Enjoyed this one a lot! This remains one of my go-tos (listened to this one while hanging the Xmas lights!) As applicable to consistency, I think there was a slight gap in the discussion, regarding the 'amplitude' of said consistency. Warrior as a class is actually offers some of the most consistent heroes. Golden Kassai, for example, can very consistently offer a 7-8 off of two cards - or 11-12 off of three cards. She can do this nearly every single turn, reliably. An *extremely* consistent hero. Yet... she (and warrior as a class) is where it is. And thus... there's a 'hole' in the consistency argument, as it also must respect the net 'power level'. You both are 100% correct in that the ability to do what you want to do, each turn, matters - but if you can't out-math someone, it still is a problem. Thanks for what you do, and cheers.
I love the interaction and conversation around hero bloat. I'm really surprised I didn't hear any comments on the "math" of the issue and what levers LSS has to control this. FAB is heavily played around math, so it surprises me that over 2 weeks of pod conversations I didn't hear (unless I just missed it) anything that addresses hero bloat in terms of release numbers vs LL points mathematically. What I mean is that if 3 seasons (PT, PT, RTN) each give 1,500 points, then there are 4.5 heroes worth of LL points introduced each year. If 3 sets each year release 3-4 new heroes each set, we gain 9-12 heroes per year. 9-4.5=4.5 so even disregarding that the 4.5k LL points are spread out and may LL 3 heroes some years and may LL 5 or 8 heroes some years, we are adding 4+ heroes to the pool every year. Regardless of what the meta or hero pool looks like now, there is an interesting mathematical issue that unless the total LL points/1000 is = to the number of heroes introduced in a year there will always be either a growing or shrinking hero pool. So I think a big question about hero bloat is actually more about how do you control/if you can control the rate at which heroes LL? How do you balance and account for the massive variables that go into predicting release and LL rates 6-18 months in the future? How heavy handed should LSS be in the regulation of the hero pool either by increasing/decreasing LL points each season, or by increasing/decreasing hero releases? I realize this may not get discussed since the pod has talked about the issue for multiple weeks, but it seems like a part of the conversation I was expecting to hear and just didn't.
I was just talking to my friend about how 80% of the cards in the expansion sets like Dusk till Dawn never saw play and that’s a pretty wasteful thing if you are opening boxes to pull the other 20%. If there’s no solution to that I don’t want to see expansion sets again anytime soon.
I was very happy to hear you revisit the topic from the previous week. If the topic is interesting and you have interesting things to say, I'm always happy to hear more. I appreciated the conversation about consistency, especially when you went a little high level and talked about what makes a deck consistent and what consistency is. It would be interesting to do a class-by-class or hero-by-hero look at the resource base issues you discussed. For instance, we all know Warrior has been bad for a long time, and there are lots of theories about why. How much of it is that Warrior is a bit in the Florian position. I needs blues to function but a lot of the blues are bad. Boltyn, on the other hand, needs zero blues, but its deck is highly dependent on a few power cards or else its turns are bad.
Cookout question: what do you think Riptide needs to become an A tier or higher hero? I'd say Pankaj being a Nuu player and hating on Riptide doesn't seem to be a coincidence... But I actually think Riptide is an example of a hero that did get support from LSS and it helped him a lot, ignoring those bad blue action cards from HVY and ROS, the arrows he's got have really helped slowly raise the power level and consistency. Plus the Azaelea armoury deck added a lot of good tools for Riptide - especially Barbed Castaway builds. He's not A tier or anything like that, but has certainly been playable since Dromai left, and the support LSS has given him has made people that play the hero generally happy.
Unequivocally, there ARE too many heroes that are dead in the water ~right now~. I think LSS is so good at their job, and they work so far in advance, that this won’t always be the case. I’m not sure if we just have short memories, but for 6 decks to be viable - even if three are from the same set - that’s pretty good compared to the previous metas where it was 2 and then maybe a third and fourth more fringe deck.
If you are going to use the term “pro” to describes players complaining they have “too much” to prep for is lame. In no other profession is a “pro” given any other option than prepare for every possibility. It comes with the title. Calling individuals “pros” is where we go wrong in the game rn imo, there isn’t enough support for full time pros to exist therefore the preparation isn’t worth the payout
big agree. i've always balked at people calling fab tourney grinders "pro players". professional means you do it as your main source of income, not just a hobby. outside of those who have quit their jobs to play fab (iirc michael hamilton) there are nearly no "pro" players. on top of that, people who complain about having to prepare for a wide field are complaining about a nonissue imo. be better. prep better. everyone has to prepare for the same metagame, nothing will be perfect, the most you can do is prep better than everyone else and that should be sufficient
@@dozrFAB There are actually a few of us out there that play FaB professionally. (Although a good chunk of our income comes from secondary sources like patreon)
@MaraFaris I specifically said that there are some who fit the term "pro". Do you disagree that the proportion of people who have made fab their primary source of income is small?
@@AustinSacriste Honestly, I think it's always going to be impossible to prepare for everything. Like Hayden briefly mentioned, you will always have a finite amount of time, and a lot of preparing for an event is figuring out how best to allocate that finite resource. The rest is the ability to think on your toes, and react to unfamiliar situations. That's a skill that's every bit as important as being able to practice your matchups. We could have a one deck meta and still it would be impossible to test every possible scenario you might encounter. I think anyone who wants to excel at FaB needs to be able to both understand how to use their prep time as efficiently as possible and be able to react to things that may not have come up in their testing.
I was thinking... Maybe armory decks are a little bit problematic as a source to inject new cards to any format? The cards in them have to be effectively unbannable. So far 2 out of the 5 armory decks required bans (Savage Sash - Berserk, Cerebellum Processor - High Octane, the latter of which completely invalidated a previously decently viable hero as a side effect, maybe even 2...). It's a really hard balancing act to keep them viable, desirable while keeping them non format breaking. Maybe a built-in sideboard would help so they are not exactly 60 cards+equipment?
One thing to consider is power/consistency and I am happy you guys are considering it. "Does your deck does it's thing, consistently? And is it powefull?" If the responsive is your deck is great, thats kinda of the reason kayo is not that great. If he is not very powerful, the consistency issues with nonblocks/nonpoppers does are not worth it.
Do you guys feel there should be more punishes in the design of heroes like from MST where "blues matter"? understandably their "weakness" is that they have some cards that don't block, but their consistency seems to make up for that issue.
In honor of thanksgiving... Blitz is the next day left over turkey, stuffing, and cranberry sandwich you make from the Limited format. If you didn't it would just be wasted
I think you touch on the most important thing about consistency. There is: every single turn is consistent or consistency over 5 turns Personally I think over 5 turns is more important.
From personal experience when I or a friend face the same hero twice or even three times in an armory they get a bit annoyed. Casual armory goers tend to be hero specialists until they’re more into the game so getting the same matchup 8 times in 4 weeks can be miserable too.
Bloat is just the amount of heroes available. Doesn't mean your hero will LL slower. The current heroes that are here, that haven't done anything in a while, need to get a power up to rotate. MST heroes are a problem for me personally. Just now trying to come back to the game. And no idea what to play that's reasonable vs them.
Imagine LSS printing the most broken set of all time, demonstrably so, with multiple overtuned heroes and negative play experiences for your opponents and still claiming the game is in a healthy state. And then, having faith in the balance team of that company that managed to do this after 5 years and thinking that they're on the right track. I would be more comfortable at this point betting that if Enigma isn't LLed by the time the Guardian Mastery set is out that Guardian will still be unplayable. LSS needs to stop printing heroes that invalidate entire swaths of the meta. You can't have hero bloat if 80% of your heroes are unplayable though, so fivehead LSS.
Victor is my favorite but not sure he has many good win rates, even with help. Having to save 2 blues to play the card in your arsenal, if you can keep an arsenal, when other heroes blow every card in their hand every turn and out value you feels bad.
Enjoyed this one a lot! This remains one of my go-tos (listened to this one while hanging the Xmas lights!)
As applicable to consistency, I think there was a slight gap in the discussion, regarding the 'amplitude' of said consistency.
Warrior as a class is actually offers some of the most consistent heroes. Golden Kassai, for example, can very consistently offer a 7-8 off of two cards - or 11-12 off of three cards. She can do this nearly every single turn, reliably. An *extremely* consistent hero.
Yet... she (and warrior as a class) is where it is. And thus... there's a 'hole' in the consistency argument, as it also must respect the net 'power level'.
You both are 100% correct in that the ability to do what you want to do, each turn, matters - but if you can't out-math someone, it still is a problem.
Thanks for what you do, and cheers.
I love the interaction and conversation around hero bloat. I'm really surprised I didn't hear any comments on the "math" of the issue and what levers LSS has to control this. FAB is heavily played around math, so it surprises me that over 2 weeks of pod conversations I didn't hear (unless I just missed it) anything that addresses hero bloat in terms of release numbers vs LL points mathematically. What I mean is that if 3 seasons (PT, PT, RTN) each give 1,500 points, then there are 4.5 heroes worth of LL points introduced each year. If 3 sets each year release 3-4 new heroes each set, we gain 9-12 heroes per year. 9-4.5=4.5 so even disregarding that the 4.5k LL points are spread out and may LL 3 heroes some years and may LL 5 or 8 heroes some years, we are adding 4+ heroes to the pool every year. Regardless of what the meta or hero pool looks like now, there is an interesting mathematical issue that unless the total LL points/1000 is = to the number of heroes introduced in a year there will always be either a growing or shrinking hero pool. So I think a big question about hero bloat is actually more about how do you control/if you can control the rate at which heroes LL? How do you balance and account for the massive variables that go into predicting release and LL rates 6-18 months in the future? How heavy handed should LSS be in the regulation of the hero pool either by increasing/decreasing LL points each season, or by increasing/decreasing hero releases? I realize this may not get discussed since the pod has talked about the issue for multiple weeks, but it seems like a part of the conversation I was expecting to hear and just didn't.
I was just talking to my friend about how 80% of the cards in the expansion sets like Dusk till Dawn never saw play and that’s a pretty wasteful thing if you are opening boxes to pull the other 20%. If there’s no solution to that I don’t want to see expansion sets again anytime soon.
I was very happy to hear you revisit the topic from the previous week. If the topic is interesting and you have interesting things to say, I'm always happy to hear more.
I appreciated the conversation about consistency, especially when you went a little high level and talked about what makes a deck consistent and what consistency is. It would be interesting to do a class-by-class or hero-by-hero look at the resource base issues you discussed. For instance, we all know Warrior has been bad for a long time, and there are lots of theories about why. How much of it is that Warrior is a bit in the Florian position. I needs blues to function but a lot of the blues are bad. Boltyn, on the other hand, needs zero blues, but its deck is highly dependent on a few power cards or else its turns are bad.
Great pod!
Cookout question: what do you think Riptide needs to become an A tier or higher hero?
I'd say Pankaj being a Nuu player and hating on Riptide doesn't seem to be a coincidence... But I actually think Riptide is an example of a hero that did get support from LSS and it helped him a lot, ignoring those bad blue action cards from HVY and ROS, the arrows he's got have really helped slowly raise the power level and consistency. Plus the Azaelea armoury deck added a lot of good tools for Riptide - especially Barbed Castaway builds. He's not A tier or anything like that, but has certainly been playable since Dromai left, and the support LSS has given him has made people that play the hero generally happy.
Unequivocally, there ARE too many heroes that are dead in the water ~right now~. I think LSS is so good at their job, and they work so far in advance, that this won’t always be the case.
I’m not sure if we just have short memories, but for 6 decks to be viable - even if three are from the same set - that’s pretty good compared to the previous metas where it was 2 and then maybe a third and fourth more fringe deck.
Oh nice I made it into the command and cookout, love to see it haha
If you are going to use the term “pro” to describes players complaining they have “too much” to prep for is lame. In no other profession is a “pro” given any other option than prepare for every possibility. It comes with the title. Calling individuals “pros” is where we go wrong in the game rn imo, there isn’t enough support for full time pros to exist therefore the preparation isn’t worth the payout
big agree. i've always balked at people calling fab tourney grinders "pro players". professional means you do it as your main source of income, not just a hobby. outside of those who have quit their jobs to play fab (iirc michael hamilton) there are nearly no "pro" players. on top of that, people who complain about having to prepare for a wide field are complaining about a nonissue imo. be better. prep better. everyone has to prepare for the same metagame, nothing will be perfect, the most you can do is prep better than everyone else and that should be sufficient
@@dozrFAB There are actually a few of us out there that play FaB professionally. (Although a good chunk of our income comes from secondary sources like patreon)
@MaraFaris I specifically said that there are some who fit the term "pro". Do you disagree that the proportion of people who have made fab their primary source of income is small?
@@MaraFaris As a professional where do you stand on the idea of having too many variables to prepare for?
@@AustinSacriste Honestly, I think it's always going to be impossible to prepare for everything. Like Hayden briefly mentioned, you will always have a finite amount of time, and a lot of preparing for an event is figuring out how best to allocate that finite resource. The rest is the ability to think on your toes, and react to unfamiliar situations. That's a skill that's every bit as important as being able to practice your matchups. We could have a one deck meta and still it would be impossible to test every possible scenario you might encounter. I think anyone who wants to excel at FaB needs to be able to both understand how to use their prep time as efficiently as possible and be able to react to things that may not have come up in their testing.
I was thinking... Maybe armory decks are a little bit problematic as a source to inject new cards to any format? The cards in them have to be effectively unbannable. So far 2 out of the 5 armory decks required bans (Savage Sash - Berserk, Cerebellum Processor - High Octane, the latter of which completely invalidated a previously decently viable hero as a side effect, maybe even 2...). It's a really hard balancing act to keep them viable, desirable while keeping them non format breaking. Maybe a built-in sideboard would help so they are not exactly 60 cards+equipment?
LMAO I think @fleshandpod is the podcast with the cool interviews
I'm the FAB channel that does all the shitposting 16:40
That is funny! Good call shouting out the real podcast
I did correct myself saying the correct channel shortly after! But thank you and glad to shout you out as well haha
@@ethnicsmoke Ah true true, I think the clip I got sent didn't include that part.
Anyways thanks for the free clout 🤑📈🎉
It's okay. We're also very bad and forget who we are too . Also thanks for thinking the interviews we do are cool!
One thing to consider is power/consistency and I am happy you guys are considering it.
"Does your deck does it's thing, consistently? And is it powefull?"
If the responsive is your deck is great, thats kinda of the reason kayo is not that great.
If he is not very powerful, the consistency issues with nonblocks/nonpoppers does are not worth it.
Do you guys feel there should be more punishes in the design of heroes like from MST where "blues matter"? understandably their "weakness" is that they have some cards that don't block, but their consistency seems to make up for that issue.
In honor of thanksgiving... Blitz is the next day left over turkey, stuffing, and cranberry sandwich you make from the Limited format. If you didn't it would just be wasted
I think you touch on the most important thing about consistency.
There is: every single turn is consistent or consistency over 5 turns
Personally I think over 5 turns is more important.
On the topic of winning tournaments, how does one find sideboard guides and other hero specific guides (started playing in August).
From personal experience when I or a friend face the same hero twice or even three times in an armory they get a bit annoyed. Casual armory goers tend to be hero specialists until they’re more into the game so getting the same matchup 8 times in 4 weeks can be miserable too.
'Consistency is really good in FaB!'
Warriors: Where!?
Bloat is just the amount of heroes available. Doesn't mean your hero will LL slower. The current heroes that are here, that haven't done anything in a while, need to get a power up to rotate. MST heroes are a problem for me personally. Just now trying to come back to the game. And no idea what to play that's reasonable vs them.
Imagine LSS printing the most broken set of all time, demonstrably so, with multiple overtuned heroes and negative play experiences for your opponents and still claiming the game is in a healthy state. And then, having faith in the balance team of that company that managed to do this after 5 years and thinking that they're on the right track.
I would be more comfortable at this point betting that if Enigma isn't LLed by the time the Guardian Mastery set is out that Guardian will still be unplayable. LSS needs to stop printing heroes that invalidate entire swaths of the meta. You can't have hero bloat if 80% of your heroes are unplayable though, so fivehead LSS.
Victor is my favorite but not sure he has many good win rates, even with help. Having to save 2 blues to play the card in your arsenal, if you can keep an arsenal, when other heroes blow every card in their hand every turn and out value you feels bad.