Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
 Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 09:20 |
 
|
If you go, the last thing you should expect is answers.
Most likely, it will be full of WW staff that know little to nothing about BB, and will be intent on selling you Space Marines, or checking your minis are GW, or shouting ‘Wheeee! Go on, throw that Goblin, Yeah!’. They tend to buy into the ‘whee!’ schtick in the same way these rules have, so I think their heads might explode if you quizzed one of them on whether CRP will be in the new box or what the Strength of a Slann Kroxigor should be.
In the event the new FW team turn up (or have anything to do with this venture at all), the likelihood of them letting you in on their plans is pretty much zero. If they, as yet, have fleshed out plans.
I’m not saying don’t go. I’ve always found WW a pleasant place to spend time. I like the bar, and a lot of the stick it used to get was (I always thought) unwarranted. I think (likely) > £50 for 5, unsanctioned games where winning isn’t the point is probably not for me, but I suspect one of the usual tournament suspects will go and provide a full and frank report.  |
|
|
spubbbba
Joined: Jul 31, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 09:24 |
|
| garyt1 wrote: | What an interesting tournament rule. I suppose it would make stalling less appealing.
League Points earned for Completions, Touchdowns, Casualties, Interceptions and Players Sent Off for Fouling. Whether you win the games doesn’t actually matter… - |
When I first read that I thought the same sort of thing, but on examining the entire page I believe this is either badly worded or a typo.
I think they are talking about prizes for whoever does the most of each of these over the tournament, so just like normal TT tournaments.
The text below is from earlier in that page.
"As usual with our events, there will be a number of prizes on offer for various aspects of the hobby, from painting individual models and whole teams, to specific in-game achievements (such as most Touchdowns, Most Interceptions, etc), sportsmanship, and of course, the XXXXXX League Cup itself." |
_________________
British or British based and looking to join a League?
Then check out theWhite Isle Fringe |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 09:38 |
|
| pythrr wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | http://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/the-bugmans-xxxxxx-league-cup/ |
urgh, is this in cooperation with NAF, or are they going all Premier League on us? |
I believe not.
| Balle2000 wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: | | http://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/the-bugmans-xxxxxx-league-cup/ |
| Games Workshop wrote: | | Rules in use: We will be slightly modifying the Blood Bowl Living Rulebook v.5, last published in 2006. Modifications will include: |
LRB5? |
Could be for any number of reasons. It could mean anything. It could mean they're going with what Cyanide are doing and 'slightly modifying' from LRB5 may mean Cyanide rules(ok doubtful). It could be that whomever made that advert was lazy or doesn't know on LRB from another. I'm not sure about that though as they've gone to the trouble of adding possible changes. It could be they're trying to go back to fluff over competition. MA9 Wood Elf catchers. 80K rerolls for super efficient Dwarfs. Doubtful though.
There is a connection between figure lines and LRB 5 though. This is pre the added races and pre the extra star players. One of the first things they mention is that figures must be GW. They've never done the extra stars but of course they're all covered by 3rd party manufacturers. GW will intend to drive them out of the game if they can.
It's all speculation though and although it makes a couple of things messy I doubt with a bunch of noobs it'll make much difference. More than likely you can play the in game rules how you like (there are only a few differences). |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 10:24 |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 10:42 |
|
I would not confer anything at all about what 'GW intend' from anything we have heard of late, the boxed set announcement through to talk of this tournament. Product development is a difficult beast, and a timeline of 2017 for the box is pretty impressive, even if the intention is (as is most likely) a stripped back black box.
I should think that, at the moment, they've got no further than what some cool new minis might look like.
Events held at WW have always insisted on GW figures, even in the days of CRP. I would be pretty impressed / surprised if someone has done the research to dig out catalogues and various rulesets and plump for one with (several years out of date) 100 % GW model support. It's just as likely that LRB 5 with modifications is a bungled communication of CRP, or the ruleset they found in that dusty draw.
It's always fun / cringe worthy to see the nerds kick off in the darker areas of the BB Internet. When the sky finally falls, they'll all claim they called it! Enough from me, just, you know, quieten the jungle drums very slightly, eh? |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 10:49 |
|
Well they've deliberately said LRB v5 last published in 2006. The fact they know the date and aren't using a more modern version suggests to me they know what they're doing there. However yeah, pure conjecture it could mean anything.
Of all the terrible things they could do.........using LRB5 is know where near the worst. Bar pricing and star availability I doubt it'll make a jot of difference in most matches. It's a bit messy though. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 10:59 |
|
They have said that. They've not said 'other rulesets came afterwards; ignore those!' You're giving the staff too much credit, because you know better than they do!
Anyway. ./out |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 13:23 |
|
So, what would the implication be for FUMBBL, if they put LRB 5 in the new boxed set in 2017? I know it's a rather speculative question right now, although, presumably, those would then revert back to being the 'official' rules?
(personally, I'll be hoping they pick LRB 4 instead, so we can get rid of 'piling awn', lol!) |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!"  |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 13:28 |
|
|
JellyBelly
Joined: Jul 08, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 13:39 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | JellyBelly wrote: | | (personally, I'll be hoping they pick LRB 4 instead, so we can get rid of 'piling awn', lol!) |
We can soften CPOMB without going back to LRB4.  |
Well, not in the 'official' rules, if GW is intent on using one of the published LRBs .. (sorry, I didn't mean to derail the thread into a CPOMB discussion!)
Personally, I'd be kind of surprised if they didn't include Khorne/Brettonians and the CRP races in a new boxed set. I mean, some of them are in the Cyanide game and they must be dying for an excuse to sell more minis (as always).. |
_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2
"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" |
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | They have said that. They've not said 'other rulesets came afterwards; ignore those!' You're giving the staff too much credit, because you know better than they do!
Anyway. ./out |
I love how often Goo tries to leave a conversation unsuccessfully when everyone knows he'll come back the next time someone posts something sensationalist or controversial. We should start a poll. We're at 2 already |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 14:16 |
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | JellyBelly wrote: | | (personally, I'll be hoping they pick LRB 4 instead, so we can get rid of 'piling awn', lol!) |
We can soften CPOMB without going back to LRB4. |
Well, not in the 'official' rules, if GW is intent on using one of the published LRBs .. (sorry, I didn't mean to derail the thread into a CPOMB discussion!)
Personally, I'd be kind of surprised if they didn't include Khorne/Brettonians and the CRP races in a new boxed set. I mean, some of them are in the Cyanide game and they must be dying for an excuse to sell more minis (as always).. |
I'd rather keep CPOMB than go back to LRB4.
I'm not at all bothered about sticking to 'official' rules though. |
_________________
[SL] + Official Stunty teams. Progression KO. Old & new teams welcome. 29th May! |
|
Swiss_Guard
Joined: Jan 03, 2015
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 14:21 |
|
Returning to LRB4? My ogres will be more than happy  |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| JellyBelly wrote: | | So, what would the implication be for FUMBBL, if they put LRB 5 in the new boxed set in 2017? |
It's interesting for sure and something I'll keep an eye on. I won't worry about it for now and will be making a call once there's some substantial information.
I'll certainly end up buying a box for myself though.. Given GW pricing, I might need to start saving now ! |
|
|
NerdBird
Joined: Apr 08, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jan 28, 2016 - 14:55 |
|
I just realized how expensive that is...basically 80 U.S. Doll Hairs! Damn. You should get a free box set for that price. ANd winning doesn't matter? Oh my god...give the fat kid a ribbon for finishing last in the race. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| |
Blackbox Teams
Search
