Hero164
Joined: Jan 20, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 20:16 |
 
|
|
SillySod
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 20:28 |
|
I think shadow might actually be a worse troll than me. |
_________________
Putting the "eh?" back into Sexeh.
"There are those to whom knowledge is a shield. There are those to whom it is a weapon. Neither view is balanced." |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 20:34 |
|
this was in question?
i think pythrr, zombie & bigmac are the only ones that top me..
--j |
_________________
| origami wrote: | | There is no god but Nuffle, and Shadow is his prophet. |
  |
|
f_alk
Joined: Sep 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 21:25 |
|
I like the idea of the sous chef - imagine a halfling with a chef's hat and a cleaver.
edit: 2 minutes work: 
About the distracted werewolves ... wasn't that 2nd ed - the astrogranite pitch?
And I really ask myself - what is worse: posting a thread in the wrong forum on accident, or deliberately derailing into an offtopic area that comes close to a flame fest? ... but this question MUST NOT be answered here as it is totally rethorically. |
Last edited by f_alk on %b %20, %2011 - %21:%Jun; edited 1 time in total |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 21:28 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | this was in question?
i think pythrr, zombie & bigmac are the only ones that top me..
--j |
Brit. Noth. Also, Pirog.
You aren't even top 5, loser!  |
|
|
Niebling
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 20, 2011 - 23:32 |
|
1st edition was more "fun" but LRB6 is a better game  |
_________________
Someone is wrong on the Internet and it is my sworn duty to correct them. |
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 21, 2011 - 09:32 |
|
Anyone wanting to further berate the mods, or anyone who wants to explain how I'm not worthy to have an opinion - or indeed anyone who wants to shout "this sucks" without elaborating can post here:
http://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=20307
That way this thread can hopefully contain some useful feedback.
Cheers
Martin |
|
|
Wallace
Joined: May 26, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 22, 2011 - 01:14 |
|
Overall comments:
The rules are mostly good in terms of game balance at a technical level, but overall they feel a bit dry. I agree with making the game a bit more balanced, but some of the changes (I'll detail them below) achieve this the easier way of making things more the same, rather than different but of equal value. That's not a strong critisism because doing so is very hard and there are some good ideas in there.
Rule Changes:
1) PO changes. Mathematically I agree that the proposed change would probably be good, but it feels a bit bland. I'd prefer the Galak/DS suggestion of no MB or Claw mods to the PO roll because a) it seems more 'realistic' in some way b) it operates in a different way, so introduces a different tactical element and 3) it operates in a different way, so it's more fun.
I think AV7 players *should* be in dire straights when playing BB. I think the Galak/DS suggestion goes far enough, since AV7 players are already immune to Claw.
The other suggestion I've heard of PO only being usable if you have a higher strength would actually be the best option if the game was being re-written from scratch, but it would require re-writing the rosters of several teams (Dwarfs in particularly) to ensure it didn't unbalance them. Too much of a change. These days Big Guys are barely worth their TV cost so some bashy skills that were unique to them would be more in keeping with the fluff. But as I say, that's a pipe dream at this point.
2) Fouling: Agreed. Khemri and elves of all flavours could do with the extra help.
3) Sneaky Git = Foul Guard. I like it! SG is very much underpowered at present. This is a goo
4) Right stuff voids tackle: Undecided.
5) Bank Rule: Far too mechanistic. Why does one pile of cash affect TV but not another? There's no logic behind it from a fluff perspective. I can see in terms of game balance why it would work, but too me it just breaks the fourth wall too much.
6) SE: To me, the level to set SE at is inherently a house rule. The official rules give a guide but I'd expect leagues commissioners to adjust this to suit even if they don't run any other house rules.
7) Concessions: No fun, keep it as it is. Bashing the other team into the ground should give you some reward because it's fun. If bash is to easy then other rules need adjusting. Mind you, the rules around conceeding are again something that different leagues should implement to suit. In practice that happens on FUMBBL. Conceeding a match in a league often has other consuqences beyond the post-game sequence (I don't have TT league experience but I imagine TT league commissioners would frown upon serial concessions).
 Wizard: Too little experience to comment. Playing in [B] on FUMBBL means you never see it.
Rosters:
Orc: I don't see the need to change. According to FUMBBL stats (my only quantitative reference point) they aren't overpowered. Yes Orcs are Ezy mode, but somehow they never quite perform as well as you expect. If a league was going to implement the house rule changes above, I'd do that first and see how things go before making this roster change.
Humans: Ogre price change good, but I'd keep the catcher fragile. Yeah they suck, but it makes the roster too vanilla flavoured.
Dwarfs: A good change, using one of the newer skills. This feels right and more like the TS that might have been invented if Jugger had always existed. The downside is that it makes the TS less attractive, block is a better skill, so we might see less of these guys on the field. The fact that it is a gentle nerf of Dwarfs is okay, although that depends on the changes made to PO and Right stuff.
Woodies: I'm undecided. I can see how Fend is fluffy for Wardancers, but so is dodge. If anything it makes more sense for them to lost block for fend, but that's a bigger nerf. I'd be inclined to leave WD as is. If fouling was boosted strip ball WD are going to have even shorter life expectancies than they do now.
Undead: Disagree. G access on big guys is a no-no, and fluff wise it doesn't make sense to give it to Mummies but not others. I'd make no change.
Goblins: I think they would still struggle with 3 Trolls, but it's something that would need to be carefully playtested.
Flings: Hate the Dryads. I'd be okay with AV7, maybe. It's another roster that it's difficult for me to judge since I mainly play FUMBBL [B] which hurts Flings much more than most teams. But I still hate the Dryads!
Khemri: Thick skull addition is good, but I'd leave it at that. Assuming fouling was boosted Khemri would be competative.
Vamps: Seems reasonable, it would need to be carefully play tested.
Ogres: I dunno. Snotlings on the Ogre roster makes no sense to me in the first place. I think the roster needs re-writing with Gnoblars instead of Snots, but then you're talking a completely different roster.
Brettonians: I'd be interested in giving this team a go, although that's unlikely to happen. At face value I'd suggest dropping S access on Yeoman, but I'd defer judgement to someone whose actually played with or agaisnt them! |
|
|
Adar
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 14:02 |
|
I am in strong agreement with Kinks regarding most of his points.
The only things I would like to add would be that I think the Ogre team should be 0-8 and get Halflings instead of Snotlings. Snotlings are just too bad to make a balanced roster and the cost of the Ogres means that the 0-8 boost only is going to help them at top TV games where they currently suck.
| Kinks wrote: | Elaborations on my thoughts:
1. Piling on. I prefer Galak and Ians version. They have the majority so I feel that suggestion should be trailed first. I prefer it as your version means piling on would have a 100% success rate when used - people would only PO if it was going to work. This would make it more of a no brainer skill than a tactical calculated risk, which I prefer. Although your stats show your version making the skill less effective they assume PO is always used and do not take into account how often PO wouldn't be used for fear of failure with Galaks & Ians version.
The fact it helps high AV / counters Claw I don't think is such a bad thing, I feel it will make Orc/dorf/lizzies vs claw teams more competitive.
2. Fouling. Coundn't agree more.
3. Sneaky git. I'm not opposed to this, although I think I agree with Ian. I presume sneaky git is suppose to primarily boost stunties and agile teams? Why would they want to stand in TZ's? My suggestions:
a) SG players only get sent of on double 1, 2 or 3.
b) SG players can RR an AV or inj roll if they roll a double (everyone seems to like AV and inj RR's with PO......)
c) When KO rolls are made 1 SG player on each team with that is banned can return to the reserves box on a 4+ (Also works for secret weapons!?)
4. Right stuff. Mostly agree - will be interesting to see how it pans out
5. Bank. I Agree.
6. Spiralling expenses. Not something I have any direct experience of. Although, I'm not keen on SE as a game mechanic at all. Amongst other reasons, the removal of ageing has caused issues in the box for me. Perhaps SE could directly relate to the number of stars & legends in a team, rather than the TV?
7. Concessions. Seems unnecessary to me combined with inducements and the proposed bank rules. It may make league start ups fairer though.
8. Wizards. If I'm honest I've not used, had one used against me or even witnessed one used . It does seem powerful, but then 150 TV is a large advantage. I'll sit on the fence with this one.
Roster changes:
(I'll just comment where I disagree / have a suggestion and not comment on those I have no opinion or agree with)
Humans - I think will need the cheaper blitzers too (in line with orcs).
Woodies - Pushing SB down the skill choices concerns me, it becomes more useless at higher TV as most teams have SH on there ball carrier. I like SB, it is a key part in game play, less SB would be bad for BB IMO.
Slann - Need some love IMO. Cheaper blitzers seems the obvious one. I find there team roster most comparable to humans and skaven, the main difference being slann are more expensive. The greatest downfall being they lose players fast, aren't agile enough to cope with a small team and are to expensive to have a large bench. Perhaps a skill that allows them a soft landing on failed leaps (and maybe dodges and GFI's), maybe -1 to the AV roll?
Zons - Need some hate. I hate them, I think that sums that one up nicely
Flings - Doesn't look like there is much support for Dryads. An on field master chef sounds fun. A third tree could be the way. I like the idea of extra flings sneaking on the pitch, maybe being able to set up 10+1D3 players - although this may be OP with the proposed Right Stuff buff.
Ogres - Same price but allow 0-8.
Hope they are of use.
Hopefully some of the more experienced players will be able to provide some better criticism / suggestions (PC?  ).
Plasmoid / Martin, would you not entertain running a league with your house rules on here yourself? If you was closely involved then you would probably get a better feel for what people think rather than just data? (I'm far to lazy to run one myself....) |
|
_________________
For all his rage, he's still just a rat in it's cage. |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 14:14 |
|
I dont like the dwarf one personally. I would be interested to see them lose their two blitzers and gain two more runners. While that would add an extra two players with ma6 to the roster speed isnt needed very often with dwarves anyway and I think losing their two blitzers which means losing two more Guard players would have quite a negative effect on the team in the long run. I personally never understood why they had two types of blitzers anyway. Troll slayers are blitzers so why give them blitzers? |
_________________
 |
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 14:20 |
|
| plasmoid wrote: | | Orcs, Wood Elfs, Undead and Dwarfs are slightly nerfed, |
I don't think Undead should be nerfed as they already where too much anyway (more expensive). Though getting general skill back means it is not a huge deal.
Khemri guardians getting break tackle makes them too good. |
|
|
garyt1
Joined: Mar 12, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 14:58 |
|
| Kinks wrote: | I think we should go with what has been laid out (all though there is a fair bit that I disagree with). All the suggestions that 2 of the 3 have agreed with would be a good starting point (so no modifications on PO AV/Inj rolls and no change to wizzies for now - sorry Plasmoid)
|
These are the most important points. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 15:27 |
|
| garyt1 wrote: | | plasmoid wrote: | | Orcs, Wood Elfs, Undead and Dwarfs are slightly nerfed, |
I don't think Undead should be nerfed as they already where too much anyway (more expensive). Though getting general skill back means it is not a huge deal.
Khemri guardians getting break tackle makes them too good. |
Yup also agree with this. Khemri wouldnt be a bad team as they are if they just lost decay. Adding Thick Skull to the positionals is also a good idea I think. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 16:25 |
|
| shadow46x2 wrote: | this was in question?
i think pythrr, zombie & bigmac are the only ones that top me..
--j |
lies sir |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 23, 2011 - 16:26 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | shadow46x2 wrote: | this was in question?
i think pythrr, zombie & bigmac are the only ones that top me..
--j |
Brit. Noth. Also, Pirog.
You aren't even top 5, loser! |
meta-lies sir! |
|
|
|
|
| |
Blood Bowl 2024 Edit...
Search
