Darkvatar
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
|
 Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:07 |
 
|
LRB7 in test
Je ne sais pas si vous étiez au courant mais moi je découvre. C'est fait entre autre par Plasmoid et Galak et préfigure le prochain lrb apparemment.
Je me trompe peut être mais en tou cas les changements annoncés sont salutaires sur certains points.
On va l'adopter aussi?  |
|
|
Woodstock
Joined: Dec 11, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:10 |
|
That is not LRB7, and please stick to English, this is an international community. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:13 |
|
That is not lrb7. That is a set of house rules. It is called Narrow Tier Blood bowl. Just to clarify - those changes do not have the backing or support of the bbrc. Only a couple of the minor rule changes got backing, and even they were not from the full bbrc, just 2 of the members.
The roster changes are all Plasmoids house rules, and on the whole very poor in my opinion.
Sorry, I just had to clear that up so other people were not confused 
If you want to play those rules though it is possible to do so on Mbbl using the play by email client. |
_________________
 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:21 |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:22 |
|
You got my hopes up. 
I'd love to see maybe 15% of Plasmoid's rules incorporated. No offense to Martin: he's a great guy, and smart. But I disagree with a lot of his assessment of LRB6.
Oh, and anglais, SVP. Sucky English is fine, but there's no reason to believe any given reader can follow your French. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
notbobby125
Joined: Feb 28, 2013
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:41 |
|
Thoughts on the changes.
Amazon: Fair I guess, never been much of a fan of them either way.
Undead: Interesting choice, makes for some interesting positional plays.
Woodelf: No block on the Wardancers? Without that, I do not believe they are worth the 120 asking price.
Human: Makes them a bit more viable, alright.
Slann: That actually is pretty huge. That 10K alone makes it possible to have a 1 Krox/ 1 Catcher/ 1 Blitzer team with all four rerolls.
High Elf: They already were the best throwers in the game, although this makes the team extremely good at picking up the ball without a worry. Also makes "tackle zone retrival" a more viable choice.
Chaos: Even with the Clomp nerf, they still are a great team that now has more reasons to put all that great stat and skill access to good use.
Vamps: That has changed thralls from being terrible to slightly less terrible, although it doesn't help with long term survival.
Goblin: Their trolls really shouldn't of had loner anyway.
Halfling: Alright, makes fling toss attempts even better and all around slightly less horrible.
Orge: I agree with this changes. Snotlings still are shit, but now there is some reason to give the ball to a snotling over an Orge.
Khemri: I would love for the Tombs to lose decay, although the AR value drop does make me worry. Break Tackle, however, means the team starts out fairly mobile for a bashy team.
Piling on: While this does make it less annoying, this REALLY hurts the Slann more than anyone. Maybe allow players to reroll the armor if they have jump up?
Claw: Does that mean +AR is maintained if one uses claw? |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:54 |
|
Leader on Chaos Minotaur hahaha. Deary me.... |
_________________
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 22:58 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | they were not from the full bbrc, just 2 of the members. |
3 of 4: Babs has joined and Babs, DoubleSkulls and Galak now agree on all proposed CRP+ rules, which include some of the roster changes (10&11):
| NTBB2014 wrote: | The Narrow-Tier BB house rules have 2 components: Firstly, 11 rules changes nicknamed CRP+, approved for further testing by 3 of the 4 members of the former BBRC. CRP+ deals mainly with the long term advantage of bash. Secondly, NTBB contains my own suggested nerfs and buffs for half of the existing teams - intended to rein in the teams at the very top of tier 1, while making the challenge offered by tier 2 and 3 a touch more manageable. The NTBB roster changes were based on data derived from FUMBBLs Black Box and further shaped in discussion with coaches trying them out.
For further explanations of the changes made, check out: www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm |
I still find that this seems the best way available to keep BB moving forward in the current schism. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:04 |
|
I have to say those rules would be the final nail in the coffin for me. I agree with removal of loner from trolls. But that's it . The rest of those rules are terrible, especially the rosters.
Where do you read that babs supports them? Last I read galak and ds didn't even agree on the rule changes fully. |
_________________
|
|
pizzamogul
Joined: Jun 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:08 |
|
| Woodstock wrote: | | Tio ne estas LRB7, kaj bonvolu algluita al Esperanto, tio estas internacia komunumo. |
Fixed it for you! |
_________________
"Don't expect mercy."
-Woodstock |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:13 |
|
Without going into it in any depth (it's been hammered to death before, here, there and everywhere), no it's not LRB7 in test (or even a draft of iterative or future rules) and no, the roster changes did not even get a nod for further play testing, which is all some of the former committee said might be an idea for the first chunk. The beauty of a committee, of course, is that when they meet and discuss, something more sensible may emerge, rather than a first draft and a bit of seperate 'OK, test it' coordinated by an enthusiastic (and likeable) house rule lightning rod when it's known there is not really a route to doing so that will lead anywhere.
Popped the thread into house rules, where such threads should live. Might want to change the thread title before people get the wrong idea (very misleading). When the subject comes up, people really do tend to go off the deep end over house rules when they're well presented. 
I don't think we need pages of people debating the good, the bad, the ugly and the uglier of these specific house rules (especially since it's been done several times), but my guess is we'll see a few pages. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:21 |
|
Thank god for goo. Though I understand the confusion as he has written at the top of the document that the rule changes are backed by 3 of the 4 ex bbrc members (presumably he means in the crp era here). That's not how I remember the conversations on tff. The worry is though if a bbrc did happen again that horrible rules like these might get used. Let's pray that is not the case. |
_________________
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:30 |
|
It's all just a form of words, whichever side of it you sympathise with. Not worth hyperbole either way. You say 'backed', steady, that's strong wording. I see 'house rules' and 'approved for testing', which is much more reasonable and wooly. I'd approve laser beams for Rooks in Chess for testing if someone asked me at random about house rules I like, mainly because I know no one would listen to me and I couldn't change it (/ be blamed for it) anyway. And we have the English language in our pocket, not everyone does.
It's not worth going to deeply into, but it is worth defusing bonkers stretches either way before the usual nonsense. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:33 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | Thank god for goo. Though I understand the confusion as he has written at the top of the document that the rule changes are backed by 3 of the 4 ex bbrc members (presumably he means in the crp era here). That's not how I remember the conversations on tff. The worry is though if a bbrc did happen again that horrible rules like these might get used. Let's pray that is not the case. |
Why? Looks better than what we have now. And I prefer that to LRB4. 
In reality it is not a whole lot different. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 5 more teams needed |
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 27, 2014 - 23:59 |
|
Meh, there's a baby in that bathwater (some ClawPOMB nerf would be nice, Goblin Trolls should lose Loner, etc.), but I'd rather have LRB6 than NTBB any time (even NTBB with LRB6 rosters). Really it shows that we as a community mostly don't agree on most of our issues with the ruleset (not that there aren't a few common gripes...), and to the extent we do, the common ground on how to go forward is limited to a few little tweaks.
This is about the time we can wish we had a manufacturer or at least a functioning rules committee. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor.
Last edited by JackassRampant on %b %28, %2014 - %00:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
Secret League Americ...
Search
