uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
 Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 21:37 |
 
|
Quick question, if you may: is there any Passing skill other than Leader that you would take on doubles? What about any such skill that you would take rather than a S skill? A G skill?
I think one of the problems is that P access is of very little use these days. |
|
|
cameronhawkins
Joined: Aug 19, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 22:27 |
|
| Mr_Foulscumm wrote: |
What does "teams are made to be balanced within themselves" that even mean?
|
It means that team rosters shouldn't be internally redundant, and no players should make other players obsolete (or even somewhat obsolete).
This is the problem with some rosters already–– notably on the Amazon roster, where many people have realized that the Blitzers are not well balanced against the Linemen in terms of cost, and have dropped them entirely.
Note that the Marauders would be unbalanced, if Human Linemen were available on the Pact roster, which is exactly what that popular comparison would prove so incisively. Unfortunately, they're not, so it doesn't prove anything.
A saurus could be priced at 50k if a skink was priced at 90k. The roster would be almost completely unchanged. How those prices compare to similar players on other teams is 100% irrelevant, as long as the team's abilities are comparable to teams of similar TV.
On the Pact team, the cost and capabilities of the Big Guys is not balanced against the cost and capabilities of the linemen. In this case, most people realize that a single Big Guy is not worth 2-3 linemen, and don't take them. However, raising the cost of the linemen, and reducing the cost of the Big Guys changes that balance, and encourages people to take Big Guys. The fact that those linemen might compare unfavorably to OTHER linemen, or that those Big Guys are cheaper then other Big Guys is utterly irrelevant.
So, now you know what that means, and you never need to wonder again! |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 22:35 |
|
| uuni wrote: | Quick question, if you may: is there any Passing skill other than Leader that you would take on doubles? What about any such skill that you would take rather than a S skill? A G skill?
I think one of the problems is that P access is of very little use these days. |
Off the top of my head, some people take pass access skills on ghouls. Pass on an Ogre used to be good, probably not so much now. |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 23:06 |
|
@harvestmouse: Indeed. I think we both would be happy to see more of NoS Pass Dump-Off Marauders, but my fear is that passing itself is too sub-par.  |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 23:22 |
|
Well there is no fix for that outright. Making throwing better, makes it better for elven teams too, which shouldn't happen.
The problem is that all teams cut off any potential fat so there is no 'B' game because it simply isn't cost effective.
As an example in LRB 4 league, in the highest divisions my League Norse team always had a thrower who could throw a bit, for those occasions that the impact game didn't work.
Now nobody would be crazy enough to put that amount of TV towards such a player, and that is the problem. TV match making outside of a resurrection tournament is absolutely dire, like a parasite. |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 01, 2013 - 23:58 |
|
Hmm... As we are throwing random thoughts about pink elephants in air, how about 0-12 6347 GPM Marauder 60k?  |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2013 - 00:43 |
|
Generally most of this thread is 'fix the pact roster for the problems with the ruleset'.
Up the cost of Marauders (5k would be nice if they'd allow it) and fix the ruleset problems and there isn't a problem.
I don't see the need to cement over the cracks to be honest. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2013 - 00:55 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | Generally most of this thread is 'fix the pact roster for the problems with the ruleset'.
|
Agreed. Once you take away the power of clawpomb every further step to harm pact will just be overcompensation.
Just like it was with DP getting reduced AND the +1 bonus of fouling taken away.
And just like it was with Piling On being improved because fouls were so strong.
Too much ideas when just one little thing would have been enough. |
|
|
Freekster
Joined: Sep 17, 2013
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 12:18 |
|
Marauder skill access is only "problem" in online "hoarding" gaming.
In tabletop it takes a year or more to develop one CLAWPOMBer. You will not get two in same year. That's 12 months.
So anyone suggesting changes to LRB is just silly. Online gaming is different animal. You can easily play 10 games in one day and develop team quite fast. And that is not a problem of rulebook, but more that ppl just have too much time to spend online  |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 12:36 |
|
Wow a necromancing troll, awesome revive. I was looking at something recently and I was shocked how many TT games a progressive team had. A couple of hundred I think. So it's not just onliners.
However you have inadvertently backed up what I have been saying. The rules do not suit massively progressive leagues as well as they do Resurrection tournies.
Obviously fix any broken combos, and make changes to rating teams and you have a lovely little roster here. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 12:46 |
|
| Freekster wrote: | Marauder skill access is only "problem" in online "hoarding" gaming.
In tabletop it takes a year or more to develop one CLAWPOMBer. You will not get two in same year. That's 12 months.
So anyone suggesting changes to LRB is just silly. Online gaming is different animal. You can easily play 10 games in one day and develop team quite fast. And that is not a problem of rulebook, but more that ppl just have too much time to spend online |
I have to inform you that CRP rules are supposed to: "mantain game balance in leagues that last for long periods of time (e.g. for months or years rather than weeks)", so they should take into account that clawpombers can be developed, online or on tabletop, no matter where.
Sadly, CRP designers are not power gamers, so they were unable to spot the holes in their ruleset. |
|
|
Freekster
Joined: Sep 17, 2013
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 16:40 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: |
I have to inform you that CRP rules are supposed to: "mantain game balance in leagues that last for long periods of time (e.g. for months or years rather than weeks)". |
yes, but they don't define what it means. In tabletop "long periods of time" is still not many games. Yes in 10 years you will have three clawpombers :F
Maybe there should be different rule sets for online and tabletop.
I play both and they are very very different. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 16:55 |
|
Different rules for progressive and resurrection yes. Not for TT and Online. The game is the same, there is no difference. The differences is lengths of campaign. In a perpetual world it's vastly different to the Table Tourney world. Unfortunately (for us) most of the BBRC were very much into the TT tourney world.
As I stated before; I recently found a team that had played 200 TT games. It's possible. I ran a group that played a lot of games a long time ago.
Just because you don't play many games per year, doesn't mean others won't. It doesn't necessarily mean they have too much time either. BB meets a lot of healthy criteria for past time activities. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 17:44 |
|
|
MisterFurious
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 17:50 |
|
| Freekster wrote: | | Marauder skill access is only "problem" in online "hoarding" gaming. |
Yeah, and you're on an online Blood Bowl site where people play Blood Bowl online, exactly where it's a problem, hence why people here were discussing it. |
|
|
|
|
FUMBBL HAIKU'S
Search
