oryx
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
 Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 03:22 |
 
|
I think beastmen are undercosted. Horns is definitely worth more than 10k - after all, the blitz is when you want +st the most. Since most non-str-access linemen will take guard and mb whenever possible, beastmen are getting an eventual 10k/str skill discount over other types of linemen.
I think mutations are also undercosted. 2h is 20k - half the cost of +ag, but more than half as useful as +ag. It's also extremely predictable - no waiting for that elusive 11. I feel the same with horns and to a lesser extent claw.
Because TV management is so crucial in this edition, I think that the failure to differentiate skill costs and to account for skill access in positional pricing is a major contribution to silly imbalances.
This explains why you see so many beastman legends, and so few human lino legends, despite the identical statline and 10k difference in cost. If the lineman gets to legend, he'll probably cost more than the beast (from taking doubles) and still be missing +1 st on the blitz. Now that's a load of crap!
Thoughts? |
|
|
Lorebass
Joined: Jun 25, 2010
|
|
The_Provocateur
Joined: Sep 29, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 03:43 |
|
Those are correct statements you have there. |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 06:15 |
|
I think rookie Beastmen are fine, but after a point it starts getting silly. Mutations should automatically be 30k, would be a start. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Beerox
Joined: Feb 14, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 06:23 |
|
You are correct sir.
ps What is everyone's favorite goat mutation? It's a close race for sure. |
|
|
CastleMan
Joined: Apr 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 06:49 |
|
I have always been a big fan of tail |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 10:17 |
|
Beastmen are certainly not undercosted. They are a bit crap at rookie level. The problem was some divy in the BBRC decided to make all mutations free rather than traits, then nerf all of them a little which made the majority of them a waste of time except Claw. (and a couple of others get used very occasionally, like a two heads ball carrier....etc...)
On top of this they decided to get rid of Traits and nerf all skills that were formally traits then make Pile On better than any of the traits before they nerfed them.
Access to the kill stack without doubles is the problem here. It used to take 2 doubles (and you had to avoid ageing) now its just 3 singles and more powerful than it used to be.
The other problem is the flat rate TV increase for skills gained. LRB4 had a cumulative system, but it had its own problems, there is however a happy medium. If players paid for skills like this - 20k, 20k, 30k, 30k, 40k, 40k, 50k, then it would help encourage more even skill distribution and it would make the kill stack and any nasty elf stack (like blodge SS DT T for example) cost a lot more. Some like the all stars and rest scrubs aspect of CRP like Koadah for example and there are probably others. Personally I don't but I guess that is down to personal preference.
Also Jackass, increasing mutations to a flat 30k cost is dumb. Most of them are terrible now. Tentacles got nerfed, big hand got nerfed, Foul Appearance got nerfed, Very Long Legs got nerfed. While Claw did too it is still an excellent skill. Making it cost 30k would just force people down the - 'only take Claw and ignore all others' route even more so than they already do I'm afraid. |
_________________
 |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 10:50 |
|
I think you're pretty much wrong about everything.
While horns might be worth 20k on a single player, it's value gets diluted when it becomes a blanket skill, since you can only blitz once per turn.
Also, +AG is just better than twice two heads, making much more versatile players. The +AG beastman can not only dodge safely, but also handle the ball reliably. And in the end, this game is about the ball. As an extra advantage, it only uses one skill slot, allowing further development of the beastman. Compare the +AG beast with the Strong arm (or Accurate), Two heads, Extra arms one. 3 skills to effectively do the same and 20k (or 30k) extra.
As Garion said, most mutations aren't even worth the 20k they cost. The problem here is an imbalance in the cost/effectiveness of different skills, and i'm not talking only about mutations. For instance, block has a better value than fend for the same cost as claw does over prehensile tail.
Finally, there are two things that make more beastmen legends than human linos. In human teams, linos have a very definite and important role: meatshields. Every spp earning stuff is done by positionals. You don't get experienced linos because it's not their function. Beastman on the other hand are the doers in chaos teams: 1 or 2 become the main blitzers and another one for ball duty. The rest are effectively meatshields as well until one of the important ones gets retired and they timely skill up. And of course, access to the killstack makes it so easy to legend anything. Even a goblin. |
_________________
 |
|
ThePeoplesChamp
Joined: Apr 20, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 10:55 |
|
i think marauders are even worse as at 50k with access to everything but A is just too strong. poor humans get such a raw deal as their lineman will always be worse than the marauding eq. the problem is access and therefore TV issues. i dont think any player should have access to more than 2 skill sets normally, unless they were overcosted to begin with.
however beastmens i think are ok, horns on all for 10k seems fine as you have to have them, much like slann getting VLL and Leap for 10. |
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 10:56 |
|
| ThePeoplesChamp wrote: | | i think marauders are even worse as at 50k with access to everything but A... |
+100 |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 11:44 |
|
| Garion wrote: |
The other problem is the flat rate TV increase for skills gained. LRB4 had a cumulative system, but it had its own problems, there is however a happy medium. If players paid for skills like this - 20k, 20k, 30k, 30k, 40k, 40k, 50k, |
This! Or perhaps rather +0 +5 +10 +15 +20 +25 (over the current cost of the skill/stat).
(Making doubles and MA/AV +5, AG+10, and ST +20 would be good too.) |
|
|
Scaramanga
Joined: May 01, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 12:15 |
|
Just remove TV and gold.
For matchups and inducements, take the number of additionnal skills. |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 13:22 |
|
I've said this before, but:
I'd alter costs for players when they develop. Currently skill access isn't considered, which I think makes for imbalances at high TV due to the fact that some players get easy skill access, and therefore have a greater selection of "TV-efficient" skills to choose from. I'm thinking in particular of the elven teams, where the entire team has GA access, and also of Chaos with GSM. I don't think that players should pay an up-front premium for skill access, though: after all, there is no on-pitch difference between a rookie Human lineman and a rookie Pact marauder - they are both 6338 and unskilled, so both should have the same TV when they are both at that point. There is a difference between the 6338G and 6338GSPM player, of course, but the difference is one of developmental possibility rather than actual effectiveness as a rookie. That's why I don't see an up-front premium as the solution. If we're going down this route then I'd prefer such players to pay a premium when the options are taken rather than beforehand - it's a better representation of the actual on-pitch capability, which is what we seem to want TV to be (and it isn't now). To that end I've been discussing with someone on FUMMBL the concept of paying a premium each time you "open" a different skill category (e.g. an elf might pick block first for 20k but would then have to pay 20k extra, for example, the first time they picked anything from the A tree, such as Dodge).
Using the 20k unlock cost as an example, a 6338G player would be able to take skills at the normal 20TV cost, or doubles at 30TV etc. A 6338GA player would be able to take his first skill (G or A) at the normal 20TV cost, and any further skills from that category at the same cost. On doubles he would be able to select any skill he could normally select on a double at 30TV if the category is not yet "unlocked", or 20TV if it has been. Should he roll a single and want to take a skill from an "locked" category to which he has access, though, a premium would be applied (e.g. an extra 20TV).
Example progressions for 6338GA:
-------
Skill 1 rolls singles: Block 20TV
Skill 2 rolls doubles: G for 20TV or ASP for 30TV (because A skills are not yet unlocked)
Skill 3 rolls doubles: GA for 20TV (assuming he unlocked A on skill 2), SP for 30TV, or A for 30TV if it was not unlocked at skill 2
-------
Skill 1 rolls singles: Block 20TV
Skill 2 rolls singles: G for 20TV or A for 40TV (20TV for the skill, 20TV to unlock it)
Skill 3 rolls doubles: GA for 20TV, SP for 30TV
This makes progression for cross-category skills more expensive. It would add 40TV to a Block/CPOMB/Tackle player and 20TV to a blodger, for example, unless doubles rolls were used to unlock skills at a lower cost. It would also add plenty overall to the Elven teams with blodge spam, and would increase the cost to Chaos teams where they take a few guarders with block to support the CPOMB players. What you would get, though, is individual players of the same type costing different amounts with the same skills depending on whether they unlocked the skill with doubles or not. That's no major issue so long as it is annotated somewhere - no problem online, and no more of an issue than noting SPP accurately is for TT.
The main advantages are that it does alter the cost for synergistic cross-category skills, and it doesn't involve any changes to the low-TV dynamic - one 6338 Block player costs the same as another (in-team differences excepted), and it might just make teambuilding a little more interesting (do I take dodge now for 40TV or do I take tackle and hope for a double and to save 10TV?). |
|
|
GronxWild
Joined: Jan 22, 2012
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 13:52 |
|
i ve never thought about before but it could be really nice to just put diferent prizes on diferent skills! this way if u don t want to rise TV u could just get those cheap TV (or free) skills like passblock, or divig catch 
i think this way we will find more diversity on the field |
|
|
Rabe
Joined: Jun 06, 2009
|
| Posted:
Oct 04, 2013 - 14:01 |
|
Maybe that can be done in [L] some day...  |
_________________
.
 |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
