Postie
Joined: Mar 06, 2004
|
 Posted:
Mar 09, 2004 - 23:53 |
 
|
Well that would be an improvement, since my throwe got his first skill he has a niggiling. He missed all the next 3 games because of it..... |
_________________
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people. |
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 02:36 |
|
Grum - along these lines.
Newbies joining FUMBBL have no idea of the diff between DivX and Open now. Is someone going to update the Reference section on site to let them know about the new no ageing/niggle rules ?
It will be a suprise to some newbies when they start their 2nd DivX game and see the Apoth is gone.
Cause there is a small % of us FUMBBL users that actually live in these forums and keep up to date.
Just a thought |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
Colin
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 02:51 |
|
|
Mully
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 03:26 |
|
You know after I posted that I thought "I better check 1st ...... nah".
F-k |
_________________
Owner of the REAL Larson
Come join the CCC League |
|
Colin
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 03:28 |
|
Feel free to polish it up a bit. There's plenty more work needed in there. |
|
|
alexander_west
Joined: Jan 24, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 04:14 |
|
Making multiple niggling injury rolls for players at each drive or the half as Tor AlKir suggests seems like a more useful change than Grumbledook's. It is better if players who HAD been removed because of a niggling injury could come back in, while characters who were doing just fine COULD also be removed. But, the idea seems to be to remove players just as much of the time: a player with 1 niggling injury should miss 1/6th of all game play. But, instead of making a player miss a whole game, they can only miss a portion of it. This would make niggling injuries still painful, but somehow just a touch less annoying. |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 05:12 |
|
| alexander_west wrote: | | Making multiple niggling injury rolls for players at each drive or the half as Tor AlKir suggests seems like a more useful change than Grumbledook's. |
The point of the change Grumbledook was talking about was to fully implement an ageing replacement package that the BBRC was interested in getting some test data for. Yes, niggling injuries will hurt you more, but without ageing, you will have less of them. All of the changes work together and need to be looked at as a whole. |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
cjohnsto
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 09:53 |
|
| Mr-Klipp wrote: | | alexander_west wrote: | | Making multiple niggling injury rolls for players at each drive or the half as Tor AlKir suggests seems like a more useful change than Grumbledook's. |
The point of the change Grumbledook was talking about was to fully implement an ageing replacement package that the BBRC was interested in getting some test data for. Yes, niggling injuries will hurt you more, but without ageing, you will have less of them. All of the changes work together and need to be looked at as a whole. |
Just to make it clear when the niggle occurs you are out for the rest of the game, you don't get a chance to come back in, but at the begining of each half you can be removed from the game. The change is that now you can be removed at half time aswell. |
|
|
Grod
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 10:21 |
|
| Mully wrote: |
One last question :
| Quote: |
put your toys back in your pram pelase
|
What the hell kind of English saying is that?? We don't even have prams in the US of A.
|
erm. Yes there is only English speaking country in this planet. The good old US of A as you put it. Erm. |
|
|
Grumbledook
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 11:49 |
|
lies i saw a pram in the ghostbusters film |
|
|
Grod
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 12:03 |
|
Not to mention Speed (the one about the bomb and the bus) |
_________________
I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
MixX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 12:25 |
|
and I saw it on TV the other day: some dude in America sailed a pram into a bridge knocking it down (or something) some years ago...
lot's of prams in the USA! |
|
|
Force
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 16:51 |
|
Folks, i hate to say it, but once again you dont get it.
Instead of makin a NI simply worse, the idea is to change its verry nature.
Right now the NI rule is broken in what it is supposed to do. A NI is supposed to weaken a player.
Thats not what it does. Either the Guy shows up, and is not handicapped at all, or he is completely unavailiable for the match.
That even leads to a problem with FUMBBL's team Strength calculation, because if you pick your opponent according to his taeams strength you are in for a verry unpleasant surprise when some of his NI players got lucky on their pregame rolls. On a sidenote, even the well respected Galak stated this argument in a posting at TBB i would have to search now...
My suggestion has a diffrent approach. Coaches simply cannot relie on players with NI's any more.
Example: a thrower. It's turn 6 second half opposing team kicking and your Thrower niggles out. BAM your passing strategy is ruined.
Once again, the suggestion is to roll for NI every time you set your players on the field, failing the roll means you have to miss that drive and roll again at the next setup. similar to the KO rule. An Apothecary could be used to make a failed NI roll succeed and the player free of all his NI's for the rest of that match.
Now what pisse me of is that you guys jump back to the "i read about something like that at TBB, we will do it that way" so quickly before you even seem to have considered the original suggestion.
I have to give Grumble some credit for he posted something like at a bit of an argumentation.
Read again what Alexander West has posted, this is exactly my point of view as well. Also, this is not something definitely related to the new "beta almost official experimental ruleset". This change is about the way NI's work, not how many of them occour or should occur.
You may be right that in DivX there are too few injuries, well that issue has more things that come with it, because, sorry, fumbbl often a home to beardy cherrypicking powergamers who refuse to play a wood elf team that has more than one lineman with block in their ranks.
Its a totally diffrent matter to discuss the effects of a injury or the chance for it to occur. All i am trying to emphasise here is that the "NI before every setup" rule would make Blood Bowl a more exiting game. |
|
|
BadMrMojo
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 17:07 |
|
| Force wrote: | | Folks, i hate to say it, but once again you dont get it. |
Heh. And once again...
| Force wrote: | Right now the NI rule is broken in what it is supposed to do. A NI is supposed to weaken a player.
Thats not what it does. Either the Guy shows up, and is not handicapped at all, or he is completely unavailiable for the match. |
That's your opinion of what a NI is supposed to do. I understand and fully comprehend your opinion and the ramifications thereof.
I also think it is wrong. Still. I suppose that means I'm flaming you and I still don't get it, right? 
A Niggle weakens your team. It's not a way to punish a player for scoring, it's a way to keep teams competitive and within reach of each other. As it is, it doesn't seem to weaken your team enough, hence the upcoming change.
That's another opinion of what it is supposed to do. It's every bit as valid an opinion as yours.
{ edit: revised to cut out ranting. $flame = $flame/2 } |
_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies
Last edited by BadMrMojo on %b %10, %2004 - %18:%Mar; edited 1 time in total |
|
MixX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 10, 2004 - 18:10 |
|
| earlier, I wrote: | | omg that's nasty.. please don't =) |
I didn't really mean that, after all my policy is usually "niggle=retirement" |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
