Duder
Joined: Mar 13, 2012
|
 Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 06:30 |
 
|
| pythrr wrote: | remove PO from all divisions.
edit: or Big Guys only for PO (good fluff)
job done |
I like this since I am not a fan of the skill piling on.
One way this could be implemented without changing the official rules is to let box teams opt out of facing piling on opponents. There could be a check box on each box team page for the opt out which cannot be selected if any player on the team has piling on.
I am much less opposed to piling on with big guys because their blitz is unreliable, half the time unrerollable, and there is the chance they don't get up the next turn after piling on. So alternatively the same opt out system could not apply to Piling On on big guys.
This system lets coaches who love the cpomb bash game or think its lameto avoid the bashy teams play the game as it is now. Everyone else can play in a more enjoyable (imo) environment. |
|
|
DeZigma
Joined: Aug 21, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 07:17 |
|
[a] let the BOX use the offical rule set
[b] New Division with CRP+ rules
[c] Remove ractial bias |
_________________
 |
|
Kelkka
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 07:24 |
|
The NTBB suggestion is good, would be interesting to see it's effects. But if I were to suggest something completely different...
I kind of liked the faction like approach HM gave earlier.
This is rather radical approach and without a doubt full of holes. No rules changes, divide box into 4 tiers:
Rookie, developing, established, old ones.
Use sum of games played by teams players to determine category (MNG doesn't count). This could be more complex than just a sum. Possibly core/most experienced members of team weight more than fodder. (Teams seasoned veterans and legends doesn't want to play against rookies, they insist on playing for glory)
Threshold values vary for each race (as they tend to develop at different pace). Pair games primarily within category by TV, but allow broader range. Possibly allow some cross-category games to happen (soft borders) so that as much games as possible happen.
This should lead to a point where sweetspotters/minmaxers would face similar builds and destroy each others, reducing that problem. Also new teams would be protected from these teams. This should encourage building more all-around powerful teams (that one legend means you are with the big boys, so you better get players to support him).
You can give low-tier (namely flings/gobbo) rosters large threshold so they stay with small teams longer. And when they finally advance to "developing/established" range, they get inducements more often.
Rebuilding could prove problematic. However as the MNG players games played doesn't count, this shouldn't be huge problem. There could be issues in extreme cases.
I'm quite sure there would be some unbalanced matches, especially in old teams category. And I'm certain there are plenty of details I didn't think of, but just a thought. Also this could be very difficult to fine tune and implement. |
|
|
Igvy
Joined: Apr 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 07:44 |
|
1) PO doesn't work on armour rolls at all. (This would have more effect then you'd think, no more safety on the ground)
or
2) PO is a big guy skill. Requires doubles for anyone else to take. |
|
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 07:50 |
|
1. Use of Piling On requires re-roll of armour first, with a +/- equal to Strength differential. Failure to break armour with PO induces armour roll on PO'ing player, and turnover. (Note that this *biases* the skill to Big Guys only, but introduces risk which escalates the smaller the Strength differential gets.)
2. Mighty Blow and Dirty Player +1 to injury becomes 9=BH, like Stunty. |
|
|
Cloggy
Joined: Sep 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 08:12 |
|
I have just 1, which is to make PO rerolls available for AV rolls only, for all divisions.
Most of the suggestions I see will reduce attrition levels too far. |
_________________
Proud owner of three completed Ranked grids, sadly lacking in having a life. |
|
mardaed
Joined: Jun 15, 2012
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 08:13 |
|
| Chainchoker wrote: | | DukeTyrion wrote: | My Fix
Make another division with adjusted rules (LRB 7) and leave Blackbox as it is. |
This. Make a Plasmoid Division - roster changes and all - my money says it will quickly become the most popular of all divisions. |
This. LRB7 all the way baby! |
|
|
birdbanger
Joined: Jul 02, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 09:58 |
|
|
Naru1981
Joined: Jan 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 10:28 |
|
why not leave as it is, except for 1 change.
If you PO YOU also take a AV/cas roll!!
After all, you are jumping on top of an armoured player. Not a pillow. Will hurt you also. Be funny seeing the lame teams losing their legend Claw POMBers to cas or RIP whilst their target is able to carry on. Will make more people think on how to play |
_________________
 |
|
drunkagent
Joined: Oct 20, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 10:46 |
|
Piling on is treated as a foul action and all doubles on armour or injury rolls are sending offs. It is after all attacking a player when hes down! |
|
|
Nickpcr
Joined: Oct 28, 2010
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 10:50 |
|
Solve TV and leave the rules as they are. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 10:53 |
|
Another potential fix for. rookie hunter teams:
Once a team has played more than 30 games, it cannot be scheduled against a team with less than 10 games played.
this might need some exceptions for eg halflings that get crushed, and the number of games might need tweaking ..
My first suggestion was FF counts double for matchmaking but I think it would need to affect inducements too
I quite like the idea of merging R and B and having both methods of matching available to a team at the same time, to increase the amount of opportunity to find games quick. we have a small playerbase and it can take a long time to get a match.
I appreciate this probably has many downsides tho.
Ohhhh just thought of a fix for high TV bash without change to core rules: Allow teams to buy up to 2 rostered apothecaries
maybe do it as an auto message, "congratulations your team has played its first 10 games. you are now sponsored by orkidas/bloodwiser/regenerade who enable your team to buy a second apothecary"
alternatively: Give away more CASH
Say +10 for a game, or just for a win. maybe with a TV requirement like only for teams over or under some limit
This would help the elves maintain a team or even a bench, and elves with a bench beat clpomb |
Last edited by Sp00keh on %b %18, %2013 - %10:%Dec; edited 2 times in total |
|
Winni
Joined: Jan 14, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 11:03 |
|
If you roll a double on a PO roll, you´re KOed. |
_________________
Spreading the truth about Wood Elves since shortly. |
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 11:40 |
|
My fix. Don't change PO/Claw/MB. Fix fouling - +1 to no-TZ fouls, sneaky git to KO. More fouling = counters PO.
How's about some outside-the-box thinking... pun intended...
There's great debate over the nuances of the rules; I think this implies the ruleset is pretty good. Perhaps the problem with *box is not CRP, but that the mechanics of *box is that it encourages wash-rinse-repeat builds.
The solution? Make it harder to wash-rinse-repeat. Limit the % of games played in *box with any particular race. You want to play that race more? Play some other races. Perhaps even subdivide the races. Group Chaos/Pact/Nurgle etc.
No rule changes. Just force diversity to stop the smallmans of this world from playing/spamming a single race. |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
cthol
Joined: Nov 10, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 16, 2013 - 12:04 |
|
Any of these options, in order of ease of implementation:
1) CONCESSION
As suggested above, and as I have suggested before, allow concessions with no further penalty than that stipulated in the rules.
What does this achieve?
This allows you to simply not play against stupid teams. WIll it be abused? Sure. Will I ever have to play against 5 x clawpomb again? No? Job done. If teams with multiple clawpomb get fewer games because no one will play against them, then maybe they will be less attractive, but even if they don't, I still will never have to play them. And the fact that you still lose the MVP, the money and possibly any star players on your team will stop people conceding against any team they just don't like, you would concede where the long term damage to your team from playing the game appears worse than the long term damage of not playing.
Feasibility: changing site rules. Easy.
2) Nerf PO by using an existing option
My favourites are either making it Armour Only, or else that the PO player gets sent off to the KO box on a double, kind of like rugby's Sin Bin: ten minutes to cool your heels for a dangerous tackle.
Armour Only
What does this achieve?
This makes sense fluff wise. You can't tell having landed on someone how badly they're injured, and then decide it's not enough, and get up and do it again. Instead, you hit the guy, see him fall, see he's intact, than pile on to finish him off. This is an armour reroll.
Sin Bin
What does this achieve?
This makes PO like fouling-lute, so that you have a chance of being sent to the bin, reducing both the number of PO hits (through SIn Binning and also through not using it for fear of SIn Binning), and also number of players on the field, thereby giving a tactical advantage to your opponent. It's not Banned, you can still get back in, but it will reduce the effectiveness of the killstack.
Feasibility: Either of these can be implemented easily since they are options in the client
]3) Nerf PO by using another option that doesn't exist yet.
Favourites would be either not giving SPP for CAS caused by PO, or limiting PO to players with high ST.
No SPP option:
What does this achieve?
We don't get SPP for fouls, or chainsaws, or stabbing. To me, PO falls into this category. It so completely changes the odds of player removal following a block, to the advantage of the PO player, that it should be grouped with other skills that are seen as "foul play" of one type or another and so don't contribute to SPP. Frankly, I think this would single handedly solve the problem. It doesn't change the effectiveness of the skill AT ALL. Coaches who want to have ClawPOMB players can still do so, they have not been nerfed in any way. It will just take AGES to skill one up. They would now either have to use other skills / play styles to skill up (feeding the TD's or easy passes) or rely on the MVP. They would in effect be like Black Orc Blockers in their skill growth.
Limit PO to High ST players.
What does this achieve?
This has the advantage of being possibly the best option as regards fluff: it is easy to envisage why a goblin can't pile onto an ogre, and very easy to see that an ogre piling onto a goblin will cause serious damage. There are basically 3 ways to implement this:
1) In game comparison: you can only PO if your player has higher ST than the opposing player. Possibly must have 2 higher ST, this could be debated. But basically, any player could take PO, but whether or not they could use it would depend on their opponent and would be checked for each and every block. Complicated. But possibly the most accurate implementation of the fluff.
2) Only players with ST5 can get PO: Makes sense, you have to be strong. Easier to implement: PO just won't show up in the skill options unless the player is ST5. A chaos Warrior with +ST could get PO, for instance.
3) Only Players with the "Big Guy" skill can have PO. Obviously, Big Guy isn't a skill any more, since LRB4. However it could be brought back, in the absence of any alternative. This would limit PO to only really huge monsters, not just some regular dudes who have hit the gym for a bit.
Feasibility: A pain in the hole. However, I think the SPP one might be the simplest, and I think this change could ON ITS OWN solve the problem. |
Last edited by cthol on %b %16, %2013 - %12:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
Blood Bowl 2024 Edit...
Search
