EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 01:34 |
 
|
I think this could be one of the better changes to the Stunty Leeg. Certainly much better than the new Stunty Leeg Stars which IMHO sucked, but that's another thread. I honestly believe the Stunty Leeg is due for some major changes. I'm almost tempted to agree with the Duke of Grumble that the Stunty Leeg should be removed from FUMBBL. Or more likely distanced from FUMBBL.
The creation of new Stunty Leeg rosters for the Halflings and Goblins should be a first step in distancing Stunty Leeg from FUMBBL. The Goblin roster has always been the baseline from which other Stunty Leeg teams have been measured. With that in mind, I don't think they should be changed much. Dropping access to all the Star Players other than the Secret Weapons and a roster name change to Grotz is all that I think it requires. As for the halflings, I'd rename them the Halfling Baking Brigade and play up the food angle. Drop Treemen and give them a boost with Hot Pots, Chefs, Sous Chefs and Carvers.
The recent changes to Squigs have led me to consider another advantage of distancing the Leeg from FUMBBL. Squig Hoppers lost Pogo in an attempt to balance them. Part of the discussion involved Penalty Rolls and Under Scrutiny. Which led me to wonder, why doesn't the Stunty Leeg just drop the Under Scrutiny handicap result. The client supports customisable handicap tables. If Stunty were to distance itself from FUMBBL, this change would probably be very compatible with this philosophy.
Major rumbles in the Stunty Leeg will inevitably be felt with this years rules review. Big Guys will be losing General access. Distancing the Stunty Leeg will enable the Leeg to decide if this change is in its best interests. I think a big long discussion is in order for this change. I'm sure it will be an exciting conversation. I'm not exactly sure where I stand on this issue. It has so many complexitities that I think it's best left for another thread.
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
ExperiMENTAL Roster: Circus Team |
_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
gken1
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 01:39 |
|
flings trees are getting on pitch take root very shortly.....so that should patch up a huge problem for them right there. |
|
|
Legbreaker
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 02:12 |
|
What is the new on-pitch Take Root exactly? Bonehead? |
|
|
Britnoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 02:55 |
|
| Miyuso wrote: | | and the Goblins Kobolds, which is another name GW have used for them. |
Um no, Kobolds are not Goblins.... far from it. I've been working on a Kobold roster for a bit but havent been able to settle on which direction they should take yet.  |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 08:10 |
|
| Britnoth wrote: | | Will you then not be able to move your team froms S to U? |
Yes you are. Where is the problem in that, its pretty easy to tell what rosters are allowed in tournament.
| Quote: | | We had a similar problem with divX teams getting an apoth for 10k then transfering... this way you could get a new fling team with 2 ogres in unranked... |
That is not possible anymore and the problem was that it was not spotted that easily than 2 whole wrong players and different race name would be.... |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 08:22 |
|
| gken1 wrote: | | flings trees are getting on pitch take root very shortly.....so that should patch up a huge problem for them right there. |
Unfortunately we are not playing on board. Implementation of any coming new rules can take loooong time. |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 08:34 |
|
| EvolveToAnarchism wrote: | | I'm almost tempted to agree with the Duke of Grumble that the Stunty Leeg should be removed from FUMBBL. |
As always if someone does not like something, he can choose not to be part of it. It is clear that you have strong picture of stunty which has been proven to be different from mine and while I make final decisions I will keep doin them accordong to my believes on whats best for stunty. And it still includes its been wacky but somewhat playable leeg which is not ment to be ruined cause someone wants to see "fluff". Its plaything, not storybook.
| Quote: | | Which led me to wonder, why doesn't the Stunty Leeg just drop the Under Scrutiny handicap result. The client supports customisable handicap tables. |
Because that would need coaches to manually change their handicap.ini everytime they play stunty or non-stunty. Handicap.ini is in your hd, not pushed from fumbbl side.
| Quote: | | Major rumbles in the Stunty Leeg will inevitably be felt with this years rules review. Big Guys will be losing General access. Distancing the Stunty Leeg will enable the Leeg to decide if this change is in its best interests. |
I really cant see dropping gen-access from stunty BGs as it would alter the whole leeg to elfbowl, which is pretty much everything stunty leeg is not ever ment to be. |
|
|
EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 09:10 |
|
| peikko wrote: | | It is clear that you have strong picture of stunty which has been proven to be different from mine and while I make final decisions I will keep doin them accordong to my believes on whats best for stunty. And it still includes its been wacky but somewhat playable leeg which is not ment to be ruined cause someone wants to see "fluff". Its plaything, not storybook. |
And this is where I fundamentally disagree with you*. It's not an either or propoosition. Stunty Leeg can be both a fun wacky game and have a strong fluffy consistent background. A fluffy background in no way ruins the game, IMHO, it greatly adds to the enjoyment of the game. Myself and Mr-Klipp put countless hours into making this vision of the Stunty Leeg work. Should you choose to reject this legacy that has been handed to you, you should expect vociferous disagreements.
| Quote: |
Because that would need coaches to manually change their handicap.ini everytime they play stunty or non-stunty. Handicap.ini is in your hd, not pushed from fumbbl side. |
I think you exagerate the complexity that such a change would require. It would require the creation of 1 handicap table for the Stunty Leeg. It might not need to be swapped every time. Christer has already implemented division specific rules (see divX hypnotic gaze). This change would require Christer to turn on the custom Handicap Table. People could download the Stunty Leeg Handicap table but it would might be a good idea to send the handicap.ini file while pics are being sent. This could be the one major technological hurdle. But if there's a will there's a way.
| Quote: | | I really cant see dropping gen-access from stunty BGs as it would alter the whole leeg to elfbowl, which is pretty much everything stunty leeg is not ever ment to be. |
That's one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it could be that it would provide a great way of rebalancing the rosters. Squigs wouldn't look so weak when all the other BGs lose Gen. Strigoyans would get a boost and would be much more unique. The Skryre Slaves' Mechavermin would look pretty good, and might make them more competitive. Orcslayers could do likewise for Gnomes. The strongest teams (Goblins, Chaos Halflings, Nurglings) would all suffer. Snotlings and Fairies would probably need a boost. M5 snotlings and experimental HG Pixies could help both of those teams. There would still be plenty of light-hearted mayhem (probably more TTM mayhem rather than BG slaughterfests).** I hardly think that would turn Stunty Leeg into everything it was never meant to be. I could be misrembering my extensive involvement in the whole development of the Leeg. None the less that's just one way to look at the potential impact of the Rules Review on the Stunty Leeg.
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
ExperiMENTAL Blood Bowl Cards
* I don't think we disagree as much as some may think. I think online forums tend to exagerate the degree opinions appear to differ. Note Peikko's selective quoting creates a grossly exagerated sense of disagreement over Stunty Leeg's place in FUMBBL.
** The immense power differential this will create between established and new teams would be a huge hurdle. |
_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
SergeiBautin
Joined: Jul 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 09:14 |
|
I like the idea of positional players for Flings, a thrower (kind of) and a blitzer (kind of) is really needed. The suggestions here were quite amusing; but why give a fling thrower ag 2? To make Flings a stunty team able to actually pass the ball, would give them a nice edge. And why not? They are one of the two teams that are "real", the others are just cheezy! |
_________________
Do you know that every time someone uses the word 'fluff' instead of 'background', a kitten dies?
- gav thorpe |
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 10:18 |
|
I do agree with Evo on getting rid of Under Scrutiny if somehow possible. It destroys the game for some races alltogether (gnomes, cheaters, squigs). No random handycap should decide the game from the get go.
-Mnemon |
|
|
peikko
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 10:52 |
|
| Mnemon wrote: | | I do agree with Evo on getting rid of Under Scrutiny if somehow possible. |
It is not possible with current client in a way that could be taken into use. |
|
|
Bruno
Joined: Sep 21, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 11:08 |
|
This is probably way out of line.
I mean, if we are this close knit society that likes Stunty, how come we dont post up an own version of fumbbl rules, a codex of behaviour to help bridge the differences of what we want to play because its fun and what is possible in the client.
Things that comes to mind is to not chose guard for fanatics/pump wagons.
Also, I would say that a outspoken "good sportmanship" rule of restarting stunty games that gets "under scrutiny".
Now yes, I know this will be impossible to implement since people never read any rules and that it would lead to arguments all over the place, but it was nice to sit and dream a bit. |
|
|
AvatarDM
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 11:50 |
|
| peikko wrote: | | Mnemon wrote: | | I do agree with Evo on getting rid of Under Scrutiny if somehow possible. |
It is not possible with current client in a way that could be taken into use. |
Would it be possible to play without handicaps in stunty? I don't think they are necessary, as stunty teams aren't balanced at the same TR (as there are always several MNG and experienced BGs are far more important that some skilled little ones). |
|
|
EvolveToAnarchism
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 16:53 |
|
It looks like where there's a will there's a way. 
With a little creative thinking the Stunty Leeg community has come up with several interesting proposals to do the impossible:
1. Turn off handicaps.
2. Use Extra MVPs as handicaps.
3. Stunty Leeg code of conduct that encourages restarts if Under Scrutiny ruins a game.
4. Custom handicaps using the honour system.
5. Custom handicaps when Skijunkie recodes the client.
Maybe I should run a poll?
As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
A Better World Is Possible |
_________________
Ignorance is Strength quis custodiet ipsos custodes As Always, Evolve To Anarchism |
|
Britnoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 16, 2004 - 17:04 |
|
Big guys losing general access will do more to rebalance the teams than all the changes made in the last year. By a long way.
There is an easy way to avoid under scrutiny - don't play down. |
|
|
|
|
Cindy is back?
Search
