36 coaches online • Server time: 13:37
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Old Wo...goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post ramchop takes on the...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
hunter



Joined: Aug 11, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 20:59 Reply with quote Back to top

Thank you for a detailed response, BadMrMojo.

As far as uniqueness is concerned, I feel as though the presence of Bull Centaurs sufficiently sets the team apart from other Stunty Leeg teams, despite the similarity of Horseless Jockeys to Halflings. I would argue that the BCs are quite different from Sauri, in that they are much more effective ballcarriers (more MV and AG), and they will also require support from the rest of the team. Skink teams with sauri only needed the sauri to tie up the opponent's big guys while the skinks ran all over the other team. With MV 5 on the majority of players, and only ST 4 on the BC, the BC will need to remain with the rest of the team to and for support. That is, the rest of the team will get demolished without the BC, and the BC will get beaten up without the rest of the team.

However, if there is much dissatisfaction with the similarity of Horseless Jockeys to Halflings, how about we keep the stats the same, raise the price to 40,000 each, and start them off with side step? That seems to me to be an interesting twist that, to my knowledge, has not been done or suggested. I will edit the original post to reflect this possibility. This may also warrant a reduction in RR price (or perhaps not, to maintain balance).

As far as fluff is concerned, that can easily be changed and expanded. I'd rather have a good, unique, balanced team developed before I spend any length of time writing a story about how the jockey race came to the world of BB. I will do it, if necessary, but that is not the main component I am currently concerned about. I suppose my feelings about fluff fit with its definition: Something of little substance or consequence. This apparently is not the view of all, but if it adds to the fun factor for some coaches, I can add it later.

As far as the personal attack/flame war issue is concerned, I will only say that I do not appreciate being attacked, and that I have only exercised my right to rebuttal. I am much more interested in the potential development of this team than some silly online word battle, and I ask that coaches with criticism please make intelligent suggestions about changes to the team, not simple flames.

Thanks,
~hunter
celas



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 21:28 Reply with quote Back to top

Hmmm, side step for every base player? That would make them really annoying, may save a life or two, and perhaps disrupt the opponent's offense (as side step plus diving tackle is evil). If you implement that change you may want to increase base cost of player to 50 K and reduce rerolls to 70k (I think that saving 160K for a reroll later on would be impossible and 140K would be a little further from impossible although not much). 50K may seem high but I think sidestep will kep players alive and help gain spps by putting them in position to score. Although I think this team would be strong, the main challenge would be having enough money to obtain extra players or god forbid replace a Bull Centaur.

_________________
Northern Wastes League
AvatarDM



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 21:43 Reply with quote Back to top

Sidestep won't work, because they couldn't get 7 skills then (on only normal rolls)
BadMrMojo



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 22:09 Reply with quote Back to top

hunter wrote:
...With MV 5 on the majority of players, and only ST 4 on the BC, the BC will need to remain with the rest of the team to and for support. That is, the rest of the team will get demolished without the BC, and the BC will get beaten up without the rest of the team.

This is still a team which relies upon 2 big guys beat up stunties and stunties to get in the way of the opposing big guys. That sounds exactly like Gobbos, Halflings and Chaos Halflings to me. I'm sorry, but this just isn't unique.

Quote:
However, if there is much dissatisfaction with the similarity of Horseless Jockeys to Halflings, how about we keep the stats the same, raise the price to 40,000 each, and start them off with side step?

In addition to AvatarDM's very important note, this is still just a halfling that costs slightly more to gain a skill that is easily and frequently gained by regular halflings, gobbos and chaos halflings. It would be unique for a game or two and then, suddenly, it's not. Also, to reiterate, it breaks one of the fundamental rules - it doesn't leave enough room for players to progress fully.

Quote:
As far as fluff is concerned, that can easily be changed and expanded.

That's why it accounts for 5% at most, according to the admin of the division.

Quote:
I am much more interested in the potential development of this team than some silly online word battle, and I ask that coaches with criticism please make intelligent suggestions about changes to the team, not simple flames.

The intelligent suggestions you have received have been primarily that your team needs some significant change in order to be considered unique. Peikko's own critique seems to have been lost a bit here:
Peikko wrote:
Stunty is not ment to be that serious, its for fun and mayhem. ... But its not meant to be total chaos and unbalanced munchkinism either.

This team is still just an existing, well-balanced, fun, mayhem-inducing roster except that the BCs make it slightly less mayhem-inducing with reliable big guys. Using that definition, then this is not what Stunty is about. The implied suggestion from Evo and myself is that you need to go back and make a core change to make the team unique, which will in all likelihood throw off the balance, which is why making good rosters is hard.

As it stands, there is no particular reason for its inclusion in Stunty. Really. It's not like court where all rosters are good until proven to be bad, you have to make something noteworthy and exciting in order to get people willing to have it included. This just isn't particularly good without a drastic makeover. I'm trying to be politely honest and I can't make it any simpler than that.

I know you want suggestions, but the suggestion is that you go back and start moving in a drastically different direction. I could suggest that you give every player ST 3 and lobby to have them made into an official LRB team. Would that be any more useful? Of course not. It's just very difficult to come up with that big of a change to your idea without changing it into something that is precisely NOT your idea. Is this making any sense?

_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies
hunter



Joined: Aug 11, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 23:09 Reply with quote Back to top

If Gobbos, Halflings, and Chaos Halflings are so similar, why are they all in? Because there are slight variations which make them unique from one another. Just like the proposed Jockey race. I think there has been too much focus on the similarities of these teams and not enough on what makes them different from one another. It is my opinion that the differences inherent in the Jockey race are of sufficient uniqueness to warrant playtesting (certainly), discussion/tweaking (certainly), and inclusion into the Stunty Leeg (potentially). However, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, as I stated earlier.

Side step on every Horseless Jockey would certainly be unique for a number of games, since many goblins, halflings, or chaos halflings never take the skill. However, AvatarDM has the best point in the matter, and side step can't simply be given (as long as another agility skill has already been given).
Quote:

It's not like court where all rosters are good until proven to be bad, you have to make something noteworthy and exciting in order to get people willing to have it included. This just isn't particularly good without a drastic makeover.


Again, you are entitled to your opinion. Others have already indicated interest in the team, though. Just like any team, the Jockeys may appeal to some but not to others.

I do not believe that drastic changes are necessary to make this team more "interesting and exciting". The Horseless Jockeys MAY need tweaking, and I would welcome any suggestions to that end. I like the stats the way they are, although perhaps MV and/or AV could be tweaked if necessary. The only other thing to change, really, would be the inclusion of an additional trait or skill. ST and AG should remain as they are.

Additionally, I have been toying with the idea of adding another character to the race. Please see the original post for the updated roster. And as always, please submit your suggestions.

Thanks,
~hunter
Dooby



Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 03, 2004 - 23:16 Reply with quote Back to top

Hows about keep your side step but lose dodge - Pygmy have got away with it on their positional players. Satisfies the purists on skill progression - should you ever get a jockey to legend status!!!! and keeps the price low 30k for when you undoubtably get pummelled by Nurgle and the like.
EvolveToAnarchism



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 00:12 Reply with quote Back to top

Re: Criticism. I have no duty to fix your fluff-starved roster proposals. The fact that I don't try to remedy an idea that I consider a poor rip-off, in no way invalidates my criticism. Deal with the issues instead of attacking the messengers of bad news.

hunter wrote:

As far as the personal attack/flame war issue is concerned, I will only say that I do not appreciate being attacked, and that I have only exercised my right to rebuttal. I am much more interested in the potential development of this team than some silly online word battle, and I ask that coaches with criticism please make intelligent suggestions about changes to the team, not simple flames.


I have criticized and clarified my criticism. It is you who have engaged in petty personal attacks. If you are genuinely interested in developing this team then I suggest you retract your groundless, wildly off-based and credibility-destroying accusations. Otherwise, I may have to give a point by point rebuttal of your ludricrous statements, and that wouldn't be good for this thread.

As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
Useful Link

_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism
Dooby



Joined: Nov 22, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 00:15 Reply with quote Back to top

I think a challenge should be made in the grotty newspaper and you two can work it out on the blood bowl pitch
Player_2



Joined: Feb 07, 2004

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 00:55 Reply with quote Back to top

I find this team to be far too similar to other already 'official' stunty leeg teams but haven't posted before as this has been stated by a couple of other coaches. However since Hunter keeps calling on the fact that not many have said they dislike it I thought I'd better just state my disapproval, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the people that dislike this roster simply haven't taken the time to post.

Now for the constructive part, as already stated, I think this team needs the core reworked, although much kudos for coming up with an idea which isn't just taking an LRB team and adding 'ling' onto the end of it.
Jarnageddon



Joined: Nov 04, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 00:57 Reply with quote Back to top

That last post was me, I do wish Player_2 would log me back on when he finishes using my computer to feed his BB addiction.

_________________
Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with something bigger and heavier.
BadMrMojo



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 01:29 Reply with quote Back to top

hunter wrote:
If Gobbos, Halflings, and Chaos Halflings are so similar, why are they all in?

These three teams happen to be the original three teams from the creation of Stunty Leeg. This is the baseline from which all other Stunty rosters evolved. Every team since these three has been a significant variation of these three. The key word there is significant, which this is not. It is exactly the same formula, which is why I ranked it highly in the Balance category, despite my dislike of the overall roster.

hunter wrote:
...Others have already indicated interest in the team, though...

For those keeping score at home:
"Others" = 2 people saying, "I like the Simpsons, too."

A&B posted some constructive criticism and amusement while Dooby has gone on the record as being both a fan of the Simpsons and amused at the word "Jockey." As much as I respect their perspectives, that's hardly a ringing endorsement from the 14,000+ coaches of FUMBBL - a large number of which have undoubtedly read this and 'voiced' their opinions by ignoring it and moving on.

Despite my near-legendary patience (heh heh), I'm done. I've made my point, whether or not you are willing listen to it. Enjoy your thread.

_________________
Ta-Ouch! of BloodBowl
Condensed Guide for Newbies
MixX



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 02:35 Reply with quote Back to top

I like the basic idea of a jockey roster, it sounds interesting. As for how to implement this, I will stay away from making any suggestions, since that's not my strong side. It seems clear that the team in it's current form is not very popular, and hence it would be better to rework them from the start instead of continually arguing that they ARE different - while I would be inclined to agree with you to a certain point, that doesn't change the main problem - that their base players, at heart, are halflings. A single skill change won't change that as far as I can see.

Again, I like the idea and I hope you can rework it into something that might prove useable and acceptable for the Stunty Leeg.

Cheers, and always: keep thinking up crazy stuff!

MixX
hunter



Joined: Aug 11, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 03:09 Reply with quote Back to top

From here on out, this thread will be devoted to the topic. Please do not bother to post pettiness as it will no longer receive a response. I will say one quick response to this quote though:
Quote:

...a large number of which have undoubtedly read this and 'voiced' their opinions by ignoring it and moving on.

This is both an opinion and an assumption. As I stated a few times before, some people will like some teams, and some people will not. And, just because people have not posted that they DO like the team, does not mean that they do not. It is a 2-way street, see?

For those of you have stated your opinion and are not interested in helping me further develop the team, thanks for your input, and have a
good day. Your input has been noted.

And now, on to the team. I would like to receive feedback regarding the Disgruntled Farrier that I added earlier. This is essentially a Horseless Jockey with 1 more AV who starts with the Kick and Dirty Player skills. Kick is such a cool skill to have in stunty, and no other teams offer such a character. Dirty Player can also be nice, but the risk of using that skill is twofold: first of all, there is the obvious risk of ejection (and thus loss of a Kicker). Secondly, he would be closer to harm's way. As a more expensive and useful player, he might be one to help protect. Anyway, those were my thoughts when I created him. What do you all think?

As far as losing dodge and keeping side step, as Dooby suggested, I find this an interesting idea. Player cost would have to remain low in such a case, though, because they would be crunchier. This would also make it more difficult to dodge between players. As such, I would want to lower RR cost a bit, and to give the stunty trait to the jousters. At least they could cause more mayhem that way. Any thoughts?

Thanks,
~hunter
Michael_Warblade



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 03:23 Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:

From here on out, this thread will be devoted to the topic. Please do not bother to post pettiness as it will no longer receive a response. I will say one quick response to this quote though:Quote:

...a large number of which have undoubtedly read this and 'voiced' their opinions by ignoring it and moving on.


This is both an opinion and an assumption. As I stated a few times before, some people will like some teams, and some people will not. And, just because people have not posted that they DO like the team, does not mean that they do not. It is a 2-way street, see?


Well Hunter I am one of the no doubt numerous list of people who didnt like your idea and decided to merely ignore your post namely because I have little experience designing rosters

personally I dont think bull centaurs are the best idea namely because they are way too fast

also a DP on a starting team is not essential and i would reccomend against it

I also agree with BMM in that having more teams based around halflings (or goblins for that matter) is not the way to go and despite your protestations the horseless jockey's are just halflings

you need something original to get a team approved (and I dont think a Fast, Strong, Reliable ball handler is the best thing for stunty)
Tinkywinky



Joined: Aug 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 04, 2004 - 03:52 Reply with quote Back to top

I too looked into this thread and decided that the roster suggested wasn't even worth commenting on. Razz

_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league!
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