kummo
Joined: Mar 29, 2016
|
 Posted:
May 22, 2017 - 22:14 |
 
|
| Lorebass wrote: | | its perfect when an opposing team grabs a kickoff and immediately cages up! |
if you are woodies or skaven |
|
|
Burnalot
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 22, 2017 - 22:59 |
|
| licker wrote: | I feel that the stupification of BB has begun (or continued for those who felt that way about CRP) with this rule set.
Not impressed, nor pleased with any of it. My feeling is the developers spent too much time playing Hearth Stone and the idiocy contained in that game has rubbed off on them. |
I pretty much have to agree, although these are not too bad yet. |
_________________
If Jah is by my side, how can I be afraid? |
|
Lorebass
Joined: Jun 25, 2010
|
| kummo wrote: | | Lorebass wrote: | | its perfect when an opposing team grabs a kickoff and immediately cages up! |
if you are woodies or skaven |
Naw for everyone! most players cage up withing 6 tiles of the LoS or closer! mind you easier for agility it does mean BALL STEALS FOR ALL! |
|
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 22, 2017 - 23:35 |
|
The Master Mage looks a lot like a Gnome Mad Bommaz with Hail Mary Pass.
Don't we all like Bommazes with HMP?
I think we do. |
_________________
There is always Sneaky Git. |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
May 22, 2017 - 23:36 |
|
| thoralf wrote: | The Master Mage looks a lot like a Gnome Mad Bommaz with Hail Mary Pass.
Don't we all like Bommazes with HMP?
I think we do. |
Some people miss their old flames more than they enjoy having fun with a new fling. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| licker wrote: | I feel that the stupification of BB has begun (or continued for those who felt that way about CRP) with this rule set.
Not impressed, nor pleased with any of it. My feeling is the developers spent too much time playing Hearth Stone and the idiocy contained in that game has rubbed off on them. |
I don't get this point of view at all, honestly. Blood Bowl has always been stupid, or always should have been. That's half the point. Some people take their Blood Bowl wholly too seriously  |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 10:46 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | | licker wrote: | I feel that the stupification of BB has begun (or continued for those who felt that way about CRP) with this rule set.
Not impressed, nor pleased with any of it. My feeling is the developers spent too much time playing Hearth Stone and the idiocy contained in that game has rubbed off on them. |
I don't get this point of view at all, honestly. Blood Bowl has always been stupid, or always should have been. That's half the point. Some people take their Blood Bowl wholly too seriously |
While you are right MJ people do take the game too seriously at times, nevertheless this view point does bug me and I see it a lot on BB forums.
There is no reason rule design cannot cater for the more "hardcore" or "serious players" and add "fun" to proceedings. They aren't mutually exclusive.
The (In)famous Coaching Staff rules are just pointless for half of them (chaos, Skaven and Elf) they wont be taken by anyone with sense. Then the other half are fine albeit clunky and not needed.
The crap wizard will be taken, the goblin one will once maxed out on bribes already, and the Norse/Zon cheerleader thing may pop up from time to time.
The main thing that bugs me with these is they should have been special cards, put in to appropriately priced decks, rather than over loading the inducement selection. Its pretty clunky really. The rules seem over written and not very elegant. I guess the correct words would be its not very streamlined, and the game seems to be getting less streamlined.
I think licker has a point really. Rather than focus on fixing some of the flaws in the previous edition they've just added in a bunch of stuff that mostly pointless.
I guess the main positive is the core game is fine and unchanged |
_________________
 |
|
Kondor
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 11:11 |
|
Garion,
That is exactly why these changes do not bother me. Who cares if no one on Fumbbl ever takes some of these coaches. They add flavor without unbalancing the game.
Cards would have been a different route to go but you would then have the people complain that they do not want to spend gold on a card that could either be a game winner or a dud. Why take the risk. With this you know exactly what you are getting and the price you are paying for it. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 11:36 |
|
It it not so much these specific changes as feeling that rule changes are likely to be crap. As Fumbbl is committed to using official rules, the main divisions will get whatever crap is pumped out.
I'm not keen on the steady drip, drip of new rules.
If they don't really affect the core rules fair enough.
I'd have kept the old wizard though (and given him zap). I hope we'll get the option to have both wizards available but a coach can only hire one. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 12:24 |
|
| Kondor wrote: | Garion,
That is exactly why these changes do not bother me. Who cares if no one on Fumbbl ever takes some of these coaches. They add flavor without unbalancing the game.
Cards would have been a different route to go but you would then have the people complain that they do not want to spend gold on a card that could either be a game winner or a dud. Why take the risk. With this you know exactly what you are getting and the price you are paying for it. |
I'm down with keeping changes to a minimum, we don't need the boat to be rocked much. Its just too many of these rules to date are pointless, long winded and clunky. Why give us a bad version of a wizard in an inducement list when we have wizards coming in the next book? I dunno, it just does not fit with an inducements very nicely, its not streamlined. It would have been much better on an appropriately costed deck of cards. Just not to my taste.
Overall the book is great for fun optional rules, the background is excellent and art work and background,(apart from 1 page where an orcs arm isn't coloured in, and a background error on page 1).
I just think its a shame they made these ones "official" as they smell like optional ones. |
_________________
|
|
AzraelEVA
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 12:28 |
|
| Garion wrote: | The (In)famous Coaching Staff rules are just pointless for half of them (chaos, Skaven and Elf) they wont be taken by anyone with sense. Then the other half are fine albeit clunky and not needed.
|
Skaven are are really good to keep up your fodder linemen up and running. If I had the option for clan mors i would certainly take him over a bribe.
The chaos shaman can give you 6 mutations for the second half(for the price of 80k). Which is really good for an early Nurgle or Chaos Renegade team. And the option 4 (tent preh tail) 6 (extr arms two heads) 7(claw and horns) and 8 are really good
a 4 on one of your Big Guys on a tv1000 Chaos Renegade team can win you the game or haveing an Elf instead of Pestigor can give you the edge to get that touchdown in.
| Garion wrote: |
I'm down with keeping changes to a minimum, we don't need the boat to be rocked much. |
And that's why hardcore player and fun are mutually exclusive because you don't want change. Any rule update that isn't the same as the old rules are by your definition unnecessary.
Fun rules increases the randomness a hardcore player tries by definition to keep the randomness to a minimum. |
Last edited by AzraelEVA on %b %23, %2017 - %12:%May; edited 2 times in total |
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
I get what you're saying Garion. For me CRP was a hardcore ruleset. It contained no fluff and lots of mechanics. My preference is 3rd edition, when I had Deathzone with a ton of cards and a compendium full of silly options like stadiums, racial wizards and Big Guys (their first introduction). Each to their own, for sure.
I too believe BB can cater to both serious and fun game types, but to suggest this is the 'stupification' of blood bowl implies that up until now it's all been serious and hardcore. At worst it's a 're-stupification' or, as some would see it a classic, or old skool ruleset.
I agree a lot of the options are silly or pointless. It's not how I'd have done it. But I like what they're trying to do, at least. |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
Last edited by mister__joshua on %b %23, %2017 - %15:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 13:53 |
|
You see, that's 3 times people have said things along the lines of rules for hardcore and fun are mutually exclusive.
I just don't buy that,
eg. Say for arguments sake goblins lost loner on the trolls. that is a small buff that just makes goblins slightly more playable. Its not something that is useful every turn it may not even come in to play in a whole match, it just gives you a relatively safe move they can do. It will stop games being spoilt where you have 2 turns in which your troll rolls skulls and cant rr. This is a both a fun change as the new player wont know any better but will have slightly less of a rough time playing with a sub par roster. The hardcore as you call them will get a slightly more competitive gobo team albeit still well within the tier 3 bracket.
Eg.2 - Removing Decay from Tomb Guardians would be a change that would be welcomed by the "hardcore" player, and the the unknowing newer coach would benefit too as they wouldn't have the completely unfun rule of rolling twice for injury on one of their most important players.
Doom Diver is a "fun" change I can live with. I have a fluffy goblin team that uses bombs currently even though they are massively ineffective and gobo teams are better off without. I would take this player on that gobo team for fluffy reasons. The same cant be said for Ooligan, who is very over priced and doesn't really bring "fun" in to proceedings imo.
I said I didn't want the boat rocked too much. That doesn't mean not at all, I welcome change and so far this ed is slightly better than CRP imo, though as I have said elsewhere as more books come out and CRP is eroded I suspect this edition will be a mess. It seems to me this is starting.
Its like on the one hand the changes have been made have been so little it doesn't change the game and then any changes or additions that are made are so weak, badly costed or irrelevant it makes them pointless. They are new things for new things sake and don't add anything to the game other than unneeded bloat.
There are a few exceptions I should say. Cheaper and useful stars are a good thing. SE is imo a good thing especially compared to the Bank rule which was pushed for so long. Removal of PO has made the game more tactical again.
I guess I just want a bit more that we can actually use. Something to make this edition worthwhile really. |
_________________
|
|
AzraelEVA
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 21:28 |
|
| Garion wrote: |
eg. Say for arguments sake goblins lost loner on the trolls. that is a small buff that just makes goblins slightly more playable.
|
But now the Big Guy isn't special anymore you've just removed the fun of him. You could also remove always hungry from the trolls and it would make the goblins slightly more playable but that would also remove a bit fun from him. |
|
|
huff
Joined: Dec 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2017 - 22:36 |
|
+1 to what Garion is saying. Should have definitely 'cleaned up' everything that was in place before/same time as adding all the new stuff. i.e. TGs, 1 stunty team left with loner BGs, Pact BGs still lacking normal mutation access, ect.
@ Koadah- what you think about the other (in)famous coaching staff in the new White Dwarf? |
|
|
|
|
| |
Elf Draft Coach
Search
