Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
 Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 06:48 |
 
|
| Overhamsteren wrote: | | Why do big rats have piling on? What about guard- strength in numbers. Would be an awesome combo; really stupid, frenzy, guard. |
Isnt there already a guard scheme for skaven slaves in a roster somewhere? |
_________________
Join the SWL
Get your team bios here!
Putting the romantic in necromantic since 2010 |
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 07:33 |
|
| MisterFurious wrote: | Olesh is right. Balance is far more important than fluff. Fluff is a good starting point, but you can't be a slave to it if it breaks the game. It's fine if a team is underpowered, but overpowered teams are detrimental to the game (see high TV Chaos).
90% of the teams people make up are vastly overpowered. All the teams in Blood Bowl have some kind of strength and some kind of weakness to balance it out. Skaven are fast and can handle the ball but are incredibly fragile and get beat up. Dwarves are great at bashing the crap out of teams, but are incredibly slow. Most people want the strengths but don't want the weaknesses so when they make their own team up, they make one that can handle the ball like Elves and smash face like Orcs. I'm not saying that SvenS specifically did that, but that's what most people do. You see the same thing on RPG forums for games like D&D when people make up their own classes. Most of them are great at everything and weak at nothing. If you have a team that is too strong, then the majority of people will play that team and that's not good. You don't want the Stunty Leeg to be 90% Clan Moulder teams because that team is the strongest (see the Black Box). |
I agree in not making new teams over the top. Better to start cautiosly then adjust if needed.
That doesnt have to go against fluff though!
If you read through the thread you'll find I even had rats at st1 before but upped it after continued feedback (and some playtests). |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 07:37 |
|
| Balle2000 wrote: | Is there any place for the Abominations ( ) and the Flayerkin ()? Imo two of the Clans top selling products should be in the roster.
Initial idea:
Flayerkin 4 3 2 8 (SM)
Claw (representing their mutilated limbs)
No Hands (obviously)
Abomination 5 6 2 8 (SM)
Prehensile Tail, Break Tackle, Claw, Disturbing Presence, No Hands, Really Stupid, Stand Firm or something |
These are likely additions from after I played WFB hehe.
I think they could be fun, but likely we'd then have to reduce the RO's to one?
How about making them stars?
Or making 0-2 Big Guys that you can chose between? |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
MisterFurious
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 07:48 |
|
| SvenS wrote: | | MisterFurious wrote: | Olesh is right. Balance is far more important than fluff. Fluff is a good starting point, but you can't be a slave to it if it breaks the game. It's fine if a team is underpowered, but overpowered teams are detrimental to the game (see high TV Chaos).
90% of the teams people make up are vastly overpowered. All the teams in Blood Bowl have some kind of strength and some kind of weakness to balance it out. Skaven are fast and can handle the ball but are incredibly fragile and get beat up. Dwarves are great at bashing the crap out of teams, but are incredibly slow. Most people want the strengths but don't want the weaknesses so when they make their own team up, they make one that can handle the ball like Elves and smash face like Orcs. I'm not saying that SvenS specifically did that, but that's what most people do. You see the same thing on RPG forums for games like D&D when people make up their own classes. Most of them are great at everything and weak at nothing. If you have a team that is too strong, then the majority of people will play that team and that's not good. You don't want the Stunty Leeg to be 90% Clan Moulder teams because that team is the strongest (see the Black Box). |
I agree in not making new teams over the top. Better to start cautiosly then adjust if needed.
That doesnt have to go against fluff though!
If you read through the thread you'll find I even had rats at st1 before but upped it after continued feedback (and some playtests). |
I didn't mean to imply that fluff should be disregarded completely, just that balance is much more important. If 6 giant rats makes the team too strong, then the number has to be reduced, fluff or no fluff (That's just an example). I like fluff and I think it's important, but if fluff and balance go against each other, then balance has to win out. |
|
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 08:18 |
|
0-2 Rat Ogres 6 5 2 8 Loner, Frenzy, Mighty Blow, Wild Animal, Prehensile Tail - S (GAPM) 140k
(If we want abomination on roster replace one, but I think its better as a star)
0-2 Packmasters 6 2 3 7 Dodge, Grab, G, P (ASM) 80K
(Gave in at G access but st3 is over the top esp. with dodge IMO. I dont see tents, prefer tail for whip, but dont want to overskill starting players. Possibly replace grab with tail?)
0-6 Giant Rats 7 2 3 6 Dodge, Stunty, No Hands, Really Stupid, Frenzy, Piling On - A,M (ASP) 80k
(2 bashy skills make them nasty, but no G or S access should keep them from getting too nasty (doubles will always go to block/tackle in stunty anyway no?).NH RS and frenzy make them insanely hard to control and they are still squishy. Speedy but NH)
0-12 Throtlings 5 1 3 6 Dodge, Stunty, Titchy - A (GSPM) 30k
RRs @70k
Apo yes
Wiz No
Stars:
Abomination 5 6 1 8
Loner, Prehensile Tail, Break Tackle, Claw, Disturbing Presence, No Hands, Really Stupid, Stand Firm
Cost: Hell of expensive! 250k+?
Ratcentaur 7 2 3 7 Loner, Dodge, Stunty, Dauntless - 80k
Packmaster lord 7337 Loner, Block, Guard, Prehensive tail (whip) - 130k?
(hard to price S stars, they dont seem to follow the more expensive stars approach of CRP, will their costs be upped? If so adjust these too) |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 08:29 |
|
| MisterFurious wrote: |
I didn't mean to imply that fluff should be disregarded completely, just that balance is much more important. If 6 giant rats makes the team too strong, then the number has to be reduced, fluff or no fluff (That's just an example). I like fluff and I think it's important, but if fluff and balance go against each other, then balance has to win out. |
I dont think 6 rats are the thing threatening to overpower the list (insanely hard to control and unreliable).
It does feel odd that the RO's can give them orders though, had been nice to somehow stop that (which would make rats rely even more on masters/throts).
Agreed on balance, but rather then to do non fluff solutions try to find fluff appropriate ones (ie no st3 megablitzer packmasters for example)  |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
Olesh
Joined: Jun 24, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 08:39 |
|
Packmasters still too cheap by 20k, Giant Rats also too cheap by 10k, and 0-6 is just not going to fly.
| Craftnburn wrote: | | When I consider a roster, I consider the team, and it's players as a whole instead of sticking to some hypothetical mathematical formula. It doesn't matter if the numbers match some equation, because not all skills are equal in every situation. |
This is an acceptable practice when you're hashing out the idea for a team in rough lines. However, if you want a design to be seriously considered your skills/prices should have some basis in reality. The rule of thumb is to find a similar player that already exists and use it as a baseline for comparison. It's important that teams be balanced relative to one another in terms of skills and costs because it makes it more FUN in the long run, both for people playing the team and for people playing against them. Winning games should come down to the coaches' skill and the luck of the dice, and shouldn't be unduly influenced by one team being more unbalanced than another. |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 09:38 |
|
| SvenS wrote: | | 0-2 Packmasters 6 2 3 7 Dodge, Grab, G, P (ASM) 80K |
| Olesh wrote: | | Packmasters still too cheap by 20k |
So a 6 2 3 7 Dodge, Grab, G, P (ASM) is 100K on your chart!? Really?
(Although Sven, I don't think the Packmaster should have P access without doubles. His good arm is holding the whip!)
| Olesh wrote: | | and 0-6 is just not going to fly. |
Stranger things have happened.
| Olesh wrote: | | It's important that teams (my emphasis added) be balanced relative to one another in terms of skills and costs |
I agree! Teams need to be balanced, not Players. Fixating on a cost formula for players and disregarding the synergy, or lack thereof, of those skills on the team is wrong.
Not all skills are of equal worth depending on the situation. Skills that are more valuable on one team may not be as valuable on another, it's the TEAM as a whole that needs to be balanced. (e.g. How much does "the chart" say Break Tackle is worth? Do you think it would be worth as much on a St 2 as a St4 player?) |
|
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 09:57 |
|
| Craftnburn wrote: |
So a 6 2 3 7 Dodge, Grab, G, P (ASM) is 100K on your chart!? Really?
(Although Sven, I don't think the Packmaster should have P access without doubles. His good arm is holding the whip!) |
Good point. I'd like them to have easy access to leader though as that fits like a glove :/
| craftnburn wrote: | | Olesh wrote: | | and 0-6 is just not going to fly. |
Stranger things have happened.
| Olesh wrote: | | It's important that teams (my emphasis added) be balanced relative to one another in terms of skills and costs |
I agree! Teams need to be balanced, not Players. Fixating on a cost formula for players and disregarding the synergy, or lack thereof, of those skills on the team is wrong.
Not all skills are of equal worth depending on the situation. Skills that are more valuable on one team may not be as valuable on another, it's the TEAM as a whole that needs to be balanced. (e.g. How much does "the chart" say Break Tackle is worth? Do you think it would be worth as much on a St 2 as a St4 player?) |
Agreed.
You have to look at the whole team.
Your talking about a team with up to 8 players RS/WA frenzy w-o block with expensive RRs.
If there ever was a turnover prone team its this one!
Then we have the ballhandling issues (just a couple of ball handlers that arent that hard to take out in stunty!).
Edit:
Im concidering lowering RO's to 1 in order to lessen the RO directing rats effect (and forcing some throts in), but then again RO's are the main piece of wonder in the Moulder clan so would be sad to see one go.
In reality Id think most people wouldnt play all the rats at once though and use some throts (regen+ ballhandling+ directing rats).
Concidering the rats Olesh do you honestly think 6 rats makes the team more over powered then 4??
The more of these you field at once the less effective they get :/ |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:18 |
|
| SvenS wrote: | | Good point. I'd like them to have easy access to leader though as that fits like a glove :/ |
You're right it does..
0-2 6 2 3 7 Grab, Leader GM (ASP) 90K
| SvenS wrote: | | Im concidering lowering RO's to 1 in order to lessen the RO directing rats effect (and forcing some throts in) |
I like 0-1 for those reasons as well (mostly to put the focus on the GRats). Also you could possibly give the Moulder ROgres Really Stupid instead of WA... (They aren't quite ready for Primetime). RS players can't help other RS players. I'm not sure if they'd be better or worse than regular ROgres this way.. but it would certainly fit the fluff of Moulder's packmaster control.
| SvenS wrote: | | In reality Id think most people wouldnt play all the rats at once though and use some throts (regen+ ballhandling+ directing rats). |
I'd don't know, but at least people have the choice of Frenzies Rats or St 1 Throts.
BTW is there a canon/fluff reason for Regen on the Throts? (I don't know Skaven all that well) |
|
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:44 |
|
Hey Sven, I just had an idea that would really differentiate the team (and give it something other than a GRats theme).
0-16 Throtlings 5 1 3 6 Dodge, Stunty, Titchy, ORM* - A, Ph 30k
*One Random Mutation. Each Throtling gets a mutation, selected at random, when initially purchased.
Although this would require a little effort on Christer's part, I think it would be an Awesome (and totally fluffy) way to really differentiate the Moulder team! Most mutations won't be very powerful on a St 1 guy, but this ensures that every Moulder team you face is different! |
|
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:45 |
|
SillySod was the fluff expert and thought so. |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:47 |
|
| Craftnburn wrote: | Hey Sven, I just had an idea that would really differentiate the team (and give it something other than a GRats theme).
0-16 Throtlings 5 1 3 6 Dodge, Stunty, Titchy, ORM* - A, Ph 30k
*One Random Mutation. Each Throtling gets a mutation, selected at random, when initially purchased.
Although this would require a little effort on Christer's part, I think it would be an Awesome (and totally fluffy) way to really differentiate the Moulder team! Most mutations won't be very powerful on a St 1 guy, but this ensures that every Moulder team you face is different! |
While a cool idea I doubt its worth the effort.
I remember the old Marauder team used to have random skills (albeit some very powerful ones) that didnt work out too well. |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
Craftnburn
Joined: Jul 29, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:49 |
|
| SvenS wrote: | While a cool idea I doubt its worth the effort.
I remember the old Marauder team used to have random skills (albeit some very powerful ones) that didnt work out too well. |
Well the new mutation list isn't nearly as good as the old. This would also give people a reason to field Throtlings.
| Craftnburn wrote: | | BTW is there a canon/fluff reason for Regen on the Throts? |
I think I see now why...Throtlings are a Swarm! (If I'm reading that army list I found correctly) |
|
|
SvenS
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 20, 2012 - 17:54 |
|
| Craftnburn wrote: | | SvenS wrote: | While a cool idea I doubt its worth the effort.
I remember the old Marauder team used to have random skills (albeit some very powerful ones) that didnt work out too well. |
Well the new mutation list isn't nearly as good as the old. This would also give people a reason to field Throtlings. |
I think there is already reason to field them (ball backup, easy assists and helping the packmasters direct the rats).
Doubt we need more gimmicks to keep them unique (as you reminded me of when TTM was in ). |
_________________
IL-S
SL |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
