46 coaches online • Server time: 16:17
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Crowd funded teams &...goto Post Gamefindergoto Post Another I need a log...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
What do you think?
I like it - seems like it might be a good alterntive to CRP
25%
 25%  [ 8 ]
Not for me - I think I'll stick with CRP thanks
50%
 50%  [ 16 ]
Pie!!!
25%
 25%  [ 8 ]
Total Votes : 32


JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 04:33 Reply with quote Back to top

JackassRampant wrote:
JellyBelly wrote:
JackassRampant wrote:
I'd change Claw so it only works on a natural 8+ on the AV roll. That's enough of a nerf.


Do you mean relative to CRP, so without any nerf to PO? Interesting - do you know what the de-pitch probabilities are for that?
ClawMB: 150/1296 Cas odds, as opposed to 186/1296. it's a reduction of 6/31, just under 20%, from current Claw.

Edit: Lemme do the math on it, I'll get back to you when I do.


The problem for me (as I explained in the pdf) with just changing Claw is that it doesn't do anything about the potency of POMB vs AV7. In my opinion, 58% de-pitch chance (higher than a DP gangfoul) is too high.

_________________
"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!!" Razz
spelledaren



Joined: Mar 06, 2004

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 06:06 Reply with quote Back to top

I've had similar reasonings... about several of the things.

Jelly, it sounds like you'd possibly like my orc and dorf teams I made for the league I might get going at some point. Check it out
https://fumbbl.com/p/ruleset?id=127

_________________
FUMBBL!
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 06:15 Reply with quote Back to top

Probable typo. You say deathroller has a 1 in 6 chance of staying on the pitch. 5+ on a roll would be 8 in 12 chance or 2/3rds chance of staying on wouldn't it?

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
tussock



Joined: May 29, 2011

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 06:20 Reply with quote Back to top

Sorry about CPOMBing your team to bits yesterday, JellyBelly, it doesn't usually work that well, but you did put the expensive AV 9 on the line rather than the cheap AV 7. Smile

Having said that, you'll note that having 4 elves on the pitch was enough to win the game even when the CPOMB was working much better than average. That's not at all unusual.

_________________
ImageImage
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 06:31 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly wrote:
mister__joshua wrote:
I'm not going to comment on everything, but I don't think your dwarf roster hits your goal. You say they're too reliable, but then give tackle to the players that really want it while taking it off the slow players (who can't make as much use of it) and reducing their cost. I think you've actually made them better. Not bad if that's what you wanted, but not your goal.

I also don't think any team should have 3 different 0-16 positions, especially if there's no particular need for it.


Thanks for your comments Mr.J, although it seems we have quite a difference of opinion on the Dwarves. I would think elves/Zons/stunties would be more concerned about mass Block/Tackle across most of a team at low TV, rather than on just two MA5 players.

Regarding the costs, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I've actually increased their cost, relative to the skills they have. I've taken away a core skill that is worth 20k and only dropped the cost by 10k. So, the team will actually cost more at higher TV, compared to a skill-equivalent team in CRP. Part of the reason for that is again because, with the boost to AV9, I was concerned they might be overpowered.


Thing is blockers start to get bloated from the 4th single skill. High TV this is probably a price cut, low TV a price increase. I guess maybe that works to help them where they are weaker along with the cpomb nerf and make them a little weaker to start.

I think I quite like the idea myself of your dwarves, the death roller might be worth taking now!

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 11:51 Reply with quote Back to top

@spelledaren: Thanks for your comments! Your league looks interesting - the Orc team in particular looks very similar to the version I have in this ruleset Smile

@tussock: Hey, no problem, that's the way it goes. Slaanesh love their pain anyway and they'll be back for more! Wink I think part of the reason that the 4 'elves' were able to score was because you were playing Khorne Daemons and most of them have no hands (plus frenzy, bloodlust ..). If it had been elves vs CRP Orcs/Dwarves/Chaos, I'm not sure it would have been the same result after the first half pounding Smile

_________________
"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!!" Razz
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 12:02 Reply with quote Back to top

Matthueycamo wrote:
Probable typo. You say deathroller has a 1 in 6 chance of staying on the pitch. 5+ on a roll would be 8 in 12 chance or 2/3rds chance of staying on wouldn't it?


Hi Matthueycamo. 5+ to get sent off means a roll of 2, 3 or 4 stays on the pitch. There are 6 roll combinations that give 2-4, so by my calculation that is 1/6.

I'm glad you like the look of the Dwarf team, although I don't quite follow why you think they are effectively cheaper at high TV. A team at higher TV with the same skills would cost more in LRB Jelly. Although, I see your point that if their initial cost is a bit higher, that point where they start bloating would be at a higher TV. Still, I think at the point where they are 'optimum', they would be more TV expensive than CRP. The thing is, also, if they start with fewer core skills, their development will be slower and it will take them longer to get to that point (more chance of attrition via gangfouls, Calcium, etc.) Wink

_________________
"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!!" Razz
awambawamb



Joined: Feb 17, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 12:06 Reply with quote Back to top

Mv4 without Block and Tackle?
that stinks of HATE.

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

Image
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 12:13 Reply with quote Back to top

awambawamb wrote:
Mv4 without Block and Tackle?
that stinks of HATE.


Or maybe it's more love towards Gobbos/Flings/Snots? Wink

It sounds like you're a Dwarf-loving coach and I respect that. Although, I don't see why they should have their cake and eat it at both low and high TV, especially if I've reined in your CPOMB menace at high TV .. (plus, given you a more useful deathroller as a bonus)

_________________
"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!!" Razz
Matthueycamo



Joined: May 16, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 14:55 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly wrote:
Matthueycamo wrote:
Probable typo. You say deathroller has a 1 in 6 chance of staying on the pitch. 5+ on a roll would be 8 in 12 chance or 2/3rds chance of staying on wouldn't it?


Hi Matthueycamo. 5+ to get sent off means a roll of 2, 3 or 4 stays on the pitch. There are 6 roll combinations that give 2-4, so by my calculation that is 1/6.

I'm glad you like the look of the Dwarf team, although I don't quite follow why you think they are effectively cheaper at high TV. A team at higher TV with the same skills would cost more in LRB Jelly. Although, I see your point that if their initial cost is a bit higher, that point where they start bloating would be at a higher TV. Still, I think at the point where they are 'optimum', they would be more TV expensive than CRP. The thing is, also, if they start with fewer core skills, their development will be slower and it will take them longer to get to that point (more chance of attrition via gangfouls, Calcium, etc.) Wink


They are cheaper because of being leaner TV wise. The line Dwarfs with block no tackle will be 10k cheaper by the time you exhaust good singles. Once you have MB/G/SF you start your get diminishing returns on single skills for blockers. If tackle now has to be taken then each blocker has to get to 5th skill with singles before seeing reduced returns. So that's 10k cheaper at high TV for pretty much the same effectiveness. Pro is OK but not really worth 20k on a guy not rolling dice that don't cause turnovers and a team that is not usually short of RR. Grab is OK too but something I could do with out. PO is not worth it on a blocker. The changes to Blitzers who suit skills like that better still makes them bloat at a higher level. Right now this is a problem I am facing with my WIL team blockers. The majority of them I would be glad of a 10k drop and have tackle instead of one of their other single skills.

It's not a bad idea, I just feel having played my WIL team for 50+ games. The majority of them in SE facing lots of wizards and other inducements that I would prefer this roster at high TV which would cut off some wizards and stars I have faced but my team is pretty much just as effective.

_________________
Image

DLE College 7s
bghandras



Joined: Feb 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 15:51 Reply with quote Back to top

Worst of both worlds. I prefer lrb4 and crp over the proposal.

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



Joined: Jan 22, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 17:54 Reply with quote Back to top

Nice jelly! I always like it when others are talking dorfs down. (and when I more or less agree with them).. so my comments (issues I fail to mention below is things I am unsure of).

Ratogre - I agree
Orcs - av 8 on line+st acess is ok, but I think 4 blitzers is better than 2.
Khremri- Decay has to go! khremri is too weak right now, decay on the most important position?
Hafling- cheaper chef is great
C-Dorf - good, but call the defenders for blitzers

DORF: the solution is simple, and I have been saying it for as long as I can remember, Blockers need to be nerfed of tackle, and you dont need to give blizers takle to compensate, all dorfs have block as free skill, why should they have 2 free skills (block+tackle) and think skull??
they can be just as they were, without tackle, and with reduced cost for the machine
actually I also like your tackle, standfirm idea, (though only standfirm), but I still think my suggestion is better, but yours is way better than the original.

skills:

piling on: suggestion is great, its too much right now
horns: yes, it was better before, and people need to choose other skills than claw
foul app: cool idea
claw: depends on mb and piling on, but I would rather have it not to stack with mb
(so if you have both skills, you will render claw ineffective vs av 7, and if you have over 7 mb will be useless)
sneaky git: great idea! yes reintroduce "the eye"
stab: I would give +1 to injury

team value and spiralling:
ok, but I think reserves bench should have half cost (half cost for cheapest players over 11).. it gives and extra buffer to consider, and makes it a little easier against bash teams)
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 18:49 Reply with quote Back to top

Well, cheers for posting it Jelly, but I'd decline playing this ruleset! I will outline why though rather than just leave it at that Wink

Quote:
Bash over ball at high tv

That's too generalised a statement, and to be honest, in a one off game I don't particularly see it slanted either way. The issue would be that over consecutive/a series of games then bash is able to continue with more ease - in my opinion that isn't an argument to decrease the effectiveness of bash over all TVs, but to decrease the ease with which it gets to high TV and stays there.

Quote:
Players should never be safer on the ground than on their feet

Fouling I'm on board with. Pretty sure anyone who's ever played me knows why. I'm not sure I like the mechanism of it though - rerolling armour? Bringing back the eye and buffing fouling all serves to try and make fouling a bit more tactical again - but making the buff a reroll (and still +1 injury) just turns it back into a dicey proposition again, with likely fairly little consequence for the player on the deck in my opinion.

Quote:
dwarves and orcs are too reliable out of the box

They probably are.
But I really don't like the fixes at all. 0-16 on 3 players is quite silly, and you've also basically just given any dwarf coach a roster selection that makes a one turn reply require juggs or natural one-turn ability for an investment of 240k.

I don't know why you'd apply the same logic to Cdorfs and then limit their positional selections either. I'm assuming M access is still a double, as you haven't listed it. To be quite honest, given that claw is a double, it's quite possible now to have even cheaper cpombers (albeit without tackle). I'm not sure that's desirable at all, even allowing for different cpomb rules.

I'd remove loner from Goblin trolls.

Khemri keep decay? What? Why?!! Decay has absolutely no in-game effect. It's solely a "screw you" to anyone who actively wants to play Khemri long-term. You can argue that a boost to fouling and claw nerf helps them (it actually doesn't - av6 skeletons?! Who cares about fouling boosts, there will be none on the pitch to foul with), but that's still not going to solve tomb guardians being RIP'd on a badly hurt that goes wrong. As for "MB out the box makes skilling them easier", who cares when you've still got a player who can conceivably make it to legend without having block if his coach doesn't recycle. I think Khemri players would probably even accept "decay makes a player unable to regenerate from badly hurt, but may attempt to regenerate all other injuries to badly hurt" over the current decay, which would be a nerf to in-game play.

Orcs. Nah, just nah. Increased cost on blitzers, dropped allowance, and added S access to linos. I always joke that Orcs are just "green dwarves". But you've literally done that to them. I also think I'd rather play as Chaos than this lineup at low and high tv, which seems to defeat the point of your balancing.

I don't particularly like the wardancer change if I'm honest, and if I were going to change woodies, it'd actually be the catchers I'd look at.


The claw changes just don't work for me. Av5 flings, av4 snots, av6 goblins/skinks/ghouls/slann catchers... Norse, Woodies, skaven, pro elves, Vamps, now almost blanket affected by a skill that effectively did not concern them too much in CRP. Lizardmen and Khemri will love it - Sure, Saurus, Krox, Tomb Guardians will be av8 vs claw, but they'll be the only things left on the pitch after about 5 turns against claw. You're making the game in isolation very, very dicey here, in order to effect a "holistic" change that assumes high TV play.

Your TV changes make minmaxing easier, not harder tbh.



I mean, come on, claw is -1 to AV, tacklepomb less effective, orcs/dwarves/(arguably) cdorks less strong initially, orcs losing blanket av9, no nerfs to elves except a wardancer nerf, the foul changes you described, spiraling expenses raised...

I wouldn't actually need to know your coaching preferences to read that and surmise that you like to play mostly as High Elves. Sorry mate, there's some interesting ideas there, but I don't think it works as a whole. I mean, this would ruin tabletop, absolutely ruin it.

_________________
Image
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 19:23 Reply with quote Back to top

Thanks for the feedback guys. I'm at work atm, but I'll write some more detailed responses later. I have one question for you though AD, why do you think it would ruin tabletop?

_________________
"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!!" Razz
JackassRampant



Joined: Feb 26, 2011

Post   Posted: Aug 08, 2016 - 19:34 Reply with quote Back to top

I just want to see a ClawMB nerf. I think CRP is 99% optimal, just missing one thing: ClawMB does its intended job too well. I even think they should still combo, which is what my proposed nerf does. (I'll do the math on it soon, I promise.) A PO nerf is fine if you don't want killstack to be a major focus, but I think "PO Stun only" is more fun than "PO AV only". Either way is fine.

_________________
What is Nuffle's tree? Risk its trunk, space the branches. Touchdowns are its fruit.
What is Nuffle's lawn? Inches, squares, and Tackle Zones; reddened blades of grass.
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