gjopie
Joined: Oct 27, 2009
|
 Posted:
Nov 05, 2013 - 10:42 |
 
|
| Smeat wrote: |
It's not that I'm "against" them, it's that I don't believe they really exist as anything much diff than cut-throat, regular-season games. Mighty Blow is still Mighty Blow, Claw is still Claw.
(Of course, you could ban Piling On, Fouls, Surfing and Wizards, anything that is designed to hurt the other team, but some coaches would still use them "out of habit" - and then what do we do with them?)
|
I would personally never ban fouls, surfing, and especially wizards from pre-season games. I think ultimately all three are perfectly legitimate means of winning a game, and preventing more damage being done to your own team.
However, we could set the rules during the post-season tour so that piling on rerolls don't use mb/claw modifiers, and that claw doesn't stack with MB. That would soften them up a little bit. |
_________________
  |
|
gjopie
Joined: Oct 27, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 16:31 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: |
Any chance we could try to fix PO somehow as OBBA, LOBBL and KPL have done?
Just wondering. |
Thoughts? Discuss. |
_________________
|
|
FredAstaire
Joined: May 10, 2013
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 17:09 |
|
It's an interesting idea because you need to balance the need for the PO'er to farm while the other teams need to not die.
What it comes down to is how competitive (or non-competitive) you want the pre-season tour to be. (Obviously spp is the main aim, but also people will want to test strategies or practice against a certain team and in those situations, the more competitive the better)
Personally, PO not stacking with Claw / Mb during pre-season could be a nice balance imho, because it'll be a nice balance between the needs of the different teams. |
|
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 17:13 |
|
| gjopie wrote: | | However, we could set the rules during the post-season tour so that piling on rerolls don't use mb/claw modifiers, and that claw doesn't stack with MB. That would soften them up a little bit. |
*Groans* I hate that rule. Just stick with CRP. It works pretty well. I play in a league where PO is nerfed and it's just not as much fun (and I'm humans).
Part of the dynamic of a game is isolating any POers and fouling them. It's fun. Plus PO'd players are AWOL for a turn. It's a tactical trade off. If you are scared of the [C]POMB then foul it. Kill it. Then win the game. |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 17:27 |
|
Just to expand on that further. You can mark dangerous players as well as fouling them. Get a block/fend zombie and stick it on that killer chaos warrior. Get your troll in front of that marauder. Put your blodge players between that tackle-less killer nurgle warrior and his nearest target. Or draw the blitz then gang foul the pest out of it.
The game becomes less colourful when you start nerfing skills. I'd be in favour of perhaps the +1 to fouling or something like that; but nerfing the danger skills makes it just a bit more boring. Nerf PO = nobody takes PO. Nobody POs really. Then 1 aspect of the game is gone and now you're stuck in a different, slower game.
This isn't blackbox. We're not playing 1000 games and getting 5 cpombers. It's taken me 4 seasons just to build one, and he'll get killed at some point.
Stop pixel hugging. You don't like a player? Try to kill him. |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
FredAstaire
Joined: May 10, 2013
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 17:32 |
|
| Chainsaw wrote: |
The game becomes less colourful when you start nerfing skills. I'd be in favour of perhaps the +1 to fouling or something like that; but nerfing the danger skills makes it just a bit more boring. Nerf PO = nobody takes PO. Nobody POs really. Then 1 aspect of the game is gone and now you're stuck in a different, slower game.
|
While I do agree with your sentiments . . . I think you may have misunderstood. Discussing a possible change/nerf to PO for the pre-season friendlies only |
|
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 17:32 |
|
I've lost it now, but somebody said to split the teams by TW and let the lowest TW play 6 post season games, etc up to the top tier only playing 1. Best idea by a country mile to help with TV disparity.
I reiterate: PLEASE DO NOT USE THE NERF OPTIONS. They make it less fun, seriously. |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
Anzelak
Joined: Nov 26, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 18:00 |
|
| Quote: | | I reiterate: PLEASE DO NOT USE THE NERF OPTIONS. They make it less fun, seriously. |
Nerfing POMB nerfs the game in my opinion. I'll be playing WElves, so discouraging mass player murder ought to be at the top of my agenda, but I've played in TT leagues that messed around with the CRP rules and generally they're crap. Brutality is a part of the game. My Elves are above that sort of malarkey, but we don't expect the lesser races to understand why. Nor do we expect our degenerate fans too either.
Edit: *CRP rules, not moves. |
_________________
Proud Commissioner of the EEL.
Last edited by Anzelak on %b %06, %2013 - %18:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
Anzelak
Joined: Nov 26, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 18:04 |
|
Also, the only major way to deal with TV gaps are hard caps. You can either do nothing or have hard caps for the start of the season after builder games. I don't really care what you do, but I would strongly advise a system where you allow teams to challenge one another freely, but maybe set a maximum limit of games. Then have a cap set at x amount before the regular season begins.
You can then enjoy the argument about what to set the cap at  . |
_________________
Proud Commissioner of the EEL. |
|
gjopie
Joined: Oct 27, 2009
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 18:33 |
|
| Chainsaw wrote: | | I've lost it now, but somebody said to split the teams by TW and let the lowest TW play 6 post season games, etc up to the top tier only playing 1. Best idea by a country mile to help with TV disparity. |
That was me - so yes, that will be happening 
Regarding the nerf options, there are two things being discussed simultaneously here - nerfing them just for the post-season tour, or nerfing them forever. I'm not necessarily in favour of either, just sounding out the league as Frankenstein mentioned them. |
_________________
|
|
Smeat
Joined: Nov 19, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 19:55 |
|
I'm in favour of nerfing the more brutal skill combos for at least the pre-season for exactly the reasons the above posters say to keep it as-is. "Colorful" and "fun" to them is mere "dice rolling" to me - I'd rather see tactics and the position battle win over a lucky (or, in this case, an "average") game of Casualties.
And I run Norse here, so I 1) have a pair of POMB'ers, 2) have a St 5 MB Claw (Blocker!), and 3) do not fear my opponents' Claw (for the most part - all but 3 are AV 7, and those 3 are just AV 8).
(Edited to disable smiley from end of post) |
_________________
Let's go A.P.E.!
(...and what exactly do you think they do with all those dead players?...)
Last edited by Smeat on %b %06, %2013 - %21:%Dec; edited 2 times in total |
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 20:14 |
|
I like CRP+. Especially the foul and SG buffs. |
|
|
Chainsaw
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 21:51 |
|
I can see the fluff behind taking them out of the pre-season games. Players are a little less 'up for it' due to them being "friendlies" of sorts. I can agree with that. However I really don't like the idea of nerfing things in the main season. |
_________________
Coach Chainsaw's Dugout
Free Gamer - blog - community |
|
BlueDevil420
Joined: Dec 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 06, 2013 - 22:09 |
|
| Chainsaw wrote: | | I can see the fluff behind taking them out of the pre-season games. Players are a little less 'up for it' due to them being "friendlies" of sorts. I can agree with that. However I really don't like the idea of nerfing things in the main season. |
+1 |
|
|
gjopie
Joined: Oct 27, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2014 - 11:04 |
|
So, Royal Pardons - are they a problem?
I'm not convinced they are as big of a deal as the draft leaders are making out. This time, we had 3 teams that could change potentially, out of a Conference of 10 teams each. One has already said they aren't going to do so. I quite like the strategy involved with allowing some teams a chance to change. However, I acknowledge that if they pile up too much we might have a problem on our hands.
So I suppose there are two issues:
1) Who gets Royal Pardons; how do we award them?
2) How long do they last?
Currently the answers are (1) a random team who won their Inter-Conference game and the Kislev Plate winners, and (2) indefinitely if not used.
However, possible ideas from me are:
1) Only award the winner of the Kislev Conference a Royal Pardon. This means that as a Conference winner they get to decide which conference they come up into, which makes sense, and gives them something that 2nd place doesn't get.
There would then be no awards for Inter-Conference Shield games, or the Kislev Plate. I don't mind the Kislev Plate, since it is the smallest tournament in the organisation. It might be nice to have some sort of incentive for the ICS games - or else perhaps we need to think of a way to reform that competition? I'm open to suggestions on that.
2) I think we put a "3 and out" policy on the RPs. You get three chances to use it, or you lose it. |
_________________
|
|
|
|
| |
DIBBL Awards
Search
