39 coaches online • Server time: 00:45
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post [L] OBBA Smack Talk ...goto Post Cindy fumbling after...goto Post FUMBBL HAIKU'S
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Would this slight buff to the Apo be worth considering (assuming ANYONE ever works on the BB rules again)?
Yes
58%
 58%  [ 7 ]
No
33%
 33%  [ 4 ]
Pie all menz!
8%
 8%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 12


Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 07:40 Reply with quote Back to top

The current Apo is a little weak (to say the least). How about the following:

At the end of the game, if either coach has an apothecary(s) remaining each may elect to treat a player who suffered a permanent injury during the game (one attempt per apothecary). Apothecaries used in this way function exactly as during the game.

This would give you a little more flexibility in "holding onto an apo" or using him during the game. Overall player survival isn't really affected much (the coach simply has the option of waiting to see if the apo is needed for a later more crucial injury). This would also increase the value of Wandering Apos as inducements (as they generally aren't considered worth their $).
BillBrasky



Joined: Feb 15, 2005

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 07:48 Reply with quote Back to top

I think they over-thought the apoth situation in light of losing aging.

Seems like a huge advantage to regen teams.

I'm all for the old apoth that works on one guy. That doesn't seem OP to me.
Wreckage



Joined: Aug 15, 2004

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 07:53 Reply with quote Back to top

I think there is nothing wrong with the apo as it is. Not in the least.

EDIT:
In compensation for losing aging it is more than fair. I think to legend in lrb4 had about a 2% chance of success, not accounting for injuries.

Regen teams are certainly qualified for the boost the weakend apo gives them.

Right now, the apo is a strategical tool. It can be used to prevent injuries at a 2/3 chance and to bring a player back into a game at a 100% chance.

Albeit unneccessary in the first place, the rule change would reinterpret the apo into a tool that is solely used for strategical aspects of the game. The dilemma to have to choose between survival and effectiveness is one of the interesting aspects of bloodbowl and forces us to relate to our players fates in a way, we wouldn't otherwise.


Last edited by Wreckage on %b %22, %2015 - %08:%Feb; edited 4 times in total
BillBrasky



Joined: Feb 15, 2005

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 07:54 Reply with quote Back to top

@Wreckage: The current apoth encourages use on a bh or ko in tourneys, and on a perm in open play.

I'd rather have one that always worked.
Sammler_der_Seelen



Joined: Feb 01, 2008

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 08:38 Reply with quote Back to top

APO in lrb4 dös Not work anytime,only on a 2+.but Yeah i think the Old apo nerf was the wrong Move in Times of Po And spiralling expenses.on the other side the game was designed as Short Term Game , These Mass on Games on a Single Team to Kick in Needs alot Time on Board And on a tabletop tourney it Never happend as the Tv is fixed .
bghandras



Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 09:07 Reply with quote Back to top

I think the proposal is no good. The apo should not increase the life expectancy of a player, but should increase the availability. So what I would do is if the apo heals a player fully, then that player stays on the pitch.

_________________
Image
JimmyFantastic



Joined: Feb 06, 2007

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 09:23 Reply with quote Back to top

Craftnburn wrote:
This would also increase the value of Wandering Apos as inducements (as they generally aren't considered worth their $).


I think wandering apos are pretty awesome.

_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby!
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Feb 22, 2015 - 09:46 Reply with quote Back to top

I agree with Bill and Craft. I don't think it's necessarily that the new apo is so bad, it's that the old one was balanced to regeneration, where as the new one is inferior.

Wasn't a question asked recently 'Which would be better for a major Chaos or Nurgle?' And Nurgle was more popular because of regen. That's wrong, they should be equal.

I also agree with Bill's second point about how an apo is used. Using them for KOs and BHs seems a better use, which isn't right IMO.

How about if a player has a remaining reroll, he may use that to use the apo to reroll on any perm injury (except dead).

If successful the MNG stays, but the perm injury has successfully been treated. Encourages more rerolls (which are cheaper than regen) and gives the apo a new roll.

Regen teams get the same deal if for that game they took Igor.
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