Jump to content
CrazyBlaine

Kick scatter discussion

Recommended Posts

Ok time for some more sage wisdom from the frozen north on this side of the pond.

I didn't want to jump up and down right away cuz this is really a small matter.... more of fine tuning

The kick scatters from front to back of the ball are too extreme.
It should be from front to front.... just like every other measurement.
I understand it's in efforts to make it cleaner but you basically made scatters d6+1 instead of d6 inches and the extra +1 inch makes for some real feel bads
Easy fix. I know you put lot of effort into this rule. I really wanted to play with it more before I said anything but it's been long enough.

This is also not an urgent problem. It can wait. But please, it's not where it should be.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2018 at 6:38 AM, CrazyBlaine said:

The kick scatters from front to back of the ball are too extreme.
It should be from front to front.... just like every other measurement.
I understand it's in efforts to make it cleaner but you basically made scatters d6+1 instead of d6 inches and the extra +1 inch makes for some real feel bads

You're not wrong...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with measuring from front to front is that you can't legally place the ball marker when scattering 1" from a player or Goal post. 

I think that the original front to center measurement was designed because of that, and that the current measurement style is a clearer way. This way, if the ball scatters 1", it still is within 1" of the target. If you measured from front to front, it would be within 1" even when it scattered 2 inches from the target player or goal post. 

This way of measuring might extend the scatter a bit when targeting a place, but it keeps the interaction with scattering from targets closer to what was originally designed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 2:33 AM, 6tus said:

Problem with measuring from front to front is that you can't legally place the ball marker when scattering 1" from a player or Goal post. 

I think that the original front to center measurement was designed because of that, and that the current measurement style is a clearer way. This way, if the ball scatters 1", it still is within 1" of the target. If you measured from front to front, it would be within 1" even when it scattered 2 inches from the target player or goal post. 

This way of measuring might extend the scatter a bit when targeting a place, but it keeps the interaction with scattering from targets closer to what was originally designed.

Yes I agree

But I honestly think the solution is worse than the problem.

So what if a 1" scatter is a little messy but basically gets to the target. I'd rather that then having every scatter as wild as they are. Like I haven't done the exact numbers but it's pretty bad.... a scatter off a 6" missed pass is VERY unlikely to be intercepted by the target. I mean if that is the intent then fine say so. If you want a missed pass to be catastrophic leave it alone cuz man I've have a LARGE upswing in missed passes go terribly wrong. I mean there is nothing to say that that is not the point. Perhaps I'm thinking about it wrong and we all agree that if you miss your pass you should basically give up position of the ball.

A feel bad example is when you miss a pass and the scatter is such that the trajectory of the ball does not cross the intended target. This leads to turnovers, balls scattering behind the goal line, balls leaving the pitch unintendedly, and balls that scatter to a place that makes the ball out of play for the turn.

So herein I ask *points to the topic* What do people think? Is everyone happy with the new scatter? Or are people feeling the same feel bads as I am?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we both agree, that it's better to measure to the edge of the ball instead of the center. It keeps the measurement as clean as possible. 

In my opinion, this way (front to back) is better. It's just over ½" difference in the scatter distances (when scattering from a player or goal, passing to a place it's a bit higher), so the effect shouldn't be that big (haven't drawn any graphs or done any calculations on this).

But basically at least 1/6 of the missed passes still hit the target regardless of the scatter direction. This is the same as with the earlier way of measurement. If you'd measure from front to front, it would be 1/3 of the missed passes that would still hit, without the effect of scatter direction. With the scatter direction, the amount of safe combinations on the scatter would rise. I think that would make passing too good/safe. It's not fun to watch your opponent play the ball game, if you know that there is next to no chance of them failing on what they want to do.

The ball is a really important and powerful tool and I think it's good that there are some risks in using it. I'm not saying that this is the perfect solution (haven't really thought about what would be), but I really do think that this is a good change. In my opinion it really represents that Guild Ball is a fast paced game where you sometimes have to pay dearly on your mistakes on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer your question: I'm ok with it. Yeah, sometimes the ball goes in a wild direction, but that happens in real life too (somebody knocks the kickers foot, gets a toe on a ball to redirect it, etc...) Poop happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the new Tap In rule goes some way to mitigate missed passes, in that they are less likely to happen, even though they are worse when they do. If every scatter just went to the person you were aiming at anyway, there would be little to no risk in passing at all, and there should be some risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now it seems to me that game rewards passes on short range but penalizes long range more risky kicks which then can scatter wildly, and balls have tendency to bounce and roll afterwards.
I think thats a good design.

 

But ball scatter after suffering goal is freaking scary!
With enemies close nearby and a goalie runner ready to be a turret I am very fearful of ball scattering wildly into direction of my opponents or in a direction I do not want my counter striking model to go!
This should be lowered to 1d3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Larhendiel said:

Now it seems to me that game rewards passes on short range but penalizes long range more risky kicks which then can scatter wildly, and balls have tendency to bounce and roll afterwards.
I think thats a good design.

 

But ball scatter after suffering goal is freaking scary!
With enemies close nearby and a goalie runner ready to be a turret I am very fearful of ball scattering wildly into direction of my opponents or in a direction I do not want my counter striking model to go!
This should be lowered to 1d3.


Ok I miss spoke. This is where my thoughts were. Thank you. Not on missed passes but on goal kicks and kickoffs.

So here is the actual debate.

Do we want goal kicks to be as high variance as they are right now?

I can see both sides. I really enjoyed having fairly arcuate kick ins and would set up crack back goals all the time with high success rate. But now they have been hindered by the higher variance. My game plan has been hurt by the new rules and I'm sad that I cannot guarantee a scatter to my ready to go score back.

But is this part of the game that we want? Do we want to punish a team that was just scored on with a high variance scatter? Do we want to encourage people to set up the crack back goal?

Missing a pass is very unlikely 12% 3 dice 6% 4 dice so that's not what we're talking about. Kick ins happen every time someone scores. This is what matters. I mean I still hate catastrophic failures and think they should be less detrimental but I'll resign that to be part of the fun... if I must.  

So what do we want?

Now that we've got the right ideas flowing, how about a more simple fix. A reroll on kick ins. Yes I really like that. That would fix all the problems without changing much. Just say you get a reroll on your kick in scatter after a goal is scored on you. Or if you wanted to get really crazy you could spend a momentum to reroll any scatter. That is actually a good idea too. Probably only one or the other though. Thoughts?


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CrazyBlaine said:

Do we want goal kicks to be as high variance as they are right now?
 

In my opinion it nicely represents the audience kicking the ball back on the pitch. It shouldn't be with a pin point accuracy. So yes.

3 hours ago, CrazyBlaine said:

I can see both sides. I really enjoyed having fairly arcuate kick ins and would set up crack back goals all the time with high success rate. But now they have been hindered by the higher variance. My game plan has been hurt by the new rules and I'm sad that I cannot guarantee a scatter to my ready to go score back.

I don't think that the change is that big. Basically the ball scatters about a half of an inch (15mm, half of the base) further than previously. 

Is there really that much higher variance? I can't see how this 15mm change hurts your counter goal plan so much. I also don't think you should be able to guarantee a counter goal.

3 hours ago, CrazyBlaine said:

But is this part of the game that we want? Do we want to punish a team that was just scored on with a high variance scatter? Do we want to encourage people to set up the crack back goal?

Missing a pass is very unlikely 12% 3 dice 6% 4 dice so that's not what we're talking about. Kick ins happen every time someone scores. This is what matters. I mean I still hate catastrophic failures and think they should be less detrimental but I'll resign that to be part of the fun... if I must.  

So what do we want?

Lets turn this around. Do we want to punish a team that just scored with a pin point accuracy pass that guarantees a counter goal? Do we want to discourage players from scoring goals?

I agree that wrong scatter might mess your whole game, but it's the same with a missed goal attempt or failed attack. The chance of that happening is really low. The whole game is based on chance and trying to maximize your chances and minimizing the chance to fail. If you take away the chance to fail, the game falls flat. Or you'd really have to completely redesign the game if it isn't based on chance.

You don't have to like catastrophic failures. I know I don't. Sometimes I just want to scream and flip the table.

But the fun in the game is that you have options to minimize the chances of those catastrophic failures. The best thing in this game in my opinion is that it's so reactive. You have to (and can) react to the changes on the pitch. You can take the safer route, or try the higher risk higher reward attempt. Sometimes it works and feels good, other times it fails and feels bad.

3 hours ago, CrazyBlaine said:

Now that we've got the right ideas flowing, how about a more simple fix. A reroll on kick ins. Yes I really like that. That would fix all the problems without changing much. Just say you get a reroll on your kick in scatter after a goal is scored on you. Or if you wanted to get really crazy you could spend a momentum to reroll any scatter. That is actually a good idea too. Probably only one or the other though. Thoughts?

11 hours ago, Larhendiel said:

But ball scatter after suffering goal is freaking scary!
With enemies close nearby and a goalie runner ready to be a turret I am very fearful of ball scattering wildly into direction of my opponents or in a direction I do not want my counter striking model to go!
This should be lowered to 1d3.

I think these changes would make scoring return goals too easy. In my opinion, at the moment scoring goals is already a bit too easy and/or powerful.

As far as I understand, this current system represents the fans kicking the ball back after the goal. They are trying to get the ball to their own team, but aren't as accurate as the players. Sometimes it works, sometimes there is an unlucky bounce. As such, in my opinion it works quite well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the old Super Fan plot card could be worked into the core rules. That makes it at least so as to you can play around it as to not haveing to deal with a kick out scatter (which are super scary). 

But it would also make goal scoring teams worse. And you want some randomness into your game, so it is really up to the game designers to decide where it should be.

But yeah a scatter of 6" to basically any direction often screw plans over.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Warpstoned said:

I still think the old Super Fan plot card could be worked into the core rules. That makes it at least so as to you can play around it as to not haveing to deal with a kick out scatter (which are super scary). 

But it would also make goal scoring teams worse. And you want some randomness into your game, so it is really up to the game designers to decide where it should be.

But yeah a scatter of 6" to basically any direction often screw plans over.  

I'm not opposed to a change, or any discussion about possible ideas for a change. I actually quite like this idea, but it would need to be tested rigorously. I think that the 6" of Super Fan might be too high. 

I'm also quite confident that if the designers think that it should be changed, they can find a way to change it in a way that doesn't break the balance in the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×