60 coaches online • Server time: 18:41
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post A Very Steely Setup ...goto Post Welcome Newcomers - ...goto Post Is kicking first wit...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 20, 2016 - 14:15
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Cheers for the feedback Dach

Dach wrote:
Throw-in: I like the intention but D3 is too short. Would prefer D6.

I'll have a look at it, but I just don't see the crowd throwing the ball that far. The idea with D3 is that it's less swingy than a long throw.

Dach wrote:
Pick-up: Uncontested rule isn't needed. Why everyone need to be 2+ to pick-up is beyond me. Kickoff Return boost seem enough.

Fluff-wise it never made sense to me that competent humans had such a hard time picking up a regular ball off the floor, which drove the change. I don't think failing a backfield pick-up is a very satisfying turnover, and it's one that newer players do a lot by going for the ball too early in the turn.

Dach wrote:
Wizard: Wizard price still 150k? This is not clear in the pdf. Does hiring a wizard add 150k to the value of your team for opponent levellers? Also if no one hire wizard, opponent can't take it from levellers, do you want to remove wizard from the game?

I'll have a look at that, there were a lot of changes in that section and maybe it isn't clear. The intention is that it costs 150, and does add to TV. Correct you can't 'level' a wizard, though either team could freeboot one. It's to prevent being lower TV + wizard being better than higher TV (so reducing minmaxing a little)

Dach wrote:
Niggling: I feel adding the +1 game to miss next game will add to people booting player out as soon as possible. From a fluff point of view this is great. But rulewise this is unneeded.
Even more so than niggling player don't get minus value.

I think niggles do reduce value. Maybe that wasn't clear.

Dach wrote:
Big hand: Automatic success in BB, that's a no! The current skill rule is fine.

I don't think the old skill rule is in line with the new power level of skills, which the new one aims to be.

Dach wrote:
Catch: Would rename to Ball Handling or Dexterous.

It probably could do with renaming yes, but I wend for the familiarity of the old skill names.

Dach wrote:
Death Roller: This is unclear... "Every block count as foul for the purpose of sending off" Does that mean the Death roller get +1 to armor roll for every block he make and add his strength too? Does that mean for every double on armor he make he can get send off? Both?

It means that it gets send off on doubles for armour rolls, like a saw does. I'll look at clarifying that.

Dach wrote:
Block: If dodge get optional, block should be too.

The optional stuff is a carry-over from the WhatRuleBook. I'll look at it.

Dach wrote:
Pass block: Conflict with Diving Catch, who get priority on a inaccurate pass?

I tried to make it clear in the wording that Diving catch gets priority, with Pass block acting based on the catchers new position. Maybe that failed. I'll review it.

Dach wrote:
Shadowing: The free block/stab feel too much, even more that you buffed stab.

Well Shadowing and Stab are hardly used now. Is it enough to make people choose them over Block? Maybe. I quite like them as they are but I'll see how it plays.

Dach wrote:
Wild Animal: 3+ is uncalled for when Bone head or Very stupid doesn't get changed... Need to stay 4+. They also all get +1 AV. Too much buff.

Having quite a bit of experience with WAs, they're simply terrible. I love them, but they are. with 3+ WA, no Loner and +AV I think they're just about worth their TV, but I'd still choose a Troll over them.

Dach wrote:
Vampire rosters: Dunno maybe re-roll at 60k, don't think they need more buff. They can lose blood lust now.

Maybe, yeah. When I created the Vamp roster it wasn't considering the removal of traits.

Dach wrote:
NB: - Inspiration description is missing some parts?!?
- Wizard and player down? It's in or not... not clear in the pdf.
- Throw Team-Mate, This part need to be striked. "(i.e., he cannot land on more than one player)"

Overall, this is great. Would totally play that.


Cheers, I'll look at those.

@Traul: Ok ta, I'll take a look. The Bull changed a few times so it's probably just a mistake I left in Smile

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 20, 2016 - 14:33
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

With all that being said, now that Custom Rosters are active I'll be focusing on this aspect of the system for a while. My Amazon roster is already up. If you import a roster into a ruleset and search for Amazon you'll see mine below the official one.

I'll add the rest as I can. It's currently not accepting new rosters.

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Jun 20, 2016 - 17:32
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Chaos added

I'll continue with the rest tomorrow. This is great! Very Happy

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
JuggerGonzo



Joined: Dec 23, 2014

Post   Posted: Sep 16, 2016 - 06:59 Reply with quote Back to top

I don`t like WE catchers. You just made them better Gutter Runners then gutter runners.
awambawamb



Joined: Feb 17, 2008

Post   Posted: Sep 16, 2016 - 08:21 Reply with quote Back to top

maybe set up a league?

_________________
"la virtú sta nel cielo e nella terra, ma anche nelle nuvole e nelle stelle"

Image
bghandras



Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Sep 16, 2016 - 08:24 Reply with quote Back to top

MJ is very busy these days, so if you want it, dont wait for him, do it yourself.

_________________
Image
"This is turning into the best thing on FUMBBL" - Seventyone
"THIS LEAGUE IS AWESOME!!!!" - Kummo
"Last league i would leave." - SpecialOne
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Sep 16, 2016 - 11:11
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

I'd love to see these rosters used in a league. I think they're pretty solid and want to see how they play. Unfortunately, as bgh said, I don't really have time to run it at the moment. If someone wanted to though I'd be happy to put in the initial setup work.

I planned to run the league in a highlander style under the HUBBA name. Hubba redux or something like that. I didn't launch it initially as I didn't want it to get lost in the glut of new leagues but then I haven't had time to revisit it. Actually managing the league should be easy as there's no extra rules etc, just forfeiting games and starting tournaments. Anyone could do it, even with no previous experience of league admin.

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
SunDevil



Joined: Dec 13, 2010

Post   Posted: Nov 21, 2016 - 00:14 Reply with quote Back to top

(Note - After rereading this, I appear to be very critical. That was not my intent! I enjoy roster design a great deal and I give my heartfelt thanks and respect to anyone who tries to tweak this game we love. So while I may not agree, thank you to the OP for attempting this!)

My two cents -

Amazons - I do not think this roster needs fixing. Yes, they are all the same stat line. Which makes them UNIQUE among all BB teams. I find it unfair to look at them alone and say 'bland, all the same' without seeing how unique they are among all the BB races. Your changes (and, to be fair, all proposed changes to this roster I've seen) only serve to homogenize them. Do we want more teams to be MORE alike? Not me. They are already a terrific tournament team and a very good league team. Why do we want to make them BETTER? Take them on as a challenge or play a less-challenging roster.

Chaos - As mentioned earlier, removing Loner from the Big Guys is a HUGE mistake. It flies in the face of years of playtesting and player creation. How do you make the Minotaur so much better and not raise his cost? Then you remove the M access from the team...which is kind of their entire point of being? I just don't see the point of these changes. If the KillStack is an issue, address that, don't ransack the roster. (That said, I've long been ad advocate of raising the AV of every big guy in the entire game by +1 to make them more playable. Not more reliable, that misses the point of big guys.)

CDs - I'm all for nerfing this roster a bit, and removing Tackle certainly does that as well as makes them even more different from their Dwarf cousins. But the M does make sense in the fluff, has for decades. CDs are slavers that use Hobgoblins to mine for them. And what is mined in this universe? Warpstone. Which mutates creatures that come into contact with it. Removing the access because you claim it is only used for Claw is not good game design. Maybe Claw needs to be reworked, or the other Mutations made better, or something else. But the M access does indeed make sense for the CDs and to claim otherwise simply because you believe coaches take too much Claw is too much of a reach.

Chaos Pact - I hate to seem like a downer but the changes here just seem to say, "This roster was too hard. So I made it easier." None of these changes are needed. They actually remove all fluff from the team and make it much less interesting. Coaches around here put work into every team and have varying amounts of success with each roster. Do coaches elsewhere really just want every roster to be Tier 1 with no challenge? I do admit that I wish the big guys on this roster got M access on regular rolls.

Dark Elves - I'd simplify this a bit and just make the Assassins 7MV for the same price. The Side seems unnecessary. Sure, it would be fun to have. But does the roster need it? The MV increase I totally agree with you on.

Dwarves - To prove I'm not here just to argue, I openly endorse the loss of Tackle on the Longbeards (and the keeping of the Longbeard name) because the mass Tackle makes certain matches of BB absolute jokes. Though I would balance the roster a bit by giving Tackle to the Blitzers for free. Makes the Blitzers unique in all of BB and give the team at least some starting Tackle to deal with Elves. As it stands, the Blitzers are almost included on teams exclusively for their 3AG. Which is weird for a Blitzer.

Elf - I laughed out loud when I saw the "Fine as is" comment. Just goes to show what a wide variety of opinions we all have on these rosters! This roster is so good and, at the same time, so unnecessary that I would just cut the roster altogether. They have no theme, no fluff, no reason to exist when we have three other good-to-very-good Elf rosters. Waste of a roster slot. Yes, mechanically they are very good. They have won both of our league titles. But they are a blank slate, they look like an untested, broken roster that someone bribed to be included. Actually, bribery would give them SOME flavor at least!

Goblins are my favorite roster. Hands down. But this is not the change they need. The main problem with the Goblin roster is that it is the only team in BB that allows your OPPONENT to dictate how you play the main point of the team - the Secret Weapons. Your opponent can score fast and get them ejected, or grind you and force them in for a single turn before getting them ejected. Cheap bribes are nice but do not solve the problem. Goblin teams should simply be allowed to field less than 11 players if they wanted. Totally fits the theme of cheating and doesn't break the roster or the game. Removing the Loner just mimics the change made to the Fling roster. It works for Flings, not for Goblins.

High Elves - Big changes here with no playtesting. Again, I just don't find the High Elf roster so terrible as to need blowing up and rebuilding, which is what this roster amounts to.

Humans - We've advocated for 7337 Catch, Dodge Human Catchers on 3DB for months so I certainly agree with you here. I wouldn't even raise their price. But again with the losing Loner! Madness!

Khemri - Your changes are not terrible here. I would also like to remove Decay from the Guardians. I'd simply trade it for Break Tackle and raise their cost to 120K. The four Ras all get Thick Skull for free as they were costed for a roster that included four Mummies, then never changed when the roster was nerfed. Lastly, I'd trade the Pass skill for Fend on the Thro-Ra. More teams in BB should be power running teams and not have a 'passer' shoe-horned in.

Norse - Agree that Thrower should be dropped. Not every team needs a Thrower (looking at you, Norse, Orcs, Khemri) and the Runner has Dauntless because he is a crazy Norseman and would rather run through an opponent than go around. Very flavorful and makes him unique. What other team as a Runner that wants to hit you? We need MORE of this diversity in BB, not less. I don't mind the Yeti getting +AV as I think all bigs in the entire game should have +1 AV.

Nurgle - I like the inclusion of the name Plaguebearer, I would simply change Nurgle Warror to this. But I'd keep the Pestigors. The Pestigors (a second positional) are what make Nurgle different from the Chaos roster, yet you remove them to 'differentiate" them from the Chaos roster? Nah, the name change alone is enough.

Ogres - Do not give them Goblins. Goblins play for to many teams as it is. The Snotlings are terrible players to be sure, but that is the point! This roster is very tough to play, which is , again, the point! If we have to improve the team at all, give the Snots +1 MA. More Ogres and adding Goblins is too good and just homogenizes the roster.

Orcs - Blitzers up in cost? No problem there. I'd remove the Troll and Goblins as no team this good should have a TTM option. Make it an actual ORC team and make Goblins and Trolls more unique are rarer to see on the pitch in BB. I'd tweak the Thrower as well since Orcs should never be throwing unless in desperation.

Slann - Blitzer cost down is a widely agreed upon change so good there. I really hope tournaments and leagues across the world keep including the Slann and don't drop them just because GW is leaving them out of the new edition because they don't make Slann minis and others do.

Undead are one of the best teams in all of BB from top-to-bottom. League play, tournaments, etc. And you want to make them BETTER with cheaper linemen? I do not get this. Roster is fine as is unless someone thinks it needs to be nerfed, which I could understand much better than this proposed change.

Vamps are such a good team! Yes, they take a while to get going. But 50K rerolls? Way, way too good. Vamps have 4ST, 4AG and all the best skill access. Plus, at least 4 different ways to deal with Bloodlust. Coaches - work on your positioning and take on the challenge. This roster does not need improving, we coaches just need to toughen up.

Wood Elves - If you want to nerf the Dancer a bit, fine. But 'redressing' the Catcher change is not needed. Sprint instead of 9MA makes them different than Skaven and the Woodies are STILL a top-tier team. How do they need IMPROVING? And you want to take Loner off the Tree? Sweet Nuffle, the Wood Elf coaches would love you!

Again, thanks for taking the time to do this and share your passion for BB with us. My main concern is that many of these changes seek to bring so many teams to the roughly same playable level as to dull much of the variety and flavor of BB.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary. Smile
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 21, 2016 - 20:38
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Cheers for the feedback SunDevil. I'll try and respond to each of your points without it sounding like I'm being defensive. I think some of your comments are valid, some are just different opinions, and several miss the point of the changes. We'll come to that later though Wink


Amazons - I'd argue that whether all players having the same stat line is 'unique' or 'boring' is an opinion. I didn't though say that I made changes cos Amazons were boring or bland, I said it was because they were too strong at low TV but weak at high TV. It's not about 'homogenizing' them, it's just altering what I felt made their development cycle better. Increasing their cost at low TV while making them a bit better at high TV by bumping a couple of key stats on the more expensive players.

Chaos - There's been a pretty even split on this issue, so to say it's a huge mistake is harsh. It certainly doesn't fly in the face of years of playtesting. I'm not sure what edition introduced Loner, but it wasn't there originally. Big Guys couldn't use re-rolls, but could remove negative traits when they were first introduced. If Big Guys had experienced 'years of playtesting' then I'd argue someone should have picked up on the fact that most of them are useless and not picked on their teams. This isn't really a Chaos issue though, as Loner was removed from everywhere. Being completely unreliable isn't the point of big guys, they're meant to be fun, hulking brutes, unpredictable but ultimately a cool addition to the BB field.
The Minotaur cost wasn't raised as I felt he was overpriced, as (under CRP, and in my opinion) he's the worst AND most expensive Big Guy.
M access isn't the 'point of the roster' at all. LRB4 Chaos didn't have M access on normal rolls. I've made M access the 'point' of 3 other rosters when you look at the rosters as a whole. The killstack is part of the issue, maybe, but there isn't another way to address it at a roster level, which is what this project is.

CDs - Removing Tackle doesn't make them different from the Dwarves, it's to make them the same. I'm undecided on the M access. There's a discussion in the thread if you look that discusses the fluff merit for M access. In different edition CDs both have and haven't mutated. I always saw BB CDs as the 'big hat' kind, but giving them M access back is a change I'd consider making.
Again, Claw can't be reworked in a Rosters project.

Chaos Pact - I don't really get your comments on this one at all. Are you saying that the Pact roster I proposed is 'Tier 1' because the big guys lost Loner and got M access, while the Marauders lost P and S access? I think if anything the roster is a little worse than it was before, but it should be more fun to play, as the fun-sucking elements (like animosity and Loner) have been removed while the more fun elements (the varied player types and Big Guys) have been enhanced. It was really nothing to do with being hard or easy.... I don't even know where you'd get that from with this roster. And I've played Pact more than most teams.

Dark Elves - The assassins could lose Side Step, I agree. I'm not sure they'd see as much play though and the idea was to increase their usage and thus increase the amount of Stab we see.

Dwarves - Tackle on Blitzers was an idea that'd been floated before, and one I considered (I think there's something on this somewhere in the thread). I'm open to it, but wanted to see how it played like this first. (all rosters are beta, effectively)

Elf & High Elf - This, I'll admit, is where your comments started to annoy me a little. You seem to be critical without any reason or aim. You've gone on about uniqueness, but when I've taken 2 very similar rosters and changed one considerably you've argued that one (the one I changed) was fine before, while the other should be removed completely!? Waste of a roster 'slot' like they're in some way limited? The history and background of the Pro Elf roster (which I thought you'd know) is discussed in the thread, and it's a nod to second edition team that had a lot of fluff and background. High Elves have a roster that's very similar, while not (to me) really screaming 'High Elves' which are regimented, organised. White Lions are a strong, axe wielding unit in WHFB, yet here they're catchers. I tried to address this by making the high elves something unique among elves.
To also comment that a project has 'no playtesting' is just bad form. Of course it has no playtesting. That's why I'm posting it on a forum and asking people to create teams.

Goblins - I don't think Goblins necessarily needed a change at all. The change here was part of the general change to Big Guys. I love the Goblin roster.
Again, the changes you suggest are outside the scope of a rosters project.

Humans - I hadn't read this change before, but I don't listen to 3DB so I don't know when you started talking about it. This project is nearly 18 months old, so maybe someone read it here Smile
I think the change warrants an increase in price. And I get that this point that you're a massive fan of the Loner skill, so there's no need to keep mentioning it.

Khemri - Not terrible? Thanks! I like the TGs as they are. Break Tackle is a common skill pick for them, but not synonymous enough with them to be a starting skill imo. I don't get your other comment? They're in a roster that has 4 mummies aren't they? Maybe I don't understand what you mean. I'm not a massive fan of the 'passer' Throw-Ra but always thought it was a nice nod to the Khemri archers that adorned WHFB with their move-shooting hordes.

Norse - The team already has lots of players that want to hit you. Giving this to the runners as well is nonsensical imo. No team has runners that want to hit you, because it's not diverse it's stupid. Why call him a runner if he's just running around hitting people? Why not instead make him better at running (something the team sorely lacks).

Nurgle - We must be miles away in what differentiate means if a name change is enough to achieve it in your eyes. The Pestogors (clones of the chaos beastman) are what makes them different? I don't get this at all. My Nurgle was one of the rosters I agonized over for the longest but I'm happy with the change. They're now different from Chaos in playstyle, not just name. They're slower and struggle to run the ball as much, but have more 'denial' options such as Disturbing Presence and Tentacles.

Ogres - The goblins are again a nod to second edition (as a lot of current BB is). I aren't totally sold on the idea, but would like to give it a try. Ogres was a really tough one to do and I've never been 100% happy with it.

Orcs - Orcs are, along with humans, the BB staple which is why they have a thrower and a Big Guy. The Orcs/Goblins is a natural fit although goblins do seem to get everywhere. I'm not sold on removing them though. I've yet to see an Orc team attempt a TTM, but I'm sure it does happen occasionally. That just increases fun and dead goblins though.

Undead - This wasn't a change I made at first, but was a later one when I decided it would be good for a roster set to have player 'types' that were the same, eg. this is the stat line of a skeleton. It came from the Khemri roster so was added in here. I'd like to see how it plays out. Skellies aren't used as much as Zombies currently anyway, so maybe we'd see more of them. I don't think it makes them so much better though.

Vamps - They really aren't. Vamps with a lot of skills and a good smattering of stat increases are a good team. Rookie vamps are a frustration for most coaches. I don't see how an extra re-roll at team creation makes them way way too good. That's dramatically overstating things.

Wood Elves - The catcher change always felt like an artificial fudge, which is why I wanted to redress it. The rest of a wood elf team are faster than their high elf counterparts. Why not the catchers? I don't think it changes much, they're expensive and Str2. They may see more play in starting rosters over the Dancers though, which would be a nice change.


Foornote: "Again, thanks for taking the time to do this and share your passion for BB with us. My main concern is that many of these changes seek to bring so many teams to the roughly same playable level as to dull much of the variety and flavor of BB."

Well that is the opposite of both my stated aim, and what I think these changes achieve. Some teams have their power level at certain TVs adjusted. Some don't. Variety isn't based on a tier system, but rather different playstyles and options within rosters. Just my opinion, obviously.

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
Pauper69



Joined: Aug 07, 2016

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2016 - 01:14 Reply with quote Back to top

For Dwarves, why not leave tackle on the long beards, but set a hard limit on how many a team can have.
garyt1



Joined: Mar 12, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 15, 2016 - 03:10 Reply with quote Back to top

Great comments Sundevil. Other than those on Ogres and snotlings. You loon.

_________________
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.”
meatball20



Joined: Jul 27, 2016

Post   Posted: Dec 22, 2016 - 03:09 Reply with quote Back to top

Are star players available for other teams in the league? They aren't for the pact...the roster has a note about revised star player list for the pact, so I wasn't sure if it was turned off just for them or for everyone.
pythrr



Joined: Mar 07, 2006

Post   Posted: Dec 22, 2016 - 04:27 Reply with quote Back to top

orcs are nerfed big time by easy access to claw.

they are only 80% of the team they used to be.

_________________
Image
Image
mister__joshua



Joined: Jun 20, 2007

Post   Posted: Dec 22, 2016 - 08:05
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

I may not have added the Star Players in. I'll take a look when I can. Cheers

_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude

Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
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
Powered by PNphpBB2 1.2 © 2003 PNphpBB Group
Credits