Welcome to Steamforged Games Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Slothrop

Members
  • Content count

    428
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by Slothrop

  1. Worth noting that the two models we've seen are tightly bound in terms of their output in a single activation. Anvil can only have either 3 INF or 5 INF, and even at 5 INF he isn't going to output nearly as much pure work as middling-output captains from other guilds, let alone super solos like Fillet or Shark. Then Sledge can only ever make 3 attacks, so he can only benefit from KD+Singled Out three times even if his buddy Anvil's activation goes perfectly and nothing happens between them. Each of those attacks has a chance to do a TON, but if he has to charge or has to spend an attack re-knocking someone down, Sledge is hardly going to be consistently deleting people. There's a huge difference in GB between "Killing Midas from full when he has 6 INF" and "Killing Midas over 3 activations, between which he gets to do stuff and spend INF and maybe invalidate yours." Just based on the two Blacksmiths revealed so far, I'd expect their team to be 6 people who in total are above average in terms of output and strength, but without the ability to change the game in a single activation nearly as well as any other guild.
  2. You guys asked me for a one-sided matchup, feel like I did exactly as asked here. Your fault for a terrible segment idea
  3. Sure seems quiet around here! Almost... too quiet... Hate ball killing? Hate ball scoring? Why not hate Pat Van Valzah too?! Come listen to our latest episode, where we discuss a little-covered phenomenon that is starting to appear on pitches across the country, mostly ones in front of Pat! Learn about standoffs and stalemates in our new episode: Make the Other Player Go First In addition to a discussion of standoffs, Vince, Pat, and I talk about the idea of "dark horsing," and whether taking players by surprise is really a viable tournament tactic in a game as small as Guild Ball. Take a listen and hit us with the sweet anti-standoff STRATS or your underrated picks for taking the tournament scene by storm! THANKS FOR LISTENING You can follow the cast here:Twitter — https://twitter.com/strictlyworstgbFacebook — facebook.com/strictlytheworst You can follow the individuals here: Alex's Twitter — Bottsonbottom.onlinePat's Twitter — Scum.onlineVince's Twitter — https://twitter.com/TheCurkovVince's YouTube — Shortened Link
  4. We didn't come up with one specific thing, no. Those are part of it, but there's a lot of little factors that make these scenarios both happen and break, so I don't really think there's one specific tactic that can make these always break in your favor.
  5. Oh man, excellent!! Thanks
  6. If I could find bits for it, I'd love to have my harvest markers be rabbits sitting triumphantly on piles of carrots. Carrots I can sculpt, not so confident about bunnies sadly.
  7. Highly recommend picking up Tower to give your game some defense and real punch, then probably a Union option whenever you're ready for that (Mist or Decimate seem like the hotness for Masons). It sounds like you're struggling against strong late-game teams with Masons, which is no surprise: Masons have a lot of fun tricks and powerful gimmicks for the early game, but can sometimes run out of steam as the game drags on. I think if you can get to the ball, going for goals with Honour/Harmony combos (or Mist or Flint, to sometimes lesser extents) is always a good idea to close out a game. If you're struggling to meaningfully control the ball, do your best to never charge with Masons in a fight, and instead make sure each INF you spend turns into a Momentum. That should give you enough juice to reliably heal players and keep Marbles and Honour in the scrum, dicing people up
  8. Ah, so he does! My bad. Still not tons exciting though unless he becomes tournament legal and is sold alone.
  9. The lull in actual new models has gotta be it, imo. No new models between May and August except for Lucky, who isn't tournament legal and we don't even know if he has rules(?)... Tough look to find stuff to talk about. I have definitively determined that scoring is both too good and not good enough, anyone who doesn't play Midas hates fun AND should git gud, and the only real NPE is playing against @Isante, any other opinions are just baseless whining.
  10. "You best believe in Blacksmiths OP threads, Miss Turner. You're in one."
  11. 7 results, because you need a net of 9 successes to wrap to the PD as you described. 7 - 1 + 3. Seven 4+s on 11 dice is 27.4%, or if we add Anvil then seven 4+s on 12 dice is 38.7%.
  12. Erm, he has a 9% to do that wrap to a 4+/1 model, and a 38% to do that to a 3+/1 model. I dunno about "quite consistently." Even with Singled Out the chances of that happening to a 4/1 just make it up to 27%... Even just getting to the 7 with Piledriver on a charge versus a 4+/1 is only a 50% chance, and given a 3+/1 can Def Stance I don't think he'll do that super often without a lot more setup than just PD. Of course, the dude is clearly meant to be set up as much as possible, and there will be games where he makes heads explode.
  13. I think the other thing that makes "killing the ball" what it is would be that neither player gets to use it really. It's just set somewhere, or at most moves once a turn when the opposing strikers get too close. I think what people complain about when they complain about killing the ball is not that their opponent has the ball, but that the ball isn't really in the game.
  14. I have been informed that you mentioned me on this "guild" "ball" "podcast." My lawyers have been notified
  15. 他還記得那些消逝了的歲月。就好像透過佈滿塵埃的櫥窗看,過去是他能看到,但不是觸碰的東西。 Sorry for the long hiatus, listeners! We have returned, with a few changes. We're starting an intermittent series about the guilds this week. Alphabetically and hierarchically, we must certainly begin with ALCHEMISTS. Take a listen below! http://strictlytheworst.libsyn.com/episode-18-nicolas-flamel-would-be-proud Also this week marks the official departure of our friend and co-host, Jordan. We'd already been considering adding Vince Curkov as a permanent fixture to the show, and with this change of the guard it became a no-brainer. Please welcome Vince well and truly to the podcast! Also check out his fantastic YouTube channel, below. We're testing out new things and more open to suggestions than ever. We feel that even without our original triumvirate we have plenty to say about Guild Ball and plenty to do to help players git gud, so we ain't stopping castin'. Thanks for your continued support! You can follow the cast here:Twitter — https://twitter.com/strictlyworstgbFacebook — facebook.com/strictlytheworst You can follow the individuals here: Alex's Twitter — Bottsonbottom.onlinePat's Twitter — Scum.online Vince's Twitter — https://twitter.com/TheCurkov Vince's YouTube — Shortened Link
  16. We debated bringing those in, but they were quite a bit ago and I at least don't remember most of my Spring Fling games very well. That said, I think there were examples in both events of things to talk about, so I wouldn't be surprised if they popped up in other contexts... At the Spring Fling Pat and I had a very interesting and extreme first two turns in our game, and then I also had a Union v Fish game against Jared McGraw that was good ball-killing exercise. Definitely good examples for interesting discussions. Thank you, everyone, for the comments on the cast! Glad it was enjoyable. I think we will continue with the faction reviews but not necessarily every episode, we may intersperse it with talks more like the ones we usually do.
  17. Part of the vetting process included making sure @TheCurkov was dedicated to our standard of awfulness. I can assure you that the man wears the Chicago colors with cocky pride and stubbornness.
  18. Funny timing, MO-Ball's latest episode and its forum post are about whether it's un-fun to try to make scoring goals hard. I do think the power gulf between teams that can always threaten a goal and those that can't is a bit too big right now. Good scoring teams have the luxury to choose between an all-goal win and a mixed win, whereas teams without great scoring are being pigeonholed into aiming for a low- or no-scoring win because allowing the ball into play for both teams usually just means the good scoring team makes VPs happen faster than you can compete against. Even if the current top dogs got nerfed, I think there's a problem with how goals are set up right now in Guild Ball. They're way too binary. It's not really tactically interesting to just measure whether Flint is in goal range or not once the ball happens to scatter right next to him; it's also not fun to be in a hotly contested 8-8 game, defend the ball as best you can, and then hope that Shark fails to get that last << that just nets him 4 more points. It's of course a dice game, but the nature of goals being IN or OUT with no half-measures makes a lot of game endings feel out of my hands both as the winner and as the loser. Playbooks are such a cool idea from this game and take the dice pool mechanics and turn it into a nuanced thing with texture and varying levels of success. Goals don't have that, you either score 4 points or you score 0. My latest idea is for something, like a stat or a bunch of traits, that changes how different models score points with goals, and then make goals across the board a bit more accessible. So you could have like Shark, who scores goals like an absolute machine, but his goals don't give you goal influence and are worth 3 points. Then there's Midas, who would be nerfed a bit and not be reliable at scoring, but since he's such a showoff his goals are worth 4 or even 5 points. Then there's Obulus who always wants a sure thing, so he normally scores 3 points with his goals but if he is within 3" of the goal he gets the Tap-In effect and nets you TWO goal INF! Stuff like that. Problem of course being that this is basically a total redesign and rebalance of the game lol. But maybe that's what it takes? Not sure. Edit: Missing goals feels awful for both players too imo. At Spring Fling a Brisket3 player missed a 3-die goal against me. I didn't outplay him, and he took a 96.3% shot which is a good choice. So I just suddenly reaped this huge reward for basically no reason on my or his part because a 3.7% possibility happened to go off. Once that missed, since he was playing a scoring team and I was playing a fighting team, there was practically no way for him to win. Woooooo counterplay.
  19. First question, yes against bad players, probably sometimes against good players, definitely not against a better player. And against comparably skilled players playing Shark against me, if I'm not allowed to at least attempt to kill the ball I might as well forfeit with Union even if I usually end up scoring a goal against them. Intentionally removing the ball from play for both teams to the best of your ability (which is what I'm defining "killing the ball" as) definitely does make that easier. If there was a rule added where you weren't allowed to intentionally not interact with the ball (I can't even imagine what this would be... maybe you can't generate momentum while a ball is loose if you were the last person to touch the ball? A model with the ball must always be allocated 2 INF? something ridiculous it would have to be)... I dunno. Depending on how extreme it was, I'd probably jump to Alchemists, Fish, or Engineers to feel like I had any chance to play the game. And I'd probably consider Brewers, Union, Butchers, Hunters, and Farmers effectively unplayable. So maybe I'd just quit; 1/2 of teams being completely deleted from competitive would be depressing. I'm trying to answer your questions as best as I can but you seem to be operating under the idea that killing the ball is some sort of binary on/off switch. It's a strategy with counterplay, plusses and minuses, complexity in its execution, and uniqueness depending on matchup and player skill. It's just like scoring tons of goals, the counterplay for which is... killing the ball. Saying "a rule where you can't kill the ball" is basically identical for me to saying "a rule where you can't react to goal scoring." It seems like an impossible rule to implement or describe, and if it was a rule, Guild Ball would not be Guild Ball anymore.
  20. The dominance of scoring teams, in particular Alchemists, seems to me to necessitate ball-killing if you're not playing one of those teams. So I guess... is it better if everybody just played Alchemists? Or is it better if people played what they wanted, and employed strategies "for people who don't want to have fun"? Or is it better if people just lost to Alchemists over and over? I like door #2, if I have to choose a door. And unless somebody is going to try to tell me that every team is as good at football or a mixed plan as Alchemists, then I think I have to choose a door.
  21. Yeah that's a really good point, Ox should come in for Thresher and just leave Grange's Harvests for INF. I was stuck on how to use Grange's free Harvests but they can just be extra INF. Think I still like Midas for the free-est goal in the world once the midfield is clear. Could be Brisket3 for basically the same reason, but Midas is more slippery.
  22. I'm assuming the effect here is that everybody counts as the same guild. With one nerfed captain allowed (so Grange has no legendary and is 3/4 INF) Grange, Naja, Spigot1, Tater, Harry, Vitriol With as many nerfed captains as you want allowed Scum, Grange, Tapper, Corsair, Midas, Thresher Both teams are meant to kill a TON of people and then slide in a goal to win the game. Both take advantage of the fact (I think) that the opponent can't have any super solos with 6 INF going on crazy scoring runs or killing sprees. In that second team, assuming the INF values are 1/3, 3/4, 2/3 (with Tac Sup), 2/4, 2/4, 1/3, I'm not really able to picture a team that can outfight Grange Tapper and Thresher with Corsair in the way and Midas or Scum killing the ball. This format sounds like it needs 2x round timers lol
  23. Hey folks, this dropped: Beyond being over the moon about the tiebreaker changes, the changes to drafting and the new 10-model roster size will, I think, change a lot about how some guilds build their rosters for tournament play. It looks like a lot of people (including me) are pretty unhappy with the new draft order and in particular captain choice being before roll off, so that might change, but for now I'm assuming it won't. I wanted to make this thread to solicit the thoughts of other Union players about how this changes our guild! For me, a couple things jump out. First off, the bad news: I think the drafting changes effectively drop Brisket3 from contention as a second captain for me. She's already such a situational pick who really wants to know what guild, captain, list, and turn order she's up against before she's played over VRage, and all of that is now off the table for her except guild. Blackheart has less if/then statements in his drafting in my opinion, so I think Rage/Blackheart is now the obvious pairing. The good news is that my list choices based on who's kicking are usually choices made in the player-selection phase, not captain-selection. In most cases I play Mist when I have to kick off, and A&G when I'm receiving, so that's a choice I still get to make with all the information I want. I think Union somewhat dodged a bullet in that regard, there are captain pairings (Grange/Thresher for example, Shark/Corsair often) that in my opinion make decisions based on roll off and those pairings now have to go in blind. Finally, the tenth slot is as nice for us as it is for everyone else, in that we get to add another situational pick. The way I look at Union right now, there are three levels of models in the list. There's the autoincludes: Harry the Hat, [Mist or A&G] There's the often-includes: VRage, [Captain2], Strongbox, Gutter, [Mist or A&G], Minx And there's the situational/matchup-dependent picks: Rage1, Coin, Decimate, Benediction (probably) Assuming we take everybody in the first two categories, we used to be able to take one of the bottom list. Now we can take two! I think the 10-man change lets Rage1 into the lists no problem now which is very nice for Blackheart (or Brisket for the brave souls playing her after these changes). Probably I take Rage1 and Decimate from the bottom set for now, but I think Decimate gets dropped for Benediction once he's out since he seems very very solid with either captain. What do y'all think?
  24. Poor turnout?? That seems like a really weird reason to me, there were 49 players that played in at least one GB event at GenCon last year, which is STILL the largest amount of GB players at a single location recorded in the US. No individual event at GenCon got super large, but still...