Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
 Posted:
Jul 03, 2014 - 23:09 |
 
|
| tmoila wrote: | | Remove spiralling expenses 2014 |
Spiralling expenses is the only thing stopping 16 man cpomb teams. It's vital. |
_________________
 |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 03, 2014 - 23:11 |
|
@uzkulak
Aye, I had a proposal in a different topic on the costing matter. It said that only the highest 12 costed players account towards the TV.
But please note this was a "quick fix", assuming nothing else would change, and try to solve the meta without any further ruling. (TV and TW calculations are kind of house rules anyway, this is the easiest to accept.)
@11 killer team
I king of not mind beyond the 2nd killer. I mean I wish the opponent has none, but if he has more than 2, then it does not make a difference, will be a bloat in most cases. Those skills alone may account for a big bench on my side, and if the opponent can only blitz, then I feel I have a chance to compete till the very end. |
_________________
 |
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 00:42 |
|
bring back ageing 2015? 
doesn't sound like fun though...
anyway, in stunty leeg it's not at all unusual with 16 man teams just because the players are more fragile.
don't know if making every regular BB player more fragile is the solution though... |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:09 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | Sounds like you guys are tilting at unicorns, to butcher an expression...
Yes, we can theorize at terrors like this but it simply doesnt reflect the vast majority of teams coach in the crp face. Im not saying there are no black swans, its just I wouldnt hinge my argument on something that takes a lot of math and time and effort and terrible opponents to create.
To wit, I'd spend the entirety of the game against such a team making fun of the other coach for such dedication to a farce. |
You have a lot of Box teams but none over 1600. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:10 |
|
That's not by choice.
Also, I spec enough and have your handy work available to replay games at that TV and these farce teams don't exist in any quantity worth mentioning. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:16 |
|
| Roland wrote: | | don't know if making every regular BB player more fragile is the solution though... |
If your response to me, then please elaborate. The proposal of the topic does not increase attrition, so does not make players more fragile according to my estimation. |
_________________
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:19 |
|
| bghandras wrote: |
- Piling on: Works only on armor, and moves to agility skill. (Former limits attrition from this source. Latter makes most killstack players 10k more expensive.)
|
While this is rubbish fluff-wise, I do like how it makes killstack further out of reach for most players (though easier for necro-wolves).
What I also like, is that it makes natural pombers very limited (Slann, Vampire).
However, it makes pombers as easy to come by for elves (with A) as for bashers (wish S). That would change the balance of bash vs agility so much, that no. Really, no. |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | Any one person's tweaks are going to be unpalatable to someone else, and it's all a matter of opinion. On the plus side, we're in the house rules section, where this stuff should be knocked about. |
It's like you only need one Purple.
We all agree tweaks need to be made to optimise a decent ruleset with huge problems.
And everyone thinks their tweaks would solve it.
Everyone is wrong, because everyones ideas for tweaks are different and they cant all be right. So jimmy is, as always, right again. Just a new set of problems, the first of which is: Get more than 5 people to agree your rules look good. Start with 5, then work up to thousands. But i bet you can't find five. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
King_Ghidra
Joined: Sep 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:43 |
|
| Beerox wrote: | | The fix for Pact is to erase them from existence. |
I think it's a lot easier. At the risk of stating the obvious, the whole purpose of pact is basically to be the Chaos All-stars, but the roster allows and encourages players to ignore what should be implicit diversity by making mix-maxed cookie-cutter builds.
I would make marauders have M access on normals and all other skills on doubles
That alone would solve the fundamental problem. It would weaken Pact, sure, but Pact should be a unique and fun team, and right now they are played mainly by powergamers.
It would also be kind of awesome to get Hypnotic Gaze back on the Mutation list. This is a fun skill with great tactical application, and having it a bit more widespread wouldn't be a bad thing imho. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:43 |
|
| mrt1212 wrote: | That's not by choice.
Also, I spec enough and have your handy work available to replay games at that TV and these farce teams don't exist in any quantity worth mentioning. |
I think that my handy work suggests that there are a lot of games played by CPOMBers. Especially over 1600. They tend to play more games per team.
It is nice to see elves, humans & co threatening the top 10 but the claw boys have the numbers at the top.
No orcs in the top 20. First dwarves are at 40! Now that's not proper blood bowl.
Low TV is a bit better though. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:44 |
|
@PurpleChest & Jimmy
Well the perquisite of agreement is that whoever dislikes provides the reasoning, so that any next trial can consider it. |
_________________
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 09:56 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | mrt1212 wrote: | That's not by choice.
Also, I spec enough and have your handy work available to replay games at that TV and these farce teams don't exist in any quantity worth mentioning. |
I think that my handy work suggests that there are a lot of games played by CPOMBers. Especially over 1600. They tend to play more games per team.
It is nice to see elves, humans & co threatening the top 10 but the claw boys have the numbers at the top.
No orcs in the top 20. First dwarves are at 40! Now that's not proper blood bowl.
Low TV is a bit better though. |
I was thinking of the teams with 11 Marauders or Perfect Killers as players - the Chaos teams I think named earlier in the thread have 3-4 players built with the kill stack, the 5 or so Perfect Killers i found arent that active. i think there are problems but its far more mundane than these what ifs and part of it is social too - some people love chaos for whatever reason. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 10:23 |
|
11 Marauders are less popular since the scheduler change. 3-4 CPOMBers is still not the kind of team people would want to face on a regular basis.
Yes things are pretty much fine even in the Box if you stick to lower TV but I don't think that it would take much to make higher TV much better.
The two nerfs that Christer suggested would have been a good start IMO.
You can try them out at The Free For All. Just a few places still available.  |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Zlefin
Joined: Apr 14, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 11:31 |
|
I don't feel like this really fixes the underlying issues of minmaxing TV being such an issue.
I wonder if a major skill rebalancing could help with that.
Using 2 different TV systems for resurrection vs continuous may help. |
|
|
albinv
Joined: Sep 15, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jul 04, 2014 - 12:10 |
|
I fully admit i havent read the whole post. But if i read that S access shall be removed for CDs i know that this is the wrong approach.
That's just a too big change to cure a few minor problems, hence it will most likely create more problems. One needs to be careful now not to leave the foundation, fight the cause, not create new symptons.
A change with rosters is always the least wanted imho. If so, remove easy M for cdorfs but not S, which they always possessed, even before CRP. So that would simply be anachronistic and therefore wrong and a mistake, simple.
Mind you i never was a cd coach or big fan. This just makes no sense to begin with.
Can only hope you guys in the charge will aim for the most simplest/ basic rule change possible in order to balance the rules.
In case of the claw f.i.: simply make it so that it reduces armour to 8 not beyound. Most simple and probably very effective change. Im not the only one with this opinion. Makes you wonder why some of the guys that seem to have taken charge of this come up with elaborated complicated libraries of suggested rule changes. Or why you have to read them no matter from who it is. Crap claw too strong...simply try it with av8, gametest it then think on. Why write libraries on it, that come with whole new trees of rule changes?
Is it to fight CRP....not to balance it? Well, fumbbl politics and egos...i dunno.
Prognosis: the game will never have a ruleset the majority of the community will regard as balanced. Too much politics and egos involved. |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
