Thinking about Tempo

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by kalasle, Sep 14, 2017.

  1. Bondman007

    Bondman007 I need me some PIE!

    Well, perhaps a meta (good stuff) BG would be good but I think a lot of their FF themes were hammered or just plain bad...
    Voil -> Nerfed and would take a near master to win with them now. They play no where near the same as they used to.
    Cyclops -> Have they ever been good?
    Moga -> High skill theme and again a few hard hitting pieces were nerfed.
    Electric -> Viable? maybe??
    Hyaenids -> A quote from Baller sums them up, "They suck."
    Leaving meta, good stuff decks and splits (as usual) as the most competitive form of SP.
    And without cleanse it really increases the level of play required to pilot the decks.
    I'm not the greatest player but I have a decent grasp on the game and my winning % dropped significantly when cleansing emerald was lost.
     
  2. kalasle

    kalasle Forum Royalty

    @GoldTiger you brought up the idea that tempo and value are at odds with one another; I think that concept has some value in HS and MtG, and I can certainly see where you are coming from, but I disagree when trying to transfer the ideas to Pox. Pox has a map. This makes a big difference. An advantage on tempo means that champions can further convert their AP into profitable damage rather than movement, and seizing fonts means more nora generation. I think that this is one of the (several) reasons that Pox games snowball more than other TCGs games. Some decks are better or worse at converting out of their tempo advantage, but generally I think that an advantage of tempo in Pox often comes with some nora advantage as well -- not necessarily an efficiency advantage, but a strict resource one. If Alice gets a tempo advantage over Bob, then Bob has to either even the field immediately, or otherwise step back and downscale the pace of the game in order to catch up and play champions.

    That last statement also makes me think it is important to differentiate between two things called "tempo": the pace of the game generally, and the comparative reaction frames of both players. By "reaction frame" I mean the chronology of the event to which a player is reacting -- whether something in the past or the future, and by how much. If Alice has a turn of tempo on Bob, then Bob is often responding to Alice's most recent turn, and Alice is being proactive and making moves to modify Bob's next turn. If Alice has two turns on Bob, then Bob is still reacting to something that happened two turns ago, while Alice is still planning for the next turn and creating more problems. That sense is different from the mathematical expression of the game's tempo generally, expressed by how many resources players may gain or lose at any given time. I'm not sure how to mix them yet, to be honest, but they seem like two distinct ways of discussing the concept.
     
  3. GoldTiger

    GoldTiger I need me some PIE!

    I called them "sisters" rather than brothers. I mean even pox has defined the T1 tempo advantage as +20 Nora to P2 so they are definitely innately linked. I even have conversions to and from each other.

    Note if the game was designed well enough good tempo should never come at good "isolated" value (such as horn of order) however dog insist on things like BE existing so who knows.

    Now in your example I feel like you're jumping the gun a bit. You say that A has a tempo advantage over B but then that B also has less champs? Sounds like a value advantage as well.

    There is also one important thing to note about your using ap to get fontS which = value. Moving 5 spaces anywhere on the map doesn't get you value. It gets you +/- tempo. It just so happens that fonts exist in the game of pox. This is a very important thing to note. Now to me board state tempo is often tricky because you are simultaneously giving your opponent board state tempo at the same time; unless centred around a font. Occupying that portion of the board gives you tempo AND value because you can't deploy. Simply put because every game of pox is centred around a mid font tempo is innately related to value. Imagine if every game was played on FW 2 font. How much does your tempo translate to value there? Not a great deal it's literally a fight for territory. In my experience, overwhelmingly, it's the player that has the +tempo with -value that wins on that map.

    Essentially I don't believe my ideas about tempo are incorrect, you simply have to take them in isolation. Once you have that baseline then you apply them to games and see how they work. With my given arguments you see that the underlying theory is correct and is also correct when applied to pox gameplay. It's wrong to take the theory straight from the gameplay. What if we were playing a similar board game for example? Well our entire theory wouldn't work since it only applies to pox as we didn't develop a baseline.

    Think of tempo and value as two currencies. At time t player X has to evaluate which is more valuable to them... which dictates many of the examples given above. Now how much tempo you have does in any way relate to how much value you you have. They can be converted however and the conversion isn't always the same. Take an easy example of 1000 Nora and no runes on the board. Lots of value and no tempo! Thinking of it simply Just because you have 15 goats doesn't mean you can get 5 cows no matter what. You may find good deals. You may get ripped off. You may even find some cows in the wild. You may even be the best goat to cow converter in the game and it doesn't even matter if you get good deals or ripped off.

    TLDR - tempo is still +ve ap and NOT related to value(though they can be converted)...it just so happens fonts, Nora globes, death mechanics etc exist in the game. The objective of the game is still use runes to destroy the shrine and that's were my definition comes from. We can apply this model to "any game" but we most definitely can't apply the pox model to any games except pox.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017
  4. GoldTiger

    GoldTiger I need me some PIE!

    I can elaborate further if Later on if requested. For example tempo in hs = mana = board state (roughly). Tempo in pox = Nora = board state (roughly). However the pox board has another dimension, and so where instead of just attack, champions also have the ability to move.

    It could also be noted that value is related to ththe resource you accrue every turn and that tempo is related to the key limiting resource and is "how you win". It's often said that the player who uses the most mana crystals in HS will win the game. This is most likely true in pox for +Ve ap. Note it has to be +Ve ap because pox has another dimension, and +/-Ve ap doesn't always mean +/-tempo as a result. Imagine a player who makes 60ap worth of attacks over another player. Probably pretty hard to lose right.
     
  5. kalasle

    kalasle Forum Royalty

    Note before my other questions -- what do you mean by +ve ap? Is that an abbreviation for "effective AP", or are you referring to something else? Just want to get terms straight.

    To what does that "them" refer? Do you mean tempo and nora advantage, or the two kinds of tempo?

    I don't understand what you mean by this.

    I don't understand what you mean by this -- I don't think I said that B has fewer champs than A anywhere? My argument was that when a player has an advantage in tempo, that converts to victory through creating a direct resource advantage: if you are up on tempo, you can kill opposing champs at a higher rate than you lose them, or take more ground (and fonts), and those are both strictly material advantages. In that respect I guess I was talking about having fewer champs, but as a product of having a tempo advantage. I don't know what you mean about "jumping the gun".

    Please provide more clarity and elaboration about your understanding of "tempo". What's the relationship between spending AP on movement and a change in tempo? I'm not demanding a strict mathematical expression or anything, but the version that you seem to be moving doesn't follow my intuition or reasoning at the moment.

    Please explain this.

    Please elaborate on this as well -- you are using some words that allude to an interesting point, but I am not sure that I agree with what you actually said at all. Also, what is "the key limiting resource"?

    Can you please describe each of those words? We've both been using the word "value", but I want to know more precisely what you mean by it -- could you give me a technical definition of some kind? It's vague in and of itself, and although people can usually get by anyway, I am starting to suspect here that we intend to mean slightly different things by it.

    Do you mean "does *not* in any way"?

    ---

    In short, I think I agree with you a lot less than when we started talking, but keep talking, maybe that will turn me around.
     
  6. GoldTiger

    GoldTiger I need me some PIE!

    Note before my other questions -- what do you mean by +ve ap? Is that an abbreviation for "effective AP", or are you referring to something else? Just want to get terms straight.
    Its a calculus/maths term. Basically means whatever you want it to mean, in this case its positive ap usage. By positive I mean ap that has an effect on the board, for good effect for you, so its good ap usage so its +ve ap. If you were to plot a graph of tempo over time you would have units of t on the x-axis and y(t) on the y, where y(t) is ap*more complicated variables. More complicated can be anything depending on the model and in pox's case we have dumb Bane Shift like fonts, nora globes, death effects etc.

    To what does that "them" refer? Do you mean tempo and nora advantage, or the two kinds of tempo?
    Tempo and Value. They are innately linked but aren't the same thing.

    I don't understand what you mean by this.
    Good tempo to value conversion should not come from the cards in players hands, it should come from the well thought out decisions they make. It really devalued any strategy behind the game when BE existed in UD for example. Dogs gave too good a conversion. Imagine the inverse for example, sacrificing tempo for value at a remarkable rate... say nora mine cost 50 but gave you 50 per turn.

    I don't understand what you mean by this -- I don't think I said that B has fewer champs than A anywhere? My argument was that when a player has an advantage in tempo, that converts to victory through creating a direct resource advantage: if you are up on tempo, you can kill opposing champs at a higher rate than you lose them, or take more ground (and fonts), and those are both strictly material advantages. In that respect I guess I was talking about having fewer champs, but as a product of having a tempo advantage. I don't know what you mean about "jumping the gun".
    You said to even the field immediately. In almost 100% of games I know this means even the major resource of the game which I assumed was champions. When have you ever heard a soccer commentator say "even the field" when in reality they mean get the ball on the other half rather than make up for their red carded 11th player.


    Please provide more clarity and elaboration about your understanding of "tempo". What's the relationship between spending AP on movement and a change in tempo? I'm not demanding a strict mathematical expression or anything, but the version that you seem to be moving doesn't follow my intuition or reasoning at the moment.
    +ve AP. Whatever you want it to mean. Means different things to me because I play different to you. Whatever +ve AP usage is to you as defined above, that's tempo. This is simply the underlying model. You need to distance gameplay and your own personal thoughts and try to understand the core underlying theory.

    Please explain this.
    You spend some nora. Play down a champion. Wowzers you've taken your first step in to the realm of tempo land. Its hard to define in what way these are related but not in the same vein as previous examples, but in HS you use up a card to spend some mana to get some tempo. Is that good enough? Perhaps rather your taking one of the factors in the AP*more complicated variables above, and turning that number from a 0 to a 1. Impossible to have a tempo with 0 champions right? We just that change variable from 0 to 1 those enabling possible values other than 0 as time goes on.

    Please elaborate on this as well -- you are using some words that allude to an interesting point, but I am not sure that I agree with what you actually said at all. Also, what is "the key limiting resource"?
    Well a lot of games use a resource system like this. For example in total war you accrue gold every turn, but youre limited by army movement, league is similar, but youre limited by your and your own teams board position, RTS = some resource x and time t as the limiting factor for building units etc. You can't win the game with infinity major resource and the base limiting resource can you. Unless your opponent is also somewhere on that Bane Shift tempo scale. You can be behind on major resource and win however.

    Can you please describe each of those words? We've both been using the word "value", but I want to know more precisely what you mean by it -- could you give me a technical definition of some kind? It's vague in and of itself, and although people can usually get by anyway, I am starting to suspect here that we intend to mean slightly different things by it.
    Nora is value. HP is similarly related in the Value equation as is other factors in the ap equation. Imagine if a champion traded 50 for 1. That's some insane value wow! But HP didn't let it get deployed as its not the major resource of the game.


    Do you mean "does *not* in any way"?
    Ye.
    ---

    In short, I think I agree with you a lot less than when we started talking, but keep talking, maybe that will turn me around
     
  7. GoldTiger

    GoldTiger I need me some PIE!

    You can't just use the coulomb potential and try to use it on any application that the yakuwa potential is for. You take that yakuwa potential and then apply it to photons and Bane Shift and then get the coulomb potential.

    Yakuwa = coulomb. Coulomb =/= yakuwa.

    Youre bringing up a universal idea in a wide variety of games. I'm just trying to get some BASELINE down because you were disagreeing with some of it (or rather misinterpreting it). After we got this sorted ill talk some pox theory.
     
  8. kalasle

    kalasle Forum Royalty

    Ok, thanks for the explanation.

    Gotcha.

    Ok, we can ignore this then, if it's just about design opinions.

    I've never heard a soccer commentator say much of anything to be honest, but that's beside the point. Here's what I was talking about when I said "even the field", because you're right that wasn't very precise language: Alice moves her champs into an advantageous position over Bob; for Bob to "even the field" with his next play, he needs to completely respond to whatever advantage Alice just gained, such that he does not need to deal with the implications of her actions on his next turn. That's what I meant by "even the field" on tempo. Generally, I think of those sorts of tempo swings involving killing or disabling a champion, and I would expect Bob would necessarily have to do something similar in order to remain even on tempo. (That's because if Alice has more champions in striking positions, she can expect to take more resources from Bob than he can from her, or can mitigate -- essentially, moving at a higher rate than Bob. That's why I used change in resource level as a provision measure of tempo. And, just like with resource levels, each player has a tempo that we can discuss in addition to describing the larger state of the game's tempo.)

    I partly get what you are saying here, but I also think that you are bringing in an element of subjectification at the wrong place. Yes, personal evaluations come up at some point, but the causal relationship you imply here:
    strikes me as totally wrong -- inverted. Personal judgements are the things through which people should filter theory to get a playstyle; they are not themselves informed by style, and allowing that kind of inference into theoretical work seems to me like it would corrupt the process.

    No, I think that the reaction frame conception of tempo actually accommodates game states that don't involve champions. Otherwise, do you have you right in saying that "generating tempo demands investing nora resources"?

    I feel like you are making an interesting and potentially valuable point here that I am just not following at the moment -- maybe I don't understand by what rationale you are distinguishing between resource types. We can let it alone for now though, and talk about it again if it's relevant.

    I don't find this explanation helpful, but it does mostly confirm to me that neither of us is using the term "value" in similar, consistent, or always compatible ways.
     
  9. GoldTiger

    GoldTiger I need me some PIE!

    LI partly get what you are saying here, but I also think that you are bringing in an element of subjectification at the wrong place. Yes, personal evaluations come up at some point, but the causal relationship you imply here strikes me as totally wrong -- inverted. Personal judgements are the things through which people should filter theory to get a playstyle; they are not themselves informed by style, and allowing that kind of inference into theoretical work seems to me like it would corrupt the process.
    Ok that was poorly worded. When I said you need to distance yourself, I meant you need to stop applying in game scenarios (note how this is not related to what I'm about to say later). We aren't ready for that yet. I would have to disagree with that second part though. Messi might like the ball on his left foot rather than his right...the ball is on a different spot of the field, the tempo is changed? Rooney likes it on the right? Some may say the model will account for this, I would say you have an unnecessarily complex model. Perhaps I like playing total war with army X in view and army Y hidden, where you prefer the inverse? How does the model account for that if I have a 100% winrate with arrangement 1, but a 0% winrate with arrangement 2? It seems unnecessarily complicated to me if we don't allow the most complex and subjective beings in the world at least say hey, I like this and you like this and we are both right about the way we play games. Now there is definitely a set of criteria that they have to follow, however in reality for people this list is infinitely large. Hence we can just say +VeAP(P). I.E. our +ve AP equation is a function of P. Note this aint the same as putting P in the original +ve AP equation itself. I'm sure you can figure that one out yourself.

    No, I think that the reaction frame conception of tempo actually accommodates game states that don't involve champions. Otherwise, do you have you right in saying that "generating tempo demands investing nora resources"?

    Yes. You can't summon minions and use ap if you don't have nora. You can't get a ball in the goal if you don't have players. Tempo and value are related, but they aren't the same thing.

    I feel like you are making an interesting and potentially valuable point here that I am just not following at the moment -- maybe I don't understand by what rationale you are distinguishing between resource types. We can let it alone for now though, and talk about it again if it's relevant.
    Major resource of the game = generated over time and can go to infinity if left unchecked. Some times theres a cap however it isn't the KEY limiting resource. Sure you can only get 10 cards in HS. But you can play a card, draw another, play a card, draw another etc... You can't play 5 mana and then just infinitely scale your mana to infinity. The cap is "artificial" in that sense. Usually the game just says ok and lets this number scale up.
    Limiting resource = The KEY limiting resource(s) in every game. Note (s), because RTS have ANOTHER dimension, build time, compared to the normal AP (attack time whatever) and board presence. All these come in to one nice tempo equation. If you have to wait a time t because there is physically no way within the rules of the game to get more of it, that's your limiting resource. Its usually limited by some sort of t. Now the major resource doesn't come under this because you can technically generate infinite Major resource, INSTANTLY, if you had infinite Limiting resource, but not the converse. This is basically saying if you occupy the whole board in every possible state, i.e. you win, thus moving your Major resource to infinity. Having infinity Major resource does not INSTANTLY give you infinity Limited resource. In my example before. 10000 nora doesn't = win. I know this is a Bane Shift explanation but if you can sorta wrap your head around it Limiting resource is limited by difference Bane Shift Major resource is. There is a different version of a limit as t --> infinity.
     

Share This Page