Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
 Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:37 |
 
|
Foul appearance was split in new foul appearance and disturbing presence...
SF was the ability to stay on spot and the ability to dodge with no falling chance. It was an absolute top skill. Mind you I wasn't suggesting to change SF, just to change FA. |
|
|
Roland
Joined: May 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:39 |
|
How was the old niggle again ? D6 per niggle?
Not playing on 1? |
|
|
Dominik
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:43 |
|
Yes plus there were a handicap which automatically made all the opposing niggled players miss on this game! |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:44 |
|
| Roland wrote: | How was the old niggle again ? D6 per niggle?
Not playing on 1? |
Yeah, but you still had to maintain the player TR wise, and it useually were the really expensive TR consuming players that wouldn't play then. So it was a huge risk.
One way to make this happen would be to roll niggle post game, rather than pre game and put the player into MNG state if it fails.
Edit:
Personally I always fancied to switch Decay with Niggling Injury. The life expectancy of a Niggler would be drastically shortend that way and he could expect to recieve much more niggles. Yet, since decay only kicks in AFTER the player has already been removed from the pitch, it would have virtually no negative side effect on the game itself.
In this context it would be also nice to see niggles becoming more common again. (Stat loss likelyness was increased on the injury table and niggles lieklyness reduced - which is good as the rules are now). Also reimplementing aging would be a valid possibility. "Oh dangit! The player got his fifth niggle! Fortunatly nothing bad happend!" |
Last edited by Wreckage on %b %13, %2015 - %19:%Feb; edited 2 times in total |
|
kilinrax
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:50 |
|
FA = Foul Appearance
SF = Stand Firm
I think. |
|
|
Dominik
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:54 |
|
Rotters usually last for 5-15 games, so which coach dares to use an apothecary on a decay Star Player? But the idea is interesting.
An idea by myself:
A niggling injury extends a MNG to two MNG, two niggling injuries to three MNG. During a game, a KO Roll on a niggled injured player requires a 5+ to recover (but that's a pretty tough rule, as they recover with a chance of 55% for the second half only instead of 75%. It could be also 5+ on the first KO roll and then 4+ on every subsequent. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 19:59 |
|
| Dominik wrote: | | Rotters usually last for 5-15 games, so which coach dares to use an apothecary on a decay Star Player? |
Well, apos and decay don't intersect so far, that would have to be defined.
Regarding the apo I'd think along the line to make it a straight re-roll -> either take the combined first 2 (or more) results, or take the second result (single apo roll).
So, you could actually utilize the apo to keep somebody alive for a very extended time span.
Especially when choosing Niggles and MNG was a valid enough choice on the apo roll too. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 20:07 |
|
| Dominik wrote: |
An idea by myself:
A niggling injury extends a MNG to two MNG, two niggling injuries to three MNG. During a game, a KO Roll on a niggled injured player requires a 5+ to recover (but that's a pretty tough rule, as they recover with a chance of 55% for the second half only instead of 75%. It could be also 5+ on the first KO roll and then 4+ on every subsequent. |
Yeah, I like this a lot. It could be implemented with an idea I had about reserve teams. Injured players could be placed in the reserve team, and players bought in their stead.
Having players missing 3 games taking up a 0-16 roster spaces isn't ideal. |
|
|
bigGuy
Joined: Sep 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 20:27 |
|
Inducements prices should be adjusted a little bit.
Wizard - 200k
1 Babe - 50k, 2 Babes - 150k
Maybe reduce Chef price a bit, to 250k? |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 20:33 |
|
| bigGuy wrote: |
1 Babe - 50k, 2 Babes - 150k
|
How about 1 Babe 70k, 2 babes 140k? |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 20:51 |
|
how about no babes, because they are stupid... hot women waking players up is pretty lame and sexist.
Why not just return to the superior - smelling salts from LRB4 that both made sense, and you could then just make them a 150k for a 2+, nothing lower. |
_________________
 |
|
NerdBird
Joined: Apr 08, 2014
|
| Posted:
Feb 13, 2015 - 21:20 |
|
| Garion wrote: | how about no babes, because they are stupid... hot women waking players up is pretty lame and sexist.
Why not just return to the superior - smelling salts from LRB4 that both made sense, and you could then just make them a 150k for a 2+, nothing lower. |
HOT Zombie, Dwarf and Nurgle cheerleaders.....shudder.
I do like the option of drugging players for a match...roll a d6 see what happens. Trying to get an advantage. I would like to see a few options for those 20K-40K increments.
I think the wizard should cost 250K and bring back the toad spell! I loved that spell..... |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | mister__joshua wrote: | I think personally, as a competitive ruleset, that CRP is the best Blood Bowl has ever been....................... We certainly shouldn't be in a situation where inducements are so strong that teams have to actively control their value.
|
But, CRP is by far the worst version for controlling value.
I'd never heard of the term minmaxing before this version. Would other games have had an impact on this. Games are getting more competitive everyday and the skill level (or the ability to win level) is getting higher. |
You're sort of quoted 2 unrelated parts of my post.
Point 1) CRP is the best ruleset yet for competitive play. I include TV management in this element of competition.
Point 2) We shouldn't be in a situation where this is required because Blood Bowl for me should be, and has always been about more than just a head-to-head competitive game.
The point I'm making being that I think CRP is a great tourney ruleset, but really de-emphasizes fluff to a level I'm uncomfortable with.
I haven't read beyond this post yet though, so I'll try and catch up with the discussion  |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 14, 2015 - 16:05 |
|
I really like LRB6. I'd like LRB7 to be more like LRB5.2, where 6 is 5.1.
A few things I think could be done:
1) A minor buff to fouling;
2) A minor buff to Sneaky Git, not sure what;
3) A minor nerf to ClawPOMB, like Claw only works if standing;
4) A scaling cost for skill-stacked players (I like +20/40/70/100/140/180, with +10k if any doubles and +10/20/30 for stats);
5) Bring back Super-Star, make Legend (7 skills) even harder to get, like 151 and 301 SPP? *
6) More ways to use money, to drain those 1M+ gold treasuries;
7) Please don't radically revise Amazons: they're unique in their uniformity;
8) 130k Ogres (both races).
* If 4 and 5 are implemented, legends should be +200k.That's a cost break for getting there.
Humans are fine, IMO: OP proves it every time he takes the field. The Blitzers cost too much, but not by much (they're better than the Orc ones, but not by 10k), the re-rolls are a hair too cheap, it balances out. Ogres are a bad deal, per 8), above.
I like the idea of using the d8 for passing (only), with no bonus (4+ on a d8) for a QP and -3 for a LB, then either buff the Pass skill or make a second Accurate-like skill (also watered down a little, like Strong Arm is) and give it to Thrower positions. Maybe +1 if there's no net penalty or something, not sure. |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
Fabulander
Joined: Oct 11, 2014
|
| Posted:
Feb 26, 2015 - 13:11 |
|
The NTBB rules changes are great in my book, the roster changes are more debatable. I certainly agree that humans should be buffed, but only ever so slightly.
For humans, I think Plasmoids +1Av to catchers is mechanically great, but fluff wise it is less great. The catchers favour light armour for speed, so returning them to the basic human S3 would be a more fitting buff. Probably too big of a buff, though, so I think a simple price reduction to the least popular positional is the most elegant soultion, as a 60kgp catcher is suddenly a sensible choice for starting rosters, effectively expendable and could be useful for different roles, like very mobile DP's or suicide blitzers. In CRP, catchers are often considered a liability compared to linemen and add immensely to team bloat. Human blitzers might be overpriced at 90KGP, but people always choose 4/4 of them on starting rosters anyway, so while a reduction here would effectively reduce the teams bloating, it would also make the humans' quite decent starting teams far too strong. Another option is to leave the positionals alone and remove the ogre's Loner. This would make him an actual part of the team, a good deal even with a small price bump and turn him into the most reliable big guy in the game, finally giving humans some kind of positive edge that other teams can't outdo.
Changing d6 to d8 in any situation is probably inadvisable from a beginners point of view. The Ag-rolls are currently a more or less standardized mechanic that works for many actions, and I think this is a good way to simplify the rules. Also, the rule of 1 and 6 is, in my opinion, a good thing, adding to the randomness of the game in general.
Small TV reductions for injured players is an excellent idea, for all of the reasons mentioned above. I think it would have to be a very simple and careful system, like -10kgp for anything except strength, which should be -20kgp. This way you can't actually benefit from injuries, but might be more tempted to keep the player around. A 20kgp value drop for -1Ag would just be too awesome on a non-dodging BoB, and easily exploitable. So, if -10kgp seems like a small compensation for a -1Ag on your thrower, then by all means fire him as you would in CRP. An interesting addition to this would be that having a stat reduced to zero is no longer impossible, and now simply kills the player. This creates an interesting weakness in otherwise very tough Ag1 players, but also means there is a risk involved with accepting unimportant or 'beneficial' stat decreases.
Also, Bank. Bank, bank, bank and bank, just like in NTBB or LRB6. It was a silly mistake that it wasn't in CRP, from what I understand caused by bad communication, and that omission really makes a mess of the game's economics system. Amassing huge treasuries makes some tough teams effectively impervious to damage, and otherwise those money reserves have no bearing on the game, which just seems like lazy game design. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
