PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 16:34 |
 
|
So in that "other" thread Kalimar was talking about possibly adding a lot of variant rules as options for league play.
OK, first off IAM NOT AGAINST THOSE. (disclaimer)
BUT
What really is the purpose?
1)Test out these variant rules to see if they are better?
OR
2)Its not really about testing the rules. Just allowing coaches in league to restrict certain styles of play or eliminate what they perceive as broken skills.
HERE WE GO.
1)So there are 3 variant PO rules, 2 Claw variant rules, implimented. IF the real reason a league wants to use those is to test them out. Would that not mean basically every team in the league is aiming to take a lot of CPOMB...to test the new rules? If no one takes those skills, or only 1 or two teams, then are you really testing them?
2)The variant rules are actually nice ways of saying that we dont want our league to have certain skills by using the variant rules. Thus the comish does not have to come up with all these variant rules in the creation of the league, like back in LRB4 days. The ole, no DP is allowed in our league, or the allways popular you cannot have RSC/CL.
On the flip side. Lets say one of the variant rules is that stand firm now allows free dodges like in LRB4. Is not that league now promoting to take stand firm? also certain teams would love to have that, so is not the league also "keying" you in on what type of team to take for the league?
So in the end.
Variant rules are really just a way for coaches to tweek their fun on FUMBBL by changing rules/skills that they dont like. And would like a league of fellow coaches who agree with them to play with.
And that is fine. Because in the end these variant rules are not really being tested out. Tested out means that at some future date they would be implimented FUMBBL wide. Which has about a .0000012% chance of happening right now and in the future.
because I sometimes get the feeling that some coaches actually think these variant rules will be implimented at some future date outside of League play.
Side note: I play in a league with the sneaky git variant. I have noticed not one coach over 2 seasons has ever EVER taken sneaky git to test out the variant or take it because it is a boost to sneaky git. Also if you tone down PO and then put variants that boost DP...then have you not just created a new CAS issue in your league because of the DP rules?
So place your vote..Iam interesting to see why coaches want variant rules so bad. I suspect it has nothing to do with improving or testing out CRP. But rather a hope that the new variant rules will bring back the fun for some coaches. |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 16:48 |
|
I created all those options to provide coaches to "have it their way". Not liking a particular aspect of the rule should not necessarily keep you off Fumbbl. Create a league, finetune the rules and have fun the way you like it. BB7 for instance is certainly more fun if FFB actually supports having less players on the field and not having to place them in the endzone doing nothing, right?
IF per chance a particular set of rule changes proves to be popular and/or helpful - well, that might provide useful data once a new rule commitee gets going (if ever). I don't try to subvert the main divisions here by providing customization. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 16:55 |
|
Variety is the spice of life. |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 17:25 |
|
I would very much like to be able to tweak a lot of rules for league.
The first two I recently wished I could edit:
Instead of rolling for armor with mighty blow, wizarded player is placed prone (no armor roll).
allow league admins to set the price of the wizard.
Another obvious thing would be to allow as houserules the rules marked as optional in the actual rulebook. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 17:29 |
|
It is a bout 2, no?
Leagues can use rules to suit their coaches. Sounds fine to me. What is there to discuss? |
_________________
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 17:32 |
|
Tailoring the game to your needs is good. I comend* Kalimar on any variants he wishes to put in to the client. He or the variants shouldn't be judged. It's up to the league admin whether they take it or not. One or 2 of the big leagues, use the PO variant, and would be very unhappy if it wasn't there.
Commend* |
Last edited by harvestmouse on %b %04, %2012 - %18:%Jun; edited 1 time in total |
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 17:48 |
|
dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
_________________
|
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
| pythrr wrote: | dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
spambot banhammered. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 18:05 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
I thought this was a dig at Painstate until I read it properly.  |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 18:12 |
|
| Kalimar wrote: | | IF per chance a particular set of rule changes proves to be popular and/or helpful - well, that might provide useful data once a new rule commitee gets going (if ever). I don't try to subvert the main divisions here by providing customization. |
Which is something that didn't happen in the transition from lrb4 to crp. FUMBBL only using skijunki's client with no possibility to adapt to the rules being tested led to fumbbl being completely ignored in the development of CRP, while some small crappy leagues were feeding meaningless stats that said that khemri were totally ace.
Having these houseruling possibilities can only do good to FUMBBL and to the blood bowl comunity in general. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 18:21 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
I thought this was a dig at Painstate until I read it properly. |
I miss spambot already....  |
_________________
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 18:23 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
what about italian pickers? |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 04, 2012 - 18:38 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | pythrr wrote: | dear spambot
welcome to fumbbl
have fun, and avoid spanish pickers and minmaxers. |
what about italian pickers? |
I assumed that spambot _was_ Italian, and did not want to incur this wrath. |
_________________
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 05, 2012 - 02:50 |
|
Painstate, you need the following option: I want to make a league with particular variant rules, and then garner SO MANY coaches to that league that I can prove that that ruleset is actually better than CRP. Nothing to do with testing (I already know that variant is the best) and while I want to play with those rules (since they are the best), my actual goal is to steal everyone from ranked and box to my particular league (not just the league division) as they see how awesome those rules are.
P.S. I do not actually have a particular set of variant rules in mind. But that is why I want variant rule options available to league. |
|
|
|
|
Custom Icon, Portrai...
Search
