Wraith
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 10:59 |
 
|
| runreallyfast wrote: | I picked the first six players on your roster just because they were the first six, not from any sinister motive.
However, to respond to your question, yes, the half-team would indeed have a very similar TS to the Norse team under the current system.
And I don't think you'd beat them very often at all. I would be ashamed, if it were my Norse team, to lose to a squad like that. If you got lucky, and the four handicaps didn't beat you before you started playing, I think you would rapidly find that you had great difficulty in getting more than two blocks a turn, that dirty players can be very hard on shorthanded squads, and that frenzy is nearly as good as tackle for taking down blodgers. Your two tacklers are worthless, and your dauntless guy is nearly worthless.
And, of course, even though individually your players are better, they're outnumbered nearly 2 to 1, and that's before anything goes wrong. If you take no casualties or KOs for the whole match, I think you have a good chance of winning.
I just don't think that's a realistic scenario.
And, besides, don't you think that it's interesting that your 6 players with nine skills have the same TS as an entire team of rookies? |
The game would be about who is luckier TBBH, just like the TS suggests. If we're talking about two similarly skilled coaches anyways. Handicaps could play a role, but they're hit or miss generally.
Another thing of note is that 10 of the Norse TS is sitting on the bench at any given time. As for the DP, it's one of the most overpowered skills in all of Blood Bowl, so not sure what your point is there.
How about this team? http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=155113 or maybe this one? http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=team&op=view&team_id=302200
I just linked the Norse because they were the first team that I found with a similar TS. Without good handicaps or good dice, I don't see many of these rosters winning the majority of games vs 6 skilled elves.
Again, my point still stands... there's just too many variables to for any static system to accurately match-up teams with a rating. The system currently in place is fine as is, be it flawed as it may be, no system is immune to flaws with so many different factors. I could find examples to support my PoV and you could find examples to support your PoV, we're both right and we're both wrong, depending on how you slice the pie. |
_________________
Insanity, is merely the lack of fear... to act on your deepest, darkest thoughts. |
|
XtremeXwing
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 11:18 |
|
still cant believe this thread has carried on for so long. It should be ...
 |
|
|
Lomack
Joined: Jun 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 11:20 |
|
can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
 |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 12:46 |
|
| Lomack wrote: | can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
|
| Code: | 0-2 Blitzers 5 3 3 9 G/S 80k TS, Block
0-2 Throwers 6 3 3 8 G/P 80k TS, Pass
0-4 Blockers 4 3 1 10 G/S 110k TS, Block, Dauntless, Stand Firm
0-16 Linedwarfs 4 3 2 9 G/S 60k TS, Block |
|
|
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 12:55 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | Lomack wrote: | can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
|
| Code: | 0-2 Blitzers 5 3 3 9 G/S 80k TS, Block
0-2 Throwers 6 3 3 8 G/P 80k TS, Pass
0-4 Blockers 4 3 1 10 G/S 110k TS, Block, Dauntless, Stand Firm
0-16 Linedwarfs 4 3 2 9 G/S 60k TS, Block |
|
4 av10 dwarves? Are you kidding? They are probably better the the original dorfs  |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 13:28 |
|
| BiggieB wrote: | | Frankenstein wrote: | | Lomack wrote: | can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
|
| Code: | 0-2 Blitzers 5 3 3 9 G/S 80k TS, Block
0-2 Throwers 6 3 3 8 G/P 80k TS, Pass
0-4 Blockers 4 3 1 10 G/S 110k TS, Block, Dauntless, Stand Firm
0-16 Linedwarfs 4 3 2 9 G/S 60k TS, Block |
|
4 av10 dwarves? Are you kidding? They are probably better the the original dorfs |
They are different, better against other bashers (to whom they are inferior at high TR) and less dominating against agility/amazon teams, as the Tackle/Dodge disparity has been removed.
On top of that, the overall mobility is even worse than that of the current roster and these dorfs lack not only Tackle but also Sure Hands out of the box.
AV 10 isn't that strong with STR 3 and AG 1 anyway, they fall prey to DPs almost as easily as any other player. |
|
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 13:56 |
|
dwarves are good just the way they are. Without them being the way they are, all tournaments would be won by elves. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 14:35 |
|
| BiggieB wrote: | | Frankenstein wrote: | | Lomack wrote: | can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
|
| Code: | 0-2 Blitzers 5 3 3 9 G/S 80k TS, Block
0-2 Throwers 6 3 3 8 G/P 80k TS, Pass
0-4 Blockers 4 3 1 10 G/S 110k TS, Block, Dauntless, Stand Firm
0-16 Linedwarfs 4 3 2 9 G/S 60k TS, Block |
|
4 av10 dwarves? Are you kidding? They are probably better the the original dorfs |
These are original or at least a modern take on it. This is the 2nd edition list but modernised. 2nd edition blockers were actually st 5!
Yes, and this really needs to be locked. Not the first time the author has thrown the teddy out the pram. |
|
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 14:47 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | BiggieB wrote: | | Frankenstein wrote: | | Lomack wrote: | can someone fix LRB4 dwarves so my longbears have a useful 3rd normal skill choice?
|
| Code: | 0-2 Blitzers 5 3 3 9 G/S 80k TS, Block
0-2 Throwers 6 3 3 8 G/P 80k TS, Pass
0-4 Blockers 4 3 1 10 G/S 110k TS, Block, Dauntless, Stand Firm
0-16 Linedwarfs 4 3 2 9 G/S 60k TS, Block |
|
4 av10 dwarves? Are you kidding? They are probably better the the original dorfs |
They are different, better against other bashers (to whom they are inferior at high TR) and less dominating against agility/amazon teams, as the Tackle/Dodge disparity has been removed.
On top of that, the overall mobility is even worse than that of the current roster and these dorfs lack not only Tackle but also Sure Hands out of the box.
AV 10 isn't that strong with STR 3 and AG 1 anyway, they fall prey to DPs almost as easily as any other player. |
Eh av10 + TS is the hardest player to remove in from the pitch on a foul  . As for the tackle issue at higher tr they will still have a few tackle especially if the do not come with tackle on the get go. This will only make them worse against zons at low tr. I would rather have tackle remove from longbeards and added to blitzers and keep the roster as it is for the rest. That way they would still have a few tacklers to keep zons in line .That being said its a nice idea. Oh and merry christmas |
|
|
CircularLogic
Joined: Aug 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 15:27 |
|
Better dorfs
| Code: | 0-16 Longbeards: 4329 Block, Thick Skull, Stand Firm GS(AP) 70k
0-2 Blitzers: 6339 Block, Thick Skull GS (AP) 90k
0-2 Runner: 6338 SureHands, Thick Skull GP (AS) 80k
0-2 Slayer: 5328 Dauntless, Frenzy, Tackle GS (AP) 90k.
Rerolls: 50k |
|
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 16:06 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: |
They are different, better against other bashers (to whom they are inferior at high TR) and less dominating against agility/amazon teams, as the Tackle/Dodge disparity has been removed. |
How about if we leave the dorfs the way they are and change zons instead? Dwarves are not the problem. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 17:30 |
|
| BiggieB wrote: | | Eh av10 + TS is the hardest player to remove in from the pitch on a foul . |
Dear BiggieB, even with AV 12 that player wouldn't be broken in any way due to the base statline of 4/3/1/x. |
|
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 18:00 |
|
| Frankenstein wrote: | | BiggieB wrote: | | Eh av10 + TS is the hardest player to remove in from the pitch on a foul . |
Dear BiggieB, even with AV 12 that player wouldn't be broken in any way due to the base statline of 4/3/1/x. |
I disagree but no matter |
|
|
TheCetusProject
Joined: May 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 18:04 |
|
To try to continue a little more with the matter at hand, I don't think that a rebalance of TS for under-strength teams (although it might be nice) would really make a lot of difference to the Ogre Problem. Ogres just seem like a team that are really annoying to play with under-strength teams. There isn't really anything the undermanned team can do other than trying to avoid being punched and waiting for things to go wrong for the Ogres. Quite a tiresome match. I doubt that TS-rebalancing could in any way hope to fix this.
Under-strength teams would meet Ogres much less often if handicaps were ignored for matchups where handicaps would make the match worse. Then under-strength teams would meet weaker full strength teams from many different races instead of Ogres/Goblins/Halflings/Vampires. Don't really see any non-dogmatic reason for not doing this. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 25, 2009 - 19:54 |
|
MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYBODY!!!!!
...and a lump of coal for ogres. |
_________________
<PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
|
|
| |
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
