celas
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 08:31 |
 
|
btw: Only Fairy Teams can have wizards and I do not think this team should be able too  |
_________________
Northern Wastes League |
|
thmbscrws
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 10:01 |
|
I hate to state the obviouse and all but fairies already have basic stunties with jump up and giving all your guys jump up is walking all over their team concept. |
_________________
"If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him." - Mikhail Bakunin |
|
Lorion
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 10:48 |
|
First I like the way the big guys have turned out.
I would say reduce the AV to 6 on teh regulars and the cost by 10k. Jump up and sidestep is overpowered with AV7 i think. Reducing their strength would make then too much like brownies.
I still think including MA 7 AG 2 players without dodge and stunty could be fun. They are not really great ball-handlers and are easy to knock down with the normal stunties... Giving them horns could be fun, and would not matter much as the big guys probably will be the ones charging (blitzing) anyway.
I like the idea of a pro player... calling him a battle vetaren would fit the bretonian fluff...
I have thought that maybe bombs would be more fun as secret weapons than daggers.... it will certainlly ad to the mayhem so how about a bowman traineé: 60000 4237 sidestep, bombs AP.... would alow for some passing also and that could be fun, when the most likely catcher has AG2.
0-1 kickers does not work that well. 1 possitional player is never an option for anything except BG's. Perhaps the number just needs to be increased by 1... to alow two kickers. They should not have DP, thats too powerfull a skill I think. They are perhaps too cheap.
That would be
0-2 Big guy (Knight) 130k 6 4 2 9 big guy, sure feet, thick skull, frenzy G S
0-2 Bomber (Bowmen Trainée) 60k 5 2 3 6 bombs, sidestep A P
0-2 Kickers (Needs fluff) 60k 4 2 3 6 dodge, jump up, stunty kick A
0-2 Gambler (Battle Veteran) 50k 4 2 3 7dodge, stunty, pro A
0-2 Runner (Jouster) 60k 7 2 2 7 sure feet, horns A
0-12 regular (Trainée) 30k 4 2 3 6 sidestep, jump up A
Rerolls 60000
Apoth yes
Wizard yes
This roster has 10 possitional players... 8 should be the max, alas 1 position shall have to go. The main consideration should be which players ad to the uniqeness and mayhem on the team. Like peikko has said. Without the runners the team would probably be to slow only having 2 MA 5 and 2 with MA 6, and no TTM. The bombers I think are important adding to the mayhem factor. The Gamblers should be the first to go IMO.... they are just the most boring players on the team.
I think the team is begginning to look like it might be both balanced and unique. With a new style of play, but I sure would like to hear from peikko.... and yes also from EVO. Can always trust him to give his honest oppinion  .
Perhaps we should shift to a new thread... Hunter? |
_________________
For in the end either all or nothing is eternal. |
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 11:23 |
|
| Lorion wrote: | 0-2 Big guy (Knight) 130k 6 4 2 9 big guy, sure feet, thick skull, frenzy G S
0-2 Bomber (Bowmen Trainée) 60k 5 2 3 6 bombs, sidestep A P
0-2 Kickers (Needs fluff) 60k 4 2 3 6 dodge, jump up, stunty kick A
0-2 Gambler (Battle Veteran) 50k 4 2 3 7dodge, stunty, pro A
0-2 Runner (Jouster) 60k 7 2 2 7 sure feet, horns A
0-12 regular (Trainée) 30k 4 2 3 6 sidestep, jump up A
I think the team is begginning to look like it might be both balanced and unique. |
Pretty sure if someone bothers to playtest these they will notice
a) 14 st2 jump-ups give you always huge load of blocks no matter what.
b) 2 mv6 st4 big guys walk through anything, after tackle/block/multiblock and without any negative skill they basicly dominate the field.
c) adding these monsters and jump-uppers 2 horns runners so you have 4 blitzers capable to go hunt anything you want in the whole field with ma6 and ma7
d) kick in basic roster with mv7, every slower team (so most of them) will be just amazed in every kickoff with reasonable kick.
Sorry to say that looks horrible superteam to me. |
|
|
Lorion
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 12:47 |
|
| Quote: | Pretty sure if someone bothers to playtest these they will notice
a) 14 st2 jump-ups give you always huge load of blocks no matter what.
b) 2 mv6 st4 big guys walk through anything, after tackle/block/multiblock and without any negative skill they basicly dominate the field.
c) adding these monsters and jump-uppers 2 horns runners so you have 4 blitzers capable to go hunt anything you want in the whole field with ma6 and ma7
d) kick in basic roster with mv7, every slower team (so most of them) will be just amazed in every kickoff with reasonable kick.
Sorry to say that looks horrible superteam to me. |
a) Yeah I agree, perhaps they should only get sidestep, but then AV 7. AV 5 instead might also balance it. Then 2 jump up players are left.... the kickers, really nasty small bastards, might be best just to trash them.
b) thought that ST4 and lack of MB might even it a little. Kroxigors are just as fast ... but of course have bonehead. The idea was to bring in a more reliable big guy as the core of the team... take root is the only negatrait i think is worth considering.
c) You forget that these runners only have AG2, and start without any skills but sure feet, and horns. Agreed the horns should probably go... but not the runners.
d) We might have to remove the kickers then... and well be back around the roster earlier suggested.
This levels it out a bit again... but the roster is not that unique with:
0-2 Knights 130k 6 4 2 9 big guy, sure feet, thick skull, horns, frenzy, take root G S
0-2 Bowmen Trainèes 60k 5 2 3 6 bombs, sidestep A P
0-2 Jouster 60k 7 2 2 7 sure feet A
0-12 Trainée 30k 4 2 3 7 sidestep A
Reminds me of gnomes, perhaps a bit two much. The core units are kind off weak without dodge. Take root is the only real negatrait i would propose, though I think the team is too weak.... and yeah it still needs some work. Perhaps Ishould concentrate on just playing BB instead . Maybe the 2 * ST4 guys core isn't as good as it first seemed. |
_________________
For in the end either all or nothing is eternal. |
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 05, 2004 - 19:26 |
|
Let's see... lots to reply to.
Thanks for the info on wizards, celas. No wizard for this team.
Good points from everyone on the Jump Up inclusion, as well. I don't want to take fairies' thunder, and it does seem pretty powerful as far as blocking is concerned, especially in combination with side step. I personally like the regulars simply with side step and stunty. Starting without dodge will make them very crunchy, so like Lorion I think av7 is in order. At least they will be cheap and easy to replace, though.
I agree with Lorion that a couple additional mv7 players would be fun, but I also agree with Peikko that 4 relatively capable blitzers is too many. We'll leave those off for now.
Bombs are cool, but I have never had much luck with them. My favorite secret weapon is the poisoned dagger, which is one reason why I included it. Any other opinions on changing the weapon(s) of choice? I originally had 1 poisoned dagger and 1 chainsaw, but it didn't fit right, so I removed the chainsaw and added another dagger.
I still like the idea of a kicker, and I only included 1 per team because I want it to represent a pretty important player. Without TTM, and with mv4 on the vast majority of players, this team could really use an advantage in regards to kickoffs. Most stunty teams have the ability to score in 1 turn, but that is not an option for this team. I do not feel that this is overpowered, as long as we maintain deficits elsewhere. We could also change the stats and price of the kicker, to make him more valuable. For now, I will remove his Jump Up trait, as I removed that from the regulars, and I will remove the Dodge skill as well. I am going to make him stunty now, though, and I will keep the price at 50K.
With the gamblers, we are now at 7 positional players. Although I like the idea of gamblers and the uniqueness of having pro on a couple of stunties, I want to remove them for now. Lorion mentioned having a max of 8 positional players, but I actually prefer having fewer. I like the idea of developing lineplayers and relying on them for more than simple fodder, while your positional players do all the damage and earn all the spps. If you can only have a maximum of 5 positional players, you will be forced to have a majority of regulars on the team. This is obviously open for debate, so I'd like to hear opinions.
As far as a negatrait is concerned for the Big Guys, I was hoping to avoid anything other than "Big Guy" status. This means that they are not allowed to use rerolls. With ag2, they will not be reliable ball handlers or dodgers, especially without rerolls. I suppose that Take Root might be an option, but then I would want more than 2 available. Without the big guys, the team is particularly slow and weak. My feeling is that the team needs the big guys as they are to have any chance of success, and that any serious negatrait would limit them too much. If we did add a negatrait, I would want to beef up some other portion of the roster. Comments on that?
I tried to reply to as much as I could, but I have to get some work done now. Hopefully I didn't miss anything vital. Please keep giving me suggestions- I really appreciate it!
Thanks,
~hunter
Here is the updated roster (still in progress):
0-2 Big Guys 130000 6 4 2 9 Big Guy, Sure Feet, Thick Skull, Horns, Frenzy G S
0-2 Poisoners 60000 5 2 3 7 Poisoned Dagger, Dodge, Jump Up, Thick Skull, No Hands A
0-1 Kicker 50000 4 2 3 6 Stunty, Kick A
0-12 Regulars 30000 4 2 3 7 Side Step, Stunty A
Rerolls = 60000
Apoth = Y
Wizard = N |
|
|
EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Aug 06, 2004 - 04:15 |
|
| hunter wrote: | | lol.... you are obviously delusional. You might want to reread your posts to see who began the personal attacks. Let me help: go back to where you accused me of ripping off and stealing ideas. |
I reread my posts. Care to point out my personal attacks? I criticisized a poorly thought out idea that disregards the contributions and guiding philosophy of the whole Stunty Leeg.
There is nothing inherently wrong with ripping off and/or stealing ideas. If you had read and seriously thought about the issues raised in the links/quotes that I had posted, you would have understood that. Unfortunately, you seem determined to wildly fling accusations of personal attacks in response to imagined personal attacks. I was criticizing your ideas. That's significantly different than obviously personal and untrue accusations of being disrespectful, immature, hypocritical, delusional etc.
What do you call someone who makes accusations which have no grounds in reality?
| Quote: |
Your OPINION is that fluff is vital to BB. You are entitled to your opinion, but you should always remember to state it as such. I know nothing of the Warhammer universe, nor do I care. I realize that BB came from that universe, but I have enjoyed the game for over a year now with absolutely no knowledge of the universe and have thoroughly enjoyed my experience. So, again it is your OPINION that knowledge of the Warhammer universe adds to the hobby, but it is not a truth or fact. Pity me all you want, but it won't change anything. |
My opinion happens to be the opinion of one who has been intensively involved with the development of the Stunty Leeg. The fact that you don't care about all the work that has gone into the development of the Stunty Leeg devalues all the work that others have put into developping the Stunty Leeg. One of the guiding principles for Stunty Leeg expansion has been that the teams must belong in the Warhammer Universe. Your unconditional dismissal of this pre-requisite is what makes your team concept a poor rip-off of someone else's universe that would corrupt the Stunty Leeg.
What do you call someone who blatantly disregards the principles of pre-existing project with his narrow personal preferences?
| Quote: |
Your opinion that the team is "poorly thought out" seems to be equivalent with your opinion that there needs to be more fluff. I am no longer interested in your opinions regarding fluff, and I don't understand how you assert that the team doesn't fit in the Stunty Leeg. There are 2 strong players, 2 weapons, and lots of little guys. Very crunchy overall. If you want something changed with the jockeys because they are too much like halflings, then SUGGEST something, don't just criticize. Haven't you been listening about my desire for constructive criticism? |
I have played a significant role in developping, balancing and rebalancing almost all of the current Stunty Leeg teams and that is why I assert that this is a poorly though out team. I strongly suggest you revisit the numerous threads that have led to the development of the current Stunty Leeg. Once you've got a sense of the history of the Stunty Leeg, you might reconsider this poorly thought out idea.
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism |
_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 06, 2004 - 04:53 |
|
In the interest of focusing on the development of this potential team, I am going to begin a new thread which does not include any additional messiness. Hopefully we will be able to remain on topic there! As I never bothered to learn HTML, I'm not sure how to make a link to the thread, but I will title it "Stunty Jockey Team", and place it in the Stunty Leeg forum. Please check it out!
On a related note, I will wait for a couple of days for additional comments and suggestions, make some changes if necessary, and begin playtesting. My gf's family will be in town for the weekend, so if you post some suggestions and I don't get back to you shortly, don't worry! I will check them out and respond as soon as I can.
Thanks,
~hunter |
|
|
|
|
| |
Cindy is back?
Search
