FUMBBL :: Online Blood Bowl League

Joined: Nov 07, 2003

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 07:11

Agrew with Origami I think you are taking this waaay to seriously. Bringing in a star player is perfectly valid. Its just the same as tabletop you are already comitted to playing the game by the time star players are announced the only difference here is that its the client that tells you not the player.
Time to Build and bridge
get over it.

masterpaw

Joined: Jan 09, 2005

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 07:22

let´s break down the posts to a conclusion:

it´s Nuffles weird sense of humor, that takes Stars onto the pitch.
everyone complaining about Stars will be confronted with one shortly.
everyone who doesn´t complain will be confronted, too... ^^

_________________
[url=http://www.sloganizer.net/en/style5,StomperZ.png]

[/url]

Wizard

Joined: Jul 09, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 08:11

keggiemckill:
You agreed to play with the FUMBBL rules when you clicked the agree button.
It's a game that you have no say in what the rules should be, you just get to play by them.
Imagine if everyone got there way about particular rules that anoyed them?

Have some fun with the game - foul the starplayer or something..

But stop telling everyone else what the should and should not do

_________________
"As long as one person lives in darkness then it seems to be a responsibility to tell other people."

blitzwing

Joined: Nov 24, 2003

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 08:49

wizard you are wrong in your approach. FUMMBL is, and always will be, a dynamic game. If it was static it would die. Christian religion, for example, may resist change in regard to its teachings, but inevitably it must, and will, change, albeit slowly, to stay alive.

Players, like Keggie, have every right to question the rules with argument. I am not saying this, per se, will make the game change, but, it is possible, if the arguments are good or gain acceptance among the majority of the bloodbowl denizens, the game will take this arguments on board, and change. If anything, thats what these forums are for, among other things - debate. If you stifle the possibility for rules debate, FUMBBL will DIE!!! (DA DA DAAAAA!!!)

Last edited by blitzwing on %b %29, %2005 - %09:%Apr; edited 3 times in total

Optihut

Joined: Dec 16, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 09:01

I agree with Blitzwing, of course people should challenge silly rules. In the case of hiring wizards and starplayers, however, I think the OP is on the wrong track - people in boardgame leagues hire starplayers all the time and in some you can't even chicken out of a match. Just look at the teams and of course here you're free not to play against teams with the funds to hire a star or wizard. That will yield you a "boo" from me, but I bet you can live with that.

Schalburg

Joined: Feb 12, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 09:01

blitzwing wrote:

wizard you are wrong in your approach. FUMMBL is a dynamic game. if it was static it would die like everything else. Players should question the rulz and argue them!!! thats what makes the game dynamic

Well in that case i like the rule as it is, don't change it change your perspective on things Wink

petsku

Joined: Oct 11, 2003

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 10:00

Got to love these foul, crowdpushing , starhiring post.
Last turn fouls and hiring starplayer lifts the feelings up and you might be be quite pissed, but isn´t that with every good game. Lot´s of good and bad feelings.
If you win game after your oppo has "secretly" hired 2 Stars , I bet it feels X10 better than winning without those 2 stars. Also you can mention that to your oppo after game. Smile

I still remember that feeling when my oppo´s roster came up in screen in the field after he had hired 2 Stars.
To answer Keggie´s question: It´s ok to hire starplayer after asking game.
"Something like this turns me off of the whole online BB" - IMO its opposite.

SkatKat

Joined: Jan 27, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 10:15

I think it depends on the situation, if a team is down in strength, I see absolutely no problem in springing a star to even the odds (someone just hired Dribblesnot - brought his str up within 5 of mine - no problem).
Another time I had gobbos vs. khemri, he was up 35 str before the match, then went and hired Ramtut III so the game became invalid (more than 40+ dif in str). Even had the game not been invalid, I would still have left a bit off - cause he allready had quite an edge...
Anyway, if anyone ever complains about a star, I offer them to restart and let them higher their own (or buy xtra chefs or wizards or whatever) - usually I´d tell them before hand though, and I usually only use stars for gobbos anyway - they often need a little extra muscle when playing close to equal TR Smile

matthewshy

Joined: Dec 20, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 10:36

I usually play necro and I've found a couple of times my opponent hired Zara the Slayer against me... I may swear you that's a really unpleasant trick to me... +3 vs all armour roll means she will hurt a ghoul with 5 and a wolf with 6, a bit too broken IMHO.

I will never play again those opponents, if I can, they unbalanced the whole match with that move...

The only time I bought a star player, Morgh, in a game he died in turn 1! I think Nuffle is not pleased seeing players who have reached star-player status playing so much...

DukeTyrion

Joined: Feb 18, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 10:39

There are 2 problems as I see it;

1) You should, in my opinion, get the chance to counter hire stars.

2) Sometimes games are taken based on ST for recovery games, as this is a series of one off games ST means alot. Your 140 / 105 Elves might be happy to play some 141 / 119 Orcs that look to be saving up for rerolls, but the entire picture (and chance of recovery) looks alot different if one or two stars are hired by the opp.

But, it's everyones choice, and everyone risk. Some of the best games involve a couple of stars on the pitch, it's just the purchased without comment, or chance to hire an counter star that tends to annoy.

SergeiBautin

Joined: Jul 15, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 11:09

Im with you all the way Keggie. Just had to check your matchlist to see who it was you played. A word of advice : often the higher coachranking the player has (there are of course a lot of exeptions) the cheezier and sneaky he playes the game. More stalling, and other tactics that make it a less enjoyable game for the other player. But in this case, thats just sad. Cowardly is the word i think, but like a footballcoach once told me about players from the southern Europe : "They dont see it like we do. Its only cheating if you get caught!"

_________________
Do you know that every time someone uses the word 'fluff' instead of 'background', a kitten dies?
- gav thorpe

Wizard

Joined: Jul 09, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 11:53

Its simply a matter of double checking rosters - problem solved...

_________________
"As long as one person lives in darkness then it seems to be a responsibility to tell other people."

Adar

Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 12:11

People have forgotten one thing, the hosting player is in a much more vulnerable position than the client since the host is the person setting the game up which means that the client coach can hire the star player while the host is setting the game up.

_________________

For all his rage, he's still just a rat in it's cage.

thesquig

Joined: Apr 11, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 12:16

matthewshy wrote:

I usually play necro and I've found a couple of times my opponent hired Zara the Slayer against me... I may swear you that's a really unpleasant trick to me... +3 vs all armour roll means she will hurt a ghoul with 5 and a wolf with 6, a bit too broken IMHO.

I agree mate, the whole concept of zara is totally bent! Why dont undead have a star player that adds +3 to all armour rolls against Humans?

Its especially bent when you're not execpting it, simply because you're not playing the game for fun. You're playing to survive.

_________________
Nuffle Sucks!!!

paulhicks

Joined: Jul 19, 2004

Posted: Apr 29, 2005 - 13:24

blitzwing wrote:

wizard you are wrong in your approach. FUMMBL is, and always will be, a dynamic game. If it was static it would die. Christian religion, for example, may resist change in regard to its teachings, but inevitably it must, and will, change, albeit slowly, to stay alive.

Players, like Keggie, have every right to question the rules with argument. I am not saying this, per se, will make the game change, but, it is possible, if the arguments are good or gain acceptance among the majority of the bloodbowl denizens, the game will take this arguments on board, and change. If anything, thats what these forums are for, among other things - debate. If you stifle the possibility for rules debate, FUMBBL will DIE!!! (DA DA DAAAAA!!!)

totaly agree. this isnt somthing that bothers me much when people do it to me but people realy do have the right to express their feelings about the rules that bind them.
its like when protesters get told "if you dont like it move to another country". its stupid. it more patriotic (or in this case good gaming comunity membership) to try to change things for the better.

i do have to agree though keggie that you should try not to get too stressed about it. it is only a game at the end of the day. we do what we can to help improve the game (reporting cheats and bugs etc as well as making suggested improvements) and then we just try to get all the enjoyment we can out of the rest of the game.

_________________
Spelling, grammer and sense are for noobs!