR my chances become the same as throwing 4 skulls at the same time, i.e. (1/6)^4 = 1/1296, or 0.08%, right?
Yes one in every 1296 2 dice blocks will be a quad skull.
1 in every 36 double skulls will be rerolled into a double skull.
If you are throwing 72 2 dice blocks a game ( not unreasonable with dwarves against the AI ) you should get a quad skull every 18 games
I'll sometimes take a 2d block with block or wrestle before running in the td. It depends on how likely I am to cause a casualty. If I've got a clean shot with my clawpomb skaven blitzer and its pretty early in the game then I'll probably take it but if its a non-mb 2d against av 8+ its probably not worth it.
What people really have to remember though is that all those calculations and % and all that you guys are mentioning... do not really matter on some levels. They are just statistics and calculations on the "chance" or "probability" of what the next roll "should" be.
Because the chance of rolling a certain roll with the dices is always the same... no matter how many times in a row you just spent rolling the exact same roll over and over again.
You start playing a dangerous game if you start thinking that the chance of you rolling the same result again is much lower because "according to probability the chance of you rolling triple ones a second time in a row is much lower".
Because if dices followed the "laws of probability/statistics" etc, or something... then it would technicly not be random any more. Since then 1 six sided dice would first roll a 1, then a 2, then a 3, then a 4, then a 5, then a 6... or any other 6 rolles in a row where the outcome of them always resulted in one of each side having been rolled once... after which point it would all stated over again. Unfortunatly that is not how it works... your just as likely to roll 123456 as you are rolling 234145, 436243, 111111, 654321, 666661, 365123, 412653, etc.
It is right to keep statistics and probability in mind, because then you can clearly see that certain types of rolls happend a lot less then others. And you can be really succesful with your playing if you keep them in mind. But... what you do not see in the statistics and probability etc though, is WHEN each individual roll happend in the string of rolls that where made. Every single roll of, for example a 1, in the entire string of dice rolls... could have happend all in the same block, one after the other, with no other 1's rolled at any other time.
Of course, in BB, the chance of a being in any given dice roll is higher then the chance of the 4 other results, since there are 2 push sides on a block dice. And you will see a lot more push results in any given dice roll string due to it. But it does not really change much of what I have said.
Still though... I think that keeping this in mind, that your previous roll does in no possible way effect the outcome of your next roll (no matter what probability and statistics say), is helpful... even if it is just to have some peace of mind, and especially acceptance of that sometimes you just end up rolling extreamly poorly and getting screwed over due to it.
I don't know, to me probabilities aren't a comfy cushion, which I use to tell me afterward that I was right, or wrong, or just got unlucky or whatever. If something bad happens, I curse for a while, and then get on with it. And the reason I curse is usually not because of the bad result, but because I didn't plan for it.
What probabilities should be used for, in my opinion, is to calculate which plays will most likely result in a success, and how likely a disastrous outcome is on any given play. For this purpose, two double skulls in a row (the "quad skull") can be treated as a single entity, if you have a reroll in hand and your player has Block, because in this case the "chance of a disastrous outcome" is 1 in 6^4 or 0.08%. Let's say the opposing player has Block as well, but no Dodge, has AV7, and my player has MB, then I would define a success as rolling POW or POW! on either of the first two dice (cause I wouldn't reroll a "safe" but unsuccessful roll), and then breaking armor and getting at least a KO, giving a success chance of 0.5556 (chance to knock down, 5 in 9) * 0.313 (chance to break armor and KO/Cas for MB against AV7, looked up in a table) , or 17.39%. And those are the two numbers I can compare: Do I want to take a 0.08% chance of disastrous failure for a 17.39% chance of success? The answer might be different every time and for every person (depending on such factors as how important the player is that you are potentially removing, how you view your chance in general of recovering from a disastrous failure, etc.), but at least you know in advance what you are getting yourself into.
Edit: And just for the record, and for any new players reading this: I don't do those sorts of calculations all the time for every move I make, and I doubt anyone else does. You get a "feel" for typical situations, and with a lot of experience you learn to "ballpark" some of the more complex probabilities, but in theoretical discussions like this one, it's a good idea to go the whole distance and make each calculation and definition in full detail, cause that might help you make better decisions in the future.
Thanks for the input all. I now see the math behind 1/18 games thing.
I guess 0.08% is still more than 0% I would have had if I had just run in the touchdown; something worth pondering!
The Slayer did have mighty blow, and the target was one of the high-skilled/valued Halflings on the team (with no defensive skills). Not sure of the exact probability of a KO, but I guess I just need to re-asses exactly how safe 2DB are, even with re-rolls!
Borke: I compleatly agree with everything you said in your last post really. I know that when ever I make my choices as to what to do I do give a thought to how many chances there are for it to fail, but what ultimatly makes me decide if I do said action or not is more so on if it "feels" right.
I know for example that most players would consider a 3+ roll (with or without a re-roll on that) to be high risk, and to some even a 2+ roll as "high risk".
I however think/feel differently. I very rarelly hesitate to take a 2+ roll, and especially not if I have a re-roll. I seldomly hesitate to much for a 3+ roll since I think it is a very good chance of success, and almost never heistate if I have a re-roll on it. Taking a 4+ roll is where it could go either way if I go for it or not, depends on situation, but with a re-roll available it's at about the same level of hesitation as a 3+ with no re-roll. A 5+ roll is where seriously start to heistate, even with a re-roll. And a 6+ is at the highest levels of heistation, even with a re-roll.
Basicly anything at a 3+ or better chance, is no real problems really for me to take. And the 4+ compleatly depends on what is going on at that exact moment, and if I have a re-roll or not for it.
The 5 and 6 + rolls is usually those things I consider when I have done everything I want to protect my self or hold back the opponent on their way towards a TD, and am now looking at some crazy manouver to try and get into the cage and attack the ballcarrier or something, I do these things pretty often really. And I will definatly do them if it is the "last chance to win the game" or other such things. They usually do come towards the middle or end of an entire string of actions I want to take.
Like knocking opponents away from the cage to open up a bit (somewhat easy rolls), then get some guy in there to get at the ballcarrier (some difficulty), and then getting the ball (difficulty compleatly depends on where the ball ended up), and then a few easier rolls after that to get the ball to where it needs to go.
Flip: To be honest, there's nothing wrong with what you did, in my opinion. I mean, yes, there is an inherent level of risk, but the chances of failure are, as you say, 1/36. With that in mind and depending on whether or not it would have put your player up to another promotion, its almost criminal to ignore those opportunities at times.
Ultimately it depends how necessary the result will be. If it's a throwaway game or you have little chance of promotion, for example, making block attempts is the smart choice as it is helping development. If the game is vital for promotion or to avoid relegation, then scoring immediately is a good choice.
Basically, don't get yourself down about it. You made a choice and while it didn't work out, your reasoning for making it was sound. There isn't much more you can ask for in that sort of situation.
Thanks Valo. I wasn't bothered about it per-se, but as a new player it was perhaps my first time really being nuffled. I did, eventually, win, so I can't complain too badly!
Interesting to get the community's opinions on the matter, and gives me a few things to think about that I hope will develop my game.
According to my friends they always work when I do them... They are wrong of course... Because they conveniantly forgot the slews upon slews of times where I failed... horribly so at times.
BUT! Amongst my friends and acquaintances it gave me the reputation of being"The guy who pulls of the impossble all the time in BB (and other games)!", and to some extent also being a bit unpredictable. They are of course true to an extent, with the exception of the "all the time", because I have always been more willing to take the chance, take the risk, and try something crazy when I play games. Usually it also comes in the form of "calm... calm... calm... calm... RAAAAAAAAH... repeat", because I tend to be a very cool, calm, collected, extreamly patient, and HIGHLY defensive type of player in most kinds of games... who goes full out almost berzerker aggression when I finally do attack in most kinds of games. If that, what they thought/felt of my style of playing, and playing against me etc, was a good or bad thing for me? I don't know... probably both yes and no. Some of the people where probably/maybe not really fazed by it I think, but I know some where, think it was sort of 50/50 on that. But I know especially two players were highly effected by it.
My best friend (the second best BB player from my gaming group, and somewhere around 2nd to 4th best BB gamer in my entire acquaintances group, back in the day) have on numerous occations told me that he always felt on edge in our games, and never really felt "safe" when playing against me in BB. Part of it, apperantly, was that no matter how he set up his guys, no matter how well he built his cages, where his ballcarrier was, or how well he built his screens and walls when I had the ball... he always felt like it was not safe enough. That I somehow would still manage to punch, force, wiggle, and glide my way through his defences and get done what I needed to be done. With all that said though... my win/loss ratio against him is probably at the very best 30/70'ish, but probably more likely down towards 20/80'ish. He is after all one of the best BB players I have ever played against (good with the tactics of it, not to mention that he is one of those guys who tend to consistently always roll very well with dices... in all games where dice is used... which is problematic when playing pen and paper roleplaying games, since he is our gamemaster, because the trail of blood and death is wide and long behind us (played pnp rpg's for 19 years now), due to all the dead player characters in our wake ).
The second person is my best friends ex-girlfriend. I never knew she had a problem with playing against me, untill my best friend eventually told me a few years after our gaming group had finally finished splitting up (it took about 3-4 years). Basicly I was the person she disliked playing against the most, due to my playstyle and the unpredictability of it etc. But from what I recall we had roughly a 50/50 win/loss ratio against each other, and we both where roughly in the middle, or just below the "really good BB players", in the ratings really. So I never realized she had that problem. I do know though for a fact though that I am personally responsible for her hating, and driving her way from ever again playing, Dwarves. She had decided she wanted to try playing Dwarves for the first time, it was during some minor tournament we had. My team in that tourney was Norse (the old/original version of Norse mind you, 6337 on all, block on all except for, werewolves at 6438 Frenzy+Razorsharp fangs). We where 5 games deep into the tournament. I had had 2 wins, 1 loss, and 2 drawn games, with a total of 7 TD scored, and 24 CAS caused... 10 of which happend against Pinkfoot Panthers in the 4th game, a Goblin or Halfling team, that game ended up a 2-2 draw somehow, probably partly because it was against the guy amongs us who I always considered THE best BB player. Her Dwarves where doing ok as well as far as I remember.
So finally the 6th game came around, for the Norceguard Vikings to go up against the Alebreath Axemen (for some reason I spelled "Norse" with a c back then, I thought that was how it was supposed to be spelled at that time *knows better now* ). The match starts... aaaand the game was an absolut slaughter... the Dwarves where dropping like Snotlings! By the end of the game I had won with 2-1, and with a result of 7-2 in cas... she only had 2 seriously injured which was good... but... the... problem... was that the 5 other cas where ALL dead. She droped out of the tournament then and there, and never... NEVER... went back to playing Dwarves ever again.
Some "puting the slaughter above into perspective", and talking about my Norceguard Vikings.
To put those 2 seriously injured, and 5 deaths, into perspective though... I have to explain our injury system (3rd edition + Deadzone), and the houserules we used on it. Back then if you got through armour you rolled 2D6's to determin what happened. 2-7 = Stunned, 8-9 = KO'ed, 10 = Badly Hurt, 11 = Seriously Injured, and 12 = Dead. Then if you had certain skills you would add X amount to the roll. The problem was that if you combined Mighty Blow with the mutation skill "Razor Sharp Claws or Fangs" you had a total of +3 on the injury roll, which ment that now suddenly you went from 12 to a 9+ roll = Dead... AND, if you then on top of that added Dirty Player then you where down to a 7+ = Dead. Not to ention that you wouold sheer through armour like it was nothing. On a foul with MB + RSC/F + DP, you would get a total of +3 on armour roll and +4 on injury roll... then if you happend to also have the mutation called "Claw" (not the same as RSC/F), you would have another +2 on the armour roll. Due to this the guy, who taught us to play BB, and his friends had long befor made houserules that stated that "Bonuses added to the injury roll can never make the result higher then 10 (Badly Hurt)". Which means that the only way for a character to get a seriously injury, or die, in how we played the game, was by rolling a natural 11 (5+6, 6+5) or 12 (6+6).
So... the fact that 2 out of the 7 injured dwarves got a seriously injury, and 5 of them where dead... WITH an apothecary roll on that as well (which failed... apo's in that version worked in such a way that after the injury was rolled, and if you choice to use your apo on it, then on a roll of 2+ the injury was ignored and the player was left in his square face-up... although we had a houserule which allowed us to wait till after the match was finished to use the apo so we could try and save our most importent player, instead of having to make the choice on the field, AND that you could use your apo on the opponents players to... either for free... or sell it to them). So you see... having a player killed/seriously injured when we played was very rare... and yet in such an enviroment my Norse managed to seriously injure 2, and kill 5, Dwarves.
In 19 matches (technically 18, since one game was a forfit from the other guy for some reason, so no game was actually played), my Norceguard Vikings managed to cause 88 casulties (5 of which where seriously injured, and 11 which where rolls of "dead" but only the 5 actually died... yes... the dwarves). At the same time they took a total of 72 cas in those games, not a single roll of dead, and only 2 rolls of seriously injured in one game (with no permanent injury from what I can see). Most TD's scored and scored against, 3 TD's. 5 wins (1 of which was a forfit), 7 losses, and 7 draw.
That was actually the "thing" with this team... most games where absolut slaughters of games... either from me, against me, or against both teams. Few died or got seriously injured though.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
being in any given dice roll is higher then the chance of the 4 other results, since there are 2 push sides on a block dice. And you will see a lot more push results in any given dice roll string due to it. But it does not really change much of what I have said.
