Kam
Joined: Nov 06, 2012
|
 Posted:
Jul 09, 2014 - 16:17 |
 
|
2 rerolls are enough for zons, especially once you have Sure Hands and a few linos with Block. Also, keep in mind they're AV7 and it takes just one game to have half of your team destroyed. It's not as bad as Norses, but they're not Orcs either. I wonder how increasing the cost of the lino would impact your treasury... |
_________________
GLN 17 is out!
 |
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 09, 2014 - 16:19 |
|
I personally have never had any treasury problem with amazon. Actually I have least treasury problem with them among my teams. |
_________________
 |
|
the.tok
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 09, 2014 - 16:49 |
|
+1
My Zons are my richest team too
You tend to hoard a lot of gold at low tv, because teams are relatively blockless then.
And by the time you encounter mass tackle, you usually have a nice treasury 
The 60k lino would not be that bad for treasury, but would make a bench more expensive tv-wise. The 80k for blitzer is elegant and consistent with it though |
_________________
Unnerf Mummies 2013! |
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 11:58 |
|
Hi bghandras,
| Quote: | | As I said it before you may have the necessary data to prove that you should not give any discount on the blitzers, but from purely minmax preventive point of view I could see the advantage of the 80k-costed blitzers. |
I can't imagine what kind of data would be that specific.
I do have data that Amazon are crazy broken in the Box from TV 0-1500, and very good from TV1500-2000.
I can see both ways working. As with other NTBB changes, I prefer making 1 change rather than 3.
Neither of us can prove whether 90K/80K blitzers would get minmaxed out of the line-up, when Linewomen are 60K. Personally I can see the access to S, and the quicker access to "something on top of Blodge" making them worthwhile.
Also, it should be noted that I think that the 2 problematic combos in the game currently are cpomb and blodge. Blodge especially on starting/early teams. NTBB takes Blodge off the wardancer. I think making the only other starting Blodger cheaper would be somewhat inconsistent.
Cheers
Martin |
|
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 12:04 |
|
Garion said:
| Quote: | | It is absolutely insane making that change for all the reasons you say. heck it got tested in the vault pre crp anyway and got vetoed. |
I'll make a proper reply concerning Khemri in the very interesting and constructive Blod post that was referenced on page 1.
But I will add here that:
a) Yes it was tested, and it was not insanely powerful. It actually struggled a bit. But it was hugely popular with the playtesters, and it was a big surprise that it didn't make it through BBRC voting.
b) Yes, it got vetoed. Not by the playtesters. But because BBRC had agreed that any one of them could veto anything. And one of them did (for whatever reason). The team we got instead was actually a compromise that none of the BBRC liked.
Cheers
Martin |
|
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 12:25 |
|
Hi Garion,
regarding the rest of your list:
| Quote: | | Slann - the minus 10k is correct. |
Glad to hear it.
| Quote: | | Goblins - [snip] calling them River Trolls and giving them two skills for free is nonsensical. |
Given the lift I'm aiming for with NTBB, they need something tangible. I don't think Dodge on the Saw would cut the mustard.
Either way, I think we can agree that somewhere in TV-calculation Gobbos get shafted. A TV1000 Gobbo team is not as good as most other TV1000 teams. So it makes sense to give them something for free in order to make up for that. IMO.
| Quote: | | Ogres and Zons - I'm just going to ignore them [snip] |
For what it's worth, the NTBB changes make Ogres better than you'd think.
| Quote: | | Wood Elf - That change would stop me ever playing wood elves again. sure they are a very good race. But that is a ridiculously huge nerf. |
I think they're still quite playable. Even if you threaten not to. The rookie Wardancer still does an impressive 2-turn score that most rookie teams are hard pressed to stop. Pick up wrestle as first skill (if you dare) and you've already regained a lot of their Cage-popping ability.
| Quote: | | Halflings - Starting with Ag4 catchers I get from a fluff stand point because of 2nd ed, but again I think you are going the wrong direction, just give them back a chef that actually works and that should be their shtick, their opponents basically should never have re-rolls. |
IIRC NTBB2012 halflings had a rostered Chef (and could induce one also). Word from the players was that playing against anyone, even halflings, with 0 rerolls makes it a stupid luck-game. So I moved away from that.
| Quote: | | High Elves - [snip] I really don't think they need any buff. But if you go that way why not just drop the thrower and catcher price 10k each. Then you can have a starting roster that isnt really poor like their normal ones. |
According to the criteria that I set up, they do need a buff. But like all elf sides, they do grow quite powerful eventually, so I was looking for a buff that didn't translate well into long term play.
Giving them 60K worth of discounts is, IMO, a problem for that reason.
As you (may) know I'm considering Accurate rather than Sure Hands for NTBB2015. Then someone suggested just giving them Accurate on top. It would make their signature player a 3-skill starter, just like Wardancers and Witches. The idea is growing on me. And I'm not sure it would be that much of a long term buff. After all, most competitive coaches prefer not to throw at all, if they can just run the ball. WDYT?
| Quote: | | Chaos - This is the biggest joke of all though. Why give leader to a minotaur, its nonsense. Also if you just dropped the minos cost by 10k then that would be more than enough, then you could have a Chaos starting roster with - 8 Beastmen, 2 Chaos Warrior, 1 Minotaur, 3 Rerolls,1000TV. That's a roster change that makes a lot more sense as Minotaurs are way over priced currently anyway. |
I have a hard time divining the fluff in your head, but the fluff in mine tells me that what is basically a Chaos warband would naturally follow the strongest and deadliest critter.
I'm not convinced that the line-ups you suggest are tangibly better than the Classic: 4 CWs, 7 Beasties, 3 RRs.
Thanks for your comments
Martin |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 12:26 |
|
Sorry but the vault play testing was incredibly flawed. That person (doubleskulls iirc) vetoed it for the correct reason. Remember the vault was also responsible for the nonsensical 10k increase for Flesh Golems (among other poor decisions) because according to the vault Necromantic were performing too well. I also have to question the coaching ability of many of the people involved in play testing the rule set as many of them are now on this site and have very very poor records. Sure some of them were very good coaches - geggster, doubleskulls etc... but there were many others that I would class as mediocre coaches at best.
Just to go back to that blog post -
| Quote: | They're hardly Khemri anymore. The trick for CRP Khemri is precise positioning (a lost art). You must get it right the first time, because you won't be dodging around. It's tough but do-able, to keep this house of cards upright. AV9 is important in this effort - lose a Guardian and your job is twice as hard.
Anyways... What exactly is the problem? Khemri are a really good team. Just give Blitz Ras thick skull, and remove decay. Done.
Just because some Khemri-hater had a gimmick idea 5 years ago doesn't make it good. Khemri have a place in the game and they should stay, and NTBB's version is nothing short of blasphemy.
Make a new team. |
This is obsoletely correct. Khemri are unforgiving to bad play but that is what they should be like. To have a plan B spoils the fun of khemri
This is a heck of a lot better than the 4 CW starting roster - 8 Beastmen, 2 Chaos Warrior, 1 Minotaur, 3 Rerolls,1000TV. Chaos is the only team where a Big Guy helps them early on imo. Their lack of block is made up for somewhat by the mino, then once your team has some skills sack the mino and get your remaining warriors. |
_________________
Last edited by Garion on %b %10, %2014 - %12:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
plasmoid
Joined: Nov 03, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 12:30 |
|
Hi Garion,
one more post:
| Quote: | | If you are trying to balance the tiers why have lizardmen got away with it so far? they are one of the strongest low TV teams by a long way. Obviously I dont think you should make changes, but if you are trying to make them all closer together in terms of ability they need a nerf. |
I've tried to set up objective criteria, in order to not get bogged Down by discussions like that (even if I do agree that lizards (and CDs) are strong starters).
I thought on Nurgle:
Looks like I did a miscalc, so Nurgle may not after all be (in the stats) struggling as hard as Chaos. I'm checking my numbers.
But if they do get a buff, and if a TV reduction is too good for them long term (IDK), then I got an inspired/crazy idea.
How about a double lineman, just like Undead? An even suckier lineman, that you wouldn't want long term, but cheap enough to help your starting roster. A "Decayed Rotter" for 40K?
Cheers
Martin |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 12:32 |
|
|
bigGuy
Joined: Sep 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 13:07 |
|
| plasmoid wrote: |
I do have data that Amazon are crazy broken in the Box from TV 0-1500, and very good from TV1500-2000.
|
Note, that here may be some statistical bias. Only good coaches are able to keep AV7 teams at high TV for longer period. |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
Hi plasmoid, welcome back again. As always the ongoing offer of playing a game here remains. you pick the teams, and we'll sort a time.
Thank you for your continued interest and opinions on Blood Bowl.
I just want to echo that i feel your site could delineate between the CRP+ and where/how it came about (and possibly who these people you name check are and why you feel anyone should care about their opinions) and the NTBB stuff, which i believe to be all your own work.
Personally i am interested but not sold on the CRP+ ideas, but strongly disagree with the NTBB concept, let alone the decisions you take as to implementation. Having a clearer line between them would assist you i believe, as at the moment it is hard to be positive about one without it feeling you are praising both.
And really, why not play some blood bowl here? |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 15:01 |
|
| bigGuy wrote: | | plasmoid wrote: |
I do have data that Amazon are crazy broken in the Box from TV 0-1500, and very good from TV1500-2000.
|
Note, that here may be some statistical bias. Only good coaches are able to keep AV7 teams at high TV for longer period. |
I suspect that was old data from the old Box. Lizardmen are No 1. team at under 1500 Amazons are neck and neck with undead and not that far ahead of the rest of the pack.
Over 1500 Amazons are only 51%. And that is probably helped by people not taking too much tackle due to relatively few zons & elves.
It is a dangerous business applying data from one environment to others. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 4 more teams needed |
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 15:25 |
|
| koadah wrote: | It's not tested until it's been tested on FUMBBL.  |
Fixed it for you koadah.
This is not meant to sound elitist, just that there is absolutely no way you can test a rule set across TT leagues and tournaments (even hundreds), the way you could with FUMBBL. Box will expose the exploitable holes and bad roster builds at specific TVs, League will show you what happens over hundreds of games with the same core teams playing and building over time. Ranked will show how well balanced the teams are when you can more easily pick opponents and avoid killer teams. Do the teams over-develop or is there a ceiling even with picking? And when you're bored, you go squish stuff in Stunty, maybe even enter the Stunty Cup. |
_________________
 |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 16:12 |
|
| WhatBall wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | It's not tested until it's been tested on FUMBBL. |
Fixed it for you koadah.
This is not meant to sound elitist, |
It not a proper 'fix' as you have to specify that you are not just talking about some test division. 
I'll grant you Ranked but League is the most similar to what they will be testing already. A lot of the leagues seem to already be using modified rules or selection criteria. I doubt if they would want to give those up to make their data more relevant.
I don't think I would worry too much about Stunty. That is a prime candidate for it's own house rules.
Edit:That's all off topic as it refers to the 'proper' rules and not the NTBB. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 4 more teams needed |
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 10, 2014 - 16:20 |
|
Hey, if you are going to quote me, keep the advertising in there!  |
_________________
|
|
|
|
| |
All Star Bowl!
Search
