48 coaches online • Server time: 16:06
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Oly1987



Joined: Oct 02, 2006

Post   Posted: Jan 26, 2015 - 15:27 Reply with quote Back to top

LETS THEORYBOWL!

Clues in the title. If there a reformation of the BBRC what changes would you like to see to rules and teams?

I'll punt the pigskin and get us started.

Rules

Personally I would like to see something to help spread SPP/TV.
I dont have a definitive solution but something like incremental skill costs for 4th skill and higher (Bigger name, bigger wage)
e.g
4th skill auto +10k regardless of skill roll
5th skill auto +20k
6th skill auto +50k (legends are mighty spenny)

If that doesnt float your boat some form of aging (not the lrb4 version)

sneaky git assists fouls regardless of TZ

No change to clawpomb or anything like that. Changing the skill/TV formula should help to balance things

Teams

Amazons need a change, something to make them.... well just different to what they are. Here's my suggestion

0-16 Linewomen 6/3/3/7 dodge G 50k
0-2 Thrower 6/3/3/7 dodge, pass GP 70k
0-2 Catcher 8/2/3/7 dodge, catch GA 70k
0-4 Blitzer 7/3/3/7 block, dodge GS 110k

same RR

mixes up the 6/3/3/7 a bit and diversifies them. Think the human catcher stat line fits zons better. Would like to add a big guy or some kind of specialist position for zons but nothing springs to mind (input your suggestions!).

Humans

0-16 Lineman 6/3/3/8 G 50k
0-2 Throwers 6/3/3/8 sure hands, pass GP 70k
0-4 Catchers 7/3/3/7 dodge, catch GA 80k
0-4 Blitzer 7/3/3/8 Block GS 80k
0-1 Ogre 5/5/2/9 BH,MB,Loner,TTM S 140k

RR 50k

Just a buff to the catchers, slower but stronger and slightly more expensive, blitzers slightly cheaper. Even with cheaper blitzers you cant take all positionals to start without dropping RR/apo so you have something to build towards and helps give the humans a slightly more competitive edge (IMO)

Well thats might 2 cents to get things started. Who knows get enough suggestions and we could make our own unofficial house rule book Wink
kilinrax



Joined: Jan 12, 2015

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 16:55 Reply with quote Back to top

I've been thinking a lot recently about Dark Elf runners. I'm not alone in thinking they're currently of very questionable utility over Line-elves, e.g. this thread or this one.

Basically I see two problems:

  • -1AV for +1MA (vs the line) is a bad trade unless it makes the positional the fastest in the team.
  • Dump-off is a skill of dubious utility and value, especially compared to Sure Hands or Pass (all of the other Thrower/Runner positionals get one or other of these, and three of them get both).

It's difficult to know what to do with them, given delves are already one of the better teams, so don't need anything that would be considered a buff.
Options I've considered:

  • Revert to MA6 AV8. Unlikely to be popular as it regresses them to halfway to a DE thrower.
  • +1 MA / +20kgp would probably make them too close to woodies.
  • +Sure Hands / +10kgp. I like this as Dump-off and SH overlap somewhat: vs Strip Ball, you'd always DO rather than risk a pushback. Understand why it would likely be unpopular, though.
  • +Sprint / +10kgp. Adds another decidedly middling skill, which technically would make them the fastest DE player, though with added risk.

Of these, I think I like the final option most. It's almost the same as the first idea, with the same debuff as was applied to the WE catcher (ok, for 10kgp less - but the WE catcher was already great value, the DE runner isn't). And it seems to fit the fluff.
It's also a skill I've never seen taken on that position, so existing teams would be easy (I'd hope) to convert.

What do other people think? Am I being biased by my love of delves?

I feel like the assassin as currently implemented isn't a great positional either, though I can't think of any way to fix that without radically changing Stab. (For instance; if player actions other than blocks that caused a CAS earned 1SPP. Which would help diving tackle Slann and Gobbos also. Though delves don't need this or the assassin IMO).

P.s. someone needs to apply the same thinking to pro elves, they're clearly the worst of the 4 elf flavours currently.


Last edited by kilinrax on Feb 13, 2015 - 17:24; edited 1 time in total
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 17:09
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

I have loads of thoughts on this, far too many for one post. For me though a lot of it comes down to 'What I miss about old Blood Bowl' vs 'What I think is good for the game'. I think personally, as a competitive ruleset, that CRP is the best Blood Bowl has ever been. For me though Blood Bowl isn't all about competition, and this is what it's lost a lot of over time.

The biggest example of this:
The inducements mechanic. It's good for the game, maybe, but from a fluff perspective it's never made any sense to me. It's contrived at best. It's also made Star Players (previously great fluff) mostly useless and overpriced. We certainly shouldn't be in a situation where inducements are so strong that teams have to actively control their value.

I'd like any new edition to re-work the whole system with an example that's fun, fair, and makes sense. If a smaller team is playing a larger/better one (classic underdog story) there are plenty of realistic bonuses/penalties that can be given. More fans turn up for the small side due to the size of the fixture; players are boosted by the massive adrenaline of the tie; some of the opponents approach the game apathetically due to their minor opponents etc.

Maybe this is a personal bugbear of mine, but this is the No.1 thing I'd look to change in the rules.
RedDevilCG



Joined: Jan 09, 2010

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 17:22 Reply with quote Back to top

Team change: Two Warp Trolls for Underworld Smile

Skill change: Sneaky Git get sent to KO box on ejection by foul.
deyempe



Joined: Aug 14, 2013

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 17:50 Reply with quote Back to top

I think things should work on a D8 instead of a D6. At least for dodging, passing and catching.. 1's wouldn't ruin mylife as often!
Garion



Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 18:06 Reply with quote Back to top

deyempe wrote:
I think things should work on a D8 instead of a D6. At least for dodging, passing and catching.. 1's wouldn't ruin mylife as often!

yes but they would be even more annoying when they do Very Happy

_________________
Image
Joemanji



Joined: Jan 15, 2011

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 18:08 Reply with quote Back to top

deyempe wrote:
I think things should work on a D8 instead of a D6. At least for dodging, passing and catching.. 1's wouldn't ruin mylife as often!
In a perfect world you could shift everything to a D12 scale without changing any of the core mechanics, all it would do is flatten out the extremes of the 'Rule of 1 and 6'. Not that I'm really suggesting this, it would be physically clunky to be rolling all those D12. I'd just be interested to see how it played out.

_________________
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 18:45 Reply with quote Back to top

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.

Pesonally I'd like to see different dice used. However I familiar with the game. To somebody looking in, the difficulty of the game can really put you off.

I remember how nervous and lost I was starting Warhammer back in 3rd edtion, the dice definitely added to that.

GW have gone out of their way to simplify their games, and one way was by cutting down the dice. However for example, I'd like to see gfi's done on a d8. I'd like to see a bit more effort put in by the players.....they stroll about too much.

A d8 could also possibly bring the passing game a bit more into the mix.


Last edited by harvestmouse on Feb 13, 2015 - 18:45; edited 1 time in total
Roland



Joined: May 12, 2004

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 18:45 Reply with quote Back to top

I like plasmoids crp+ suggestions.
Wreckage



Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:12 Reply with quote Back to top

For Fumbbl it might make sense to move away from the tabletop format alltogether and rather operate with complex algorythms.

If not, or if a compromising solution is desired, I find individual pricing of skills could go a long way. It's not overly complex, you just open the rulebook and check the cost of a skill.

Price increase for doubles should be slightly lower (than the current 10k). Stat ups probably too (they are hard to get and should be at least a little bit rewarding.)

Top skills may be tuned down a bit and standardised.

+1 on fouls.

Piling-on only on Armor.

Do something with SG.

The cheapest players on the team should add reduced team value to the team. Make each player after the 11th have reduced value (maybe 50%, or some other cost)... for tabletop purposes one could give out two prices for players: One buy-in price, which is identical to the regular player price, aswell as a reduced price for TV calculation.

Lets say we have a dwarf team. Then the team could look like this:

Longbeards: 70 (50)

Since positionals can't really exceed 11 players anywhere (except for orcs) it may be aswell enough to just reprice the longbeards.

Human Linemen: 50(30)
High Elf Linemen: 70 (40)
Skinks: 80 (50)
Halflings: 30 (20)
Goblins: 40 (20)
Ork Linemen: 50 (30)

Flings, is a toss up between 10&20, 10 may be a little too cheap for a so badly needed player.

Skinks, toss up between 40&50, chose to go with start value as a player. Skinks are useful off the bat, so went with 50.

HE, same consideration as with skinks, not useful of the bat.

Ork&Humans, between 20&30, but at these low prices 20 would just be too low for a full fledged player.



What else... probably do something about dodge and tackle. Can make games really one sided. Finding a proper balance with skills is rather hard tho.
For instance FA and SF were torn apart in LRB5 and have ever since lost any relevance.

Afaic, FA & Disturbing Presence = one skill was just fine, so may as well have that again.
RedDevilCG



Joined: Jan 09, 2010

Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:30 Reply with quote Back to top

SF has no relevance? This is one of my top skills for big guys. The utility it gives to guard, and how it prevents revenge surfing is amazing. It stalls cages in the most annoying way as well.

It's even great on ST4. Flesh Golems made me really appreciate it.


    Last edited by RedDevilCG on Feb 13, 2015 - 19:32; edited 1 time in total
    Dominik



    Joined: Oct 29, 2004

    Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:32 Reply with quote Back to top

    I like the idea that experienced players are sometimes recommended to stay active and keep their permanent injuries. This makes many players unique and adds a lot of joy to the game. Why not keep a +ST -MA -Ma Blodge BoB for example? Of course the rules have to change in order to encourage this. Niggling injurjes shouldn't automatically force the (experienced) player to retire. Eradicate those 08/15 rosters!
    Short and simple: It should be rewarding to keep good but permanently hurt players up to a certain point.

    Proposal: A -Ma/-Av stat decrease reduces the TV by 10, -AG by 20 and -St by 30. Players whose initial St was higher than whose Ag, eg Nurgle Warriors, get a -10 reduction only on a -Ag but 40 on a -St.
    On Gutter Runners, -Ma and -Ag are more reduced than -St is.


    Last edited by Dominik on Feb 13, 2015 - 19:46; edited 4 times in total
    Wreckage



    Joined: Aug 15, 2004

    Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:34 Reply with quote Back to top

    harvestmouse wrote:

    I'd never heard of the term minmaxing before this version.

    I'm not sure what they did before they invented TS. But I imagine it must have been terrible.
    Nobody called it abuse then but IIRC it was quite common to try to manage TR in a way that it would not exceed TS.
    Maybe what you would need is something similar as an orientation to make it easier (fairer for all) to min-max.
    But just to show that even TS was abused before (and I believe the term min-max was already used then), there was for instance an in built TS reduction for teams with 0 RR. Rookie Coaches would often not realise importance of RR and were supposed to get a little bit help this way.
    Teams designed around leader and proper skills like dwarves used to swarm the lower box levels in an attempt to exploit that.
    Since it was a house made model, C was a bit faster in correcting such things, while with actual rules there is just more hesistance.

    Quote:
    To somebody looking in, the difficulty of the game can really put you off.

    The type of games GW and specialist games represent are rather very complicated.
    BB in comparison is pretty simple to gather I believe. The biggest obstacle to explaining the game are probably the assist rules.
    A beginner probably would have problems to manage a legend team, but he doesn't have to.
    I think whats probably more offputting is the mix of sport and board game... at least that was it for me... if I wanna do sport I go outside. To sit down and roll dice and to pretend to do sport (not even something like war or something but just sport) that looks a bit... humiliating from the outside.

    Quote:

    A d8 could also possibly bring the passing game a bit more into the mix.
    When I started it actually bothered me the most. The '1' on a d6 just shows up too often to ever do something safely. So I believe that is a huge source of frustration.
    Probably a good idea, that would even help beginners.


    Last edited by Wreckage on Feb 13, 2015 - 19:47; edited 1 time in total
    Roland



    Joined: May 12, 2004

    Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:34 Reply with quote Back to top

    Fa and SF?
    harvestmouse



    Joined: May 13, 2007

    Post   Posted: Feb 13, 2015 - 19:36 Reply with quote Back to top

    I thought about that Dominik. What if.......the injuries were rolled before the match (like old niggle) or old niggle only missed for a half. Or old niggle missed but didn't add to TV.

    I think I agree with pretty much every Wreckage had to say, and about injured players from Dominik.
    Display posts from previous:     
     Jump to:   
    All times are GMT + 1 Hour
    Post new topic   Reply to topic
    View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic