hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
 Posted:
Feb 02, 2006 - 03:23 |
 
|
<b><u>Introduction</b></u>
Hello Stunty Leeg fans, and welcome to my “Stunty Manifesto”. This work was developed to address a variety of issues in the Stunty Leeg, and to provide my views on these issues. I will also provide recommendations for future Stunty Leeg directions. Grab a beer... it's kinda long. 
Before reading further, you should enlighten yourself with some of the most vocal opinions such as that of long-time stunty team developer and contributor, EvolveToAnarchism. Of note is his recent “Guide to Designing Stunty Leeg Teams”, currently 2/3 completed. I will be critiquing and elaborating on his “F.U.N.” criterion, so it would be beneficial to the reader to have some familiarity and background with the topic.
Also, a disclaimer: everything in this post should technically be considered my opinion. However, I have dedicated much thought and effort to the Stunty Leeg via participation in a variety of Stunty tournies, establishment of a playtesting league, forum posting, and development of a variety of teams (most retired now). Also, I will do my best to support my views with facts and sound theory. As far as I understand it, the only officials with control over the Stunty Leeg are peikko, the administrator, and Christer, the “Lord of FUMBBL”. One of my recommendations will be to augment this setup slightly, so read on if you are interested.
I am writing this mainly because I have derived great pleasure from playing in the Stunty Leeg, and I would like to see it continue to develop. I believe that I have sound ideas to further this development. The Stunty Leeg is almost solely FUMBBL’s baby… by the coaches, for the coaches. It is derived from Blood Bowl, but is not necessarily bound by LRB restrictions. An obvious example of this is the inclusion of a variety of non-LRB teams, which have been created by the coaches on this site. My point is that the Stunty Leeg can actually be anything we want it to be, and the possibilities are endless.
<b><u>Critique of F.U.N.</b></u>
To begin with, I would like to discuss conceptual races. Many Stunty Leeg coaches, myself included, have designed races for hopeful implementation into the Stunty Leeg as an “official” race. Some of these are well thought out; others appear to have developed “off the cuff”. To centralize these ideas and provide a site to find rosters, I developed the Stunty Compendium. In an effort to remain objective, I have included every race submitted to me which has been discussed in the forums and would have a chance of getting into the Stunty Leeg as an official team.
What are the criteria for inclusion into the Stunty Leeg, you ask? Excellent question! At this time, there are no “official” guidelines regarding which teams are included, and the decisions seem to be entirely up to peikko. The best posts I can find on this subject, from peikko, are here, and here. The last one lists the following bases for consideration: 5% Fluff, 35% Balance, and 60% Uniqueness. Evaluation of proposed races in the forums typically uses the “F.U.N.” criteria coined by EvolveToAnarchism: Fluff, Uniqueness, and Novel Playing Style.
<u>Fluff</u>
The “F” in “F.U.N.” stands for “Fluff”. Although this is the least important category under consideration by peikko, it is typically the main basis for criticism when new races are presented in the forums. Oftentimes, this criticism comes from EvolveToAnarchism, who firmly believes that new races should be based on Warhammer fluff. The problem with this is that Blood Bowl is seldom mentioned in Warhammer books, and although derived from this universe, has become something separate. In fact, BB is officially separating from the Warhammer universe, as indicated by a member of the Blood Bowl Regulatory Commission here. It will be set up in such a way that no knowledge of Warhammer will be necessary whatsoever, and may even be produced by a company other than Games Workshop. As such, I would contend that there are no fluff limits on race creation at this point, other than “fitting” proposed teams somehow with the current teams… for example, it is unlikely that Smurfs or Gummi Bears or Simpsons exist in the same universe as the current Stunty Leeg teams, but it is not unlikely that an underground or unknown race from a distant land (which fit into the general “fantasy” theme) exists. The Stunty Leeg is meant to be a fun and non-serious league, and creativity with race design should be encouraged!
Even if we did self-impose fluff restrictions on race creation, requiring derivation from Warhammer, the doors are wide open for creativity. Here is some information regarding Warhammer Fantasy, for those interested. Essentially, it is a make-believe universe, derived from other famous make-believe universes (most notably Dungeons and Dragons and Tolkien’s Middle-Earth). The Warhammer universe is not unique, nor is it static: GW regularly publishes new texts to alter the flora and fauna, political connections, base races, etc. I have read on these forums that one reason for this is money, as official new figures are put out frequently as well, which are “required” for play. Whatever the reason, the point is that Warhammer is an ever-changing make-believe world, and there is no logical rationale to adhere only to what is officially “known” about this universe when it comes to developing new races for the Stunty Leeg. Fluff is simply make-believe stuff to relate a race to the other races or to the universe, and fluff can easily be altered to “fit” a race properly. In fact, the vast majority of the current Stunty Leeg races have no official GW/ Warhammer mention or rationale for playing BB, so the races were developed based on an “if…then” philosophy: e.g., “If Pygmies mentioned in Warhammer played Blood Bowl, then I believe they would appear thusly.” The fluff for these teams is presented in the forums as more official than it actually is… in reality, it is based upon the creator’s interpretation of the universe. This has led to what amounts to an entitled opinion of what “should” be in the Stunty Leeg.
To summarize, based upon the official standing and direction of Blood Bowl, as well as the kinetic and derived nature of the Warhammer universe, I feel as though adhering to self-imposed Warhammer fluff restrictions stifles the creativity which should be encouraged in this particular division. Fitting the fluff to that of the other races should perhaps be encouraged or required, but fitting the fluff to Warhammer is somewhat illogical and should not be encouraged or required.
I believe that fluff is important, but not necessary. That is, a unique and balanced race can be created without a background. However, the background helps others conceptualize the race and helps explain the uniqueness and balance, and for at least those reasons should be included with every proposal. Fluff creation can be a lot of fun, too!
<u>Uniqueness/ Novel Playing Style</u>
By and large, everyone seems to agree upon these criteria as necessary for consideration of proposed races. I fully agree- I mean, why have a “new” team that is essentially an “old” team with a different name? The importance of this criterion is reflected in the assignment of 60% weight to uniqueness according to peikko. Uniqueness and novel playing style are such similar constructs that I believe they fit better together.
The only disagreement I have with some uniqueness/novelty criticisms is in regards to the race “schticks”. Although this is an accurate way to describe and differentiate the uniqueness and novelty of teams, boundaries do not have to be too distinct. For example, just because Fairies have a core of players who start with Jump Up doesn’t mean that another race cannot have an ancillary player who also starts with Jump Up. However, core themes should not be redundant: as the main Pygmy players are built around the Shadowing skill, it would be redundant to develop another team in which the main players all use Shadowing.
<u>balaNce</u>
In an effort to retain the “FUN” acronym, and in avoidance of the less funny and memorable “FUB” acronym, I would like to mention “balaNce”. peikko weights this criterion at 35%, second only to uniqueness. EvolveToAnarchism does not specifically differentiate this construct in his guide, but there is no doubt in the value of its importance (and no doubt that he values its importance). Many teams are proposed that could be considered “over the top” in some regard(s), and these are rapidly toned down by the community. Races with strengths should also have weaknesses. The typical distinction is between bash and agility, although factors such as speed, unpredictability, and danger are also important. Also, the team must be balanced in light of the other Stunty Leeg races, so much must be taken into consideration.
<b><u>Conceptual Race Recommendations</b></u>
When developing a race, there are a few points to consider beyond those already discussed. A common opinion that I will echo here is to refrain from simply adding “-ling” to an existing race (or even a new one, for that matter). You should avoid this if for no other reason than others will not take it as seriously. Don’t name any of your positions as such, either. For example, “Vamplings” and “Nurglings” really should be something more creative IMHO. Races should be original… adding “-ling” is not original. Similarly, the “children” of a race are not a separate race, and represent another rather unoriginal concept. Although I do not know the official stance on this, my guess is that it is extremely unlikely that any such “race” would ever become an official Stunty Leeg team.
Conceptual races should be playtested thoroughly. It is great to see coaches coming up with ideas, but without actual testing it will not be known how they will perform. As I mentioned, the Stunty Compendium has sought to centralize and playtest ideas, and I encourage coaches to submit their races (after discussion in the forums). In lieu of this, one should coordinate with other coaches to playtest ideas, or at the very least play standalone games.
<b><u>Stunty Leeg change/ modification proposals</b></u>
It is well known that the Stunty Leeg is not completely balanced, and fine-tuning is often in progress. Playtesting future races prior to inclusion will help with this, but a number of issues currently at hand should be addressed.
First up is the “General skills on Big Guys” issue, which has been hotly debated in the forums. Here is my opinion on the matter, which mainly boils down to my belief that the development and inclusion of teams without Big Guys would solve a lot of problems. With more diversity, coaches wouldn’t feel obligated to play against developed Big Guy teams. Also, for those interested, the Small Stunty Spike is an official Stunty tournament with no-G Big Guys.
Other options, which would require considerable rebalancing, would be to either eliminate Big Guys altogether, limit teams to 1 Big Guy, or make Big Guys star players only. With the elimination of Big Guys, the Stunty Leeg would truly become “Stunty”, although much of the fun, destruction, and mayhem would be removed. These really aren’t viable options, but neither (IMO) is removal of G access. I tried it in a small league and did not like it, but others did. There really is a diversity of opinions, and again I’ll fall back on my proposition that increased diversity would squelch the problem considerably.
Speaking of dissent in the forums, my next recommendation is in regards to appropriate responses to proposed races. Too often, hostile and unconstructive responses turn potential coaches from the Leeg. New proposals should be encouraged, and race creators should be given thoughtful and appropriate feedback. One reason why I decided to write this text is so that I can provide new coaches some direction and instruction.
However, the best recommendation to assist in this manner is to develop and establish <u>official</u> criteria for conceptual teams. That is, teams should meet certain minimum requirements, as outlined by those running the site/Leeg. Meeting these criteria does not automatically entitle a team for inclusion in the Leeg by any means, but would perhaps deem it ready for playtesting and further consideration. Teams not meeting these specific criteria would not be considered for inclusion, and coaches proposing new teams could be directed to the criteria page instead of receiving various opinions.
To aid in the creation of such official criteria, my next recommendation is to form an advisory committee which would report to peikko. There are some different means in which this could be implemented. One way would be for peikko to retain full authority, but would weigh his decisions carefully upon input from the committee. Another method would be for the committee members to have voting privileges, and for decisions to be based on a more democratic system. Committee members could even be voted in by the FUMBBL community. In any case, I would recommend a total size (including peikko) of either 3 or 5 members, so that if votes were to take place, we wouldn’t have to worry about ties.
This committee would help decide on changes to the Stunty Leeg, including issues such as new race implementation, changes to existing rosters, formation of official tournaments, etc. It would also decide upon the “official fluff” for each race. I really think that it would be a great idea to establish some official fluff for each race, so that decisions to change the rosters “based on fluff” actually have some basis. A page in the User Guide could easily be devoted to this, and it would serve to demystify the creation and background of the races currently in the Stunty Leeg.
<b><u>Conclusion</b></u>
To conclude, I would like to express my appreciation first of all to those of you who read this entire text and to all those involved in the Stunty Leeg… past, present, and future. I fully anticipate deriving much more joy from this creation!
Also, a special thanks to those who have proposed new races and those who have actively participated in playtesting them.
And, of course, to Christer for the kickin’ site and peikko for all of his work with the Stunty Leeg. Although some (including myself, at times) do not agree with his decisions, I certainly do not envy his position. Finally, props to EvolveToAnarchism, who has put much time and effort into the Leeg. Without his work, there probably would not be much for me to comment on!
Please post your thoughts!
Regards,
~hunter |
_________________
Stunty Leeg Central - For ALL your Stunty needs! 
Last edited by hunter on %b %28, %2006 - %22:%Jun; edited 2 times in total |
|
Wallace
Joined: May 26, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2006 - 03:59 |
|
Nurglings are directly from the Warhammer Universe (just like halflings), they are not just small 'Nurgs', but indeed 'Vamplings' are a weak stunty league name and the deadlins, elflings, ogrelings (and Ogre Childs ?!?!) etc that have been proposed are also unsuitable additions.
I can't see an official stunty committee happening, since the two most likely candidates (apart from peikko) get along like frogs in a sock as well as the fact that one is too accepting of every half-baked idea proposed and the other is accepting of every idea as long as it is proposed by him. I just can't see a working stunty committee happening.
Official 'criteria' for new stunty teams may be good but any criteria be in F.U.N. or anything else is open to much interpretation. Two people with different views can find the same proposal either fits a criteria perfectly or not at all depending on each new team. There is no way to have an objective criteria that can be applied to a new proposal to say for sure whether it is or isn't acceptable by some magic criteria. There will always be debate.
To be honest most of the proposals that a put forward are rubbish. Sure some people are pretty hard on the people that put them forward, but it stems from the fact that there are so many of them and some of the proposers are not willingly to believes their idea is not a good one and keep putting it forward regardless (the Ogre Childs is a good example). I have some experience here, I put forward a rubbish half-baked proposal a while back and several posters pointed out thouroughly and completely why it was rubbish. I saw that what they said made sense and abandoned that particular proposal. Some of the elements I did like I've been toying with and if (and only if) I think I get it to a form more worthy of inclusion in the future, I may put it forward.
What I'm trying to say is that the reason so many team proposal threads get nasty is NOT beacuase of the people critising it, but the morons who refuse to listen to the intial cristisim and keep pushing waste of time rosters in everyones face.
My 'solution' or manifesto or whatever is for Hunter to keep doing the good job of playtesting and more of the community involved on that level. Rather than everyone having there own proposal, put your time into playtesting and tweaking the ones that are out there. Peikko (who is and probably will be for the future) the final decider has said that there will be no more teams in stuntu unless they replace existing teams, so therrre's no going to be a helluva lot more teams going to go in anyway, rather the existing ones will probably be tweaked a bit |
|
|
El_Jairo
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 02, 2006 - 17:56 |
|
I also second the point that there is not need for new teams in stunty. I am however only a rookie stunty coach. But as there are new rules coming up, it is more usefull to look at the changes is skills, and thus balance, which will affect stunty teams.
My first stunty team is nurglings and as Big Hand is nerfed to: ignore all negative modifiers on pick up, I won't play them anymore because they would lack any possibilty for ball handling. Ok I know, they are a team with almost no ball handling or speed; which has to rely on regen and outbashing the other team. But the fact that some doubles could help you out is a nice perspective to take the team anyway.
I should think they will need a 0-2 Positional ag 3 player without regen with the new Big Hand rule, to keep them somewhat
But I am digressing, the point was that there should be clear criteria for team proposals for stunty. I think it is usefull but not necessary as there is a fairly big span of different teams. I only tried one, so I have much more to learn! |
_________________
By the way Pheadrus, do we need anybody to tell us what is good and what is bad?
NAF n°: 21249 |
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 05, 2006 - 18:48 |
|
Thanks for your comments, guys.
I suppose what I could do in lieu of an official stance on the appropriateness of proposed races is limit those which can be included in the Stunty Compendium. Although I would like to be entirely objective, it takes some time for me to update the website with new information, not to mention playtest the new races. As such, I don't want to spend time with races that simply have no future. I have actually turned down a few requests for inclusion in the Compendium on this basis, so I suppose I have already demonstrated some subjectivity. 
Well, without being too subjective, I think I could implement the following constraints:
1) You must have an advocate for your race participate in playtesting. This can be the race creator or someone else.
2) Serious flaws should be addressed. If the vast majority of responses to one's proposal indicate that the race is much too strong, then something must be done before playtesting initiates.
3) The fluff must somehow fit the proposed race with existing races. The fluff does not have to be from the Warhammer universe, but it should be rooted in fantasy.
Do these sound reasonable?
Obviously, my preference would be to have some official FUMBBL stance on these issues so that I could easily point creators in the correct direction. That is, I'd like to take my subjectivity out of the equation. At present, however, it does not appear that I can adequately do so.
As far as the implementation of new races is concerned, my guess is that a couple of old races will eventually be replaced. Skinks, for example, are in dire straits. Chaos Halflings have been called a "mistake" on various occasions, and it wouldn't surprise me if they were eventually replaced. A couple other races such as Strigoyan and Squig Herders have relatively few teams, and may eventually be replaced with something more popular. Perhaps the reason for lack of popularity is because these teams don't have Big Guys, or because they both have to deal with OFAB, but that is speculation. I guess my point is that the future of the Leeg is uncertain, and it is likely that available races will change somewhat in the future.
Please comment!
Regards,
~hunter |
_________________
Stunty Leeg Central - For ALL your Stunty needs! |
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 05, 2006 - 20:18 |
|
Can't comment much as I am not concerned much with race creation as such. I wonder about the reasons why some races are more attractive and others are not, though. I'd for once wouldn't mind trying some of the newer races (that is, everything added after gnomes) but don't given I am not willing to retire/like the themes of the teams I have too much right now.
I'd guess finding out what really makes some races "not work" or "not accepted" would go along way to find out what makes for a good/bad race in the long run. How to? Not the slightest clue .
-Mnemon |
|
|
Furious_George
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 06, 2006 - 16:31 |
|
Im all in favour of this, I like the idea that old ideas are being worked on and balanced rather than new ideas getting all teh attention and phasing out old lists. There are some old lists that have great potential and just need some TLC. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, my pet peeve are the goblin cheaters, easily my favourite team in fumbbl, but useless at higher TR due to BG dominated casmonster teams, I feel a few mods would change them into a competetive and still fun team with a good sense of individuality. Other teams are the same, with some love they can be salvaged and made whole, but as it is, if we just abandon X race because they needed improving/balancing, and end up replacing them with Wizlings or some such nonsense, then nobody can ever again do X race because 'its all been done before'...
Maybe im not making sense but i really want to see certain races improved with a view to keeping their character.
On the topic of Cflings, i think theyre a case in point, not all THAT fluffy tbh, hideously casheavy, with mutations on everyone. Its not an acceptable excuse to say, if you dont want to play them, dodge the game, and i dont think its wise to drop them completely to be replaced with another off the wall idea. If people think theres a problem with them then they need to be Polled, and then promptly changed, there have been untold numbers of widely responded polls on topics which have had no action taken. now im not saying its easy to make sweeping changes, but if the polls dont yield changes, whats the point 
Bleh, take the entire post with a pinch of salt and a good deal of sympathy, Im not quite 'on the ball' just now, so this is part whine, part suggestion and part drivel...
Rip apart at leisure. |
_________________
Dead Men dont tell tales... But they sure play a mean game of Bloodbowl.
"Hugh Mann eh? Now theres a name I can trust!"
Me Loves Futurama |
|
shadow46x2
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 08, 2006 - 21:20 |
|
I'm only going to comment on the things I disagree with, simply because I despise "Me too" posts 
| hunter wrote: | <b><u>Introduction</b></u>
<b><u>Critique of F.U.N.</b></u>
To begin with, I would like to discuss conceptual races. Many Stunty Leeg coaches, myself included, have designed races for hopeful implementation into the Stunty Leeg as an “official” race. Some of these are well thought out; others appear to have developed “off the cuff”. To centralize these ideas and provide a site to find rosters, I developed the Stunty Compendium. In an effort to remain objective, I have included every race submitted to me which has been discussed in the forums and would have a chance of getting into the Stunty Leeg as an official team. |
Who actually determines which of these teams "have a chance of getting into the Stunty leeg as an official team"? Do you determine that? or is it a public decision?....
| hunter wrote: |
<u>Fluff</u>
The “F” in “F.U.N.” stands for “Fluff”. Although this is the least important category under consideration by peikko, it is typically the main basis for criticism when new races are presented in the forums. Oftentimes, this criticism comes from EvolveToAnarchism, who firmly believes that new races should be based on Warhammer fluff. The problem with this is that Blood Bowl is seldom mentioned in Warhammer books, and although derived from this universe, has become something separate. In fact, BB is officially separating from the Warhammer universe, as indicated by a member of the Blood Bowl Regulatory Commission here. It will be set up in such a way that no knowledge of Warhammer will be necessary whatsoever, and may even be produced by a company other than Games Workshop. |
You should really go back and read that thread from Galak. First off, it doesn't say that it will or will not happen...
| Galak Starscraper wrote: | | There is a possibility that BB may be more widely marketed in 2007. Instead of going through GW ... it might go through say Milton Bradley for its release. |
Notice the inclusion of the following words:
- possibility
- may
- might
None of these words, in any way shape or form, mean "definitively" or "guaranteed"....
Additionally, just because another company may print the game, it is still GW creative property...It's like Jerry Bruckheimer making a movie, but Miramax releasing it....there's a difference between who creates the item, and who just prints it for release.
Which leads me to my point...
| hunter wrote: | | As such, I would contend that there are no fluff limits on race creation at this point, other than “fitting” proposed teams somehow with the current teams… for example, it is unlikely that Smurfs or Gummi Bears or Simpsons exist in the same universe as the current Stunty Leeg teams, but it is not unlikely that an underground or unknown race from a distant land (which fit into the general “fantasy” theme) exists. The Stunty Leeg is meant to be a fun and non-serious league, and creativity with race design should be encouraged! |
Sure, ok I can accept that maybe there's some underground race that peeks its head out to play blood bowl....just don't do it in a GW universe, imo...
Blood Bowl was a derivitave of the GW universe, it should stay that way...Simply because the positional names are changing to make them user friendly, doesn't mean they're going away from a GW-based universe...the background fluff of teams is consistent with that theme, and should stay that way, even for stunty....
God knows I don't want to end up playing my GW-themed teams against...oh I dunno...LotR crap, or D&D crap...I'll go play those games if I'm interested in that...I play GW games because they're superior...please don't dilute my experience...
If you can write up some fluff story for bringing in random race #382752, rock on....just keep the fluff tied to the universe that the game came from....
After all this is Blood Bowl....not GurpsWorld.
| hunter wrote: | | I believe that fluff is important, but not necessary. That is, a unique and balanced race can be created without a background. However, the background helps others conceptualize the race and helps explain the uniqueness and balance, and for at least those reasons should be included with every proposal. Fluff creation can be a lot of fun, too! |
After spending much of my younger years roleplaying under many many systems...I can't disagree with this statement any more that I already do...except for the last comment
Fluff/background is one of the most important items in the creation of something new....and also one of the most critical items...it helps to keep the idea in line, and not have things going crazy into directions that make no sense....sure you can have balance, and uniqueness, but you can't have a theme, which is what this is all about...
When a writer sits down to write a book, do you think they just start typing and a bestseller pops out of the typewriter a day later?(god i'm dating myself with typewriter)...Except for maybe the singular anomaly prodigy writer in the world, most every author has some sort of skeleton on how their story is going to come out...notes on characters, development, ideas for storyline....it's all there...it's what develops the story and gives it content and makes it worthwhile...
I've tried many times in the past, when roleplaying, to make characters without some sort of background....with just numbers and stats....sure it works for a day or two, but once the characters start to develop, there's no direction, and nothing keeping the character in place, and keeping it from becoming a piece of paper with statistics....there's nothing that turns it into a living, breathing creation....
That's where the fluff comes in, and that's why it's so important....granted, the fluff may not be as important after the fact, after development, and once the team has been put into live gameplay....but for creational purposes, development, and everything up to that stage, it's arguably the single, most important piece to the puzzle.
| hunter wrote: | | A couple other races such as Strigoyan and Squig Herders have relatively few teams, and may eventually be replaced with something more popular. Perhaps the reason for lack of popularity is because these teams don't have Big Guys, or because they both have to deal with OFAB, but that is speculation. |
From those I've talked to...the issues with these teams, and why people avoid them is the OFAB, and only that....
Vamp-type teams have always been a more advanced team to play, and a lot of people have issues learning how to play them properly....Frankly, I think if people play them a few times, and get used to them, they're a lot more fun than other teams, simply because of the added chaos factor, which, imo, is one of the key elements of stunty to begin with...
Outside of that, for creational purposes, the ideas posed are decent...I'm not much into team creation, though I may toss in my two cents every now and then, so not much of it applies to me or my creative ideas
--j |
|
|
Macavity
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 08, 2006 - 21:22 |
|
You used the word Manifesto! You are now obligated to grow a beard and smoke a pipe!
(I'm getting worse, aren't I?) |
_________________
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -C.S. Lewis |
|
Furious_George
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 08, 2006 - 23:54 |
|
Mac is right Such elderly talk warrants a change in dress style at least. Bleh, lots of talk of stunty being changed, all good by me. How exactly are the changes that you or whoever deems nessecary impressed upon peikko ? (if impressing is nessecary) |
_________________
Dead Men dont tell tales... But they sure play a mean game of Bloodbowl.
"Hugh Mann eh? Now theres a name I can trust!"
Me Loves Futurama |
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Feb 15, 2006 - 17:01 |
|
Thanks for the great comments, guys... keep it up!
| shadow46x2 wrote: | Blood Bowl was a derivitave of the GW universe, it should stay that way...Simply because the positional names are changing to make them user friendly, doesn't mean they're going away from a GW-based universe...the background fluff of teams is consistent with that theme, and should stay that way, even for stunty....
God knows I don't want to end up playing my GW-themed teams against...oh I dunno...LotR crap, or D&D crap...I'll go play those games if I'm interested in that...I play GW games because they're superior...please don't dilute my experience... |
In some sense, we ARE playing LotR/D&D "crap", since the Warhammer universe was derived from these. GW has built on fantasy lore from other creators and shaped it into something kind of unique, but not really. What uniqueness exists, I suppose, comes largely from the frequent "updates" to the universe. If the official FUMBBL stance is that new teams must be consistent with GW fluff, why couldn't we take it upon ourselves to "update" the universe a bit? Surely many on the site are creative and knowledgeable enough to make or help shape logically consistent races.
It is difficult for me to understand how inclusion of non-GW races would dilute your experiece, as I believe it would enrich mine. This is likely due to the fact that unlike you I have not played other GW games, and thus have not invested significant time and effort (and money) into the universe other than through BB. Maybe some day I'll make a poll about this, or perhaps Macavity will beat me to it (*cough*). That is, I'd like to know how many other GW games FUMBBL coaches have played, if any. I'd also like to know how coaches perceive non-WH fluff, both with and without a logical connection to existing fluff used for BB teams.
| shadow46x2 wrote: | | Who actually determines which of these teams "have a chance of getting into the Stunty leeg as an official team"? Do you determine that? or is it a public decision?.... |
Unfortunately, the decision is mine and therefore largely subjective. I base my decision off of forum feedback though, so if others are supporting the concept I will include it (so in some sense, it is a public decision as well). To date I have only declined inclusion to three teams that I can remember: two recent teams involving Ogre offspring, and one team hastily cobbled together a while ago that had essentially no feedback in the forums (and none positive). I'd like to be less subjective, which is why I'd like official criteria established... that way I can simply point creators to the appropriate forum thread or user guide page and say, "Your team breaks/does not meet criterion X... until this is remedied I cannot include your team in the Compendium."
If you have ideas for me regarding administration of the Compendium, I'm always open to suggestion!
| Mnemon wrote: |
I'd guess finding out what really makes some races "not work" or "not accepted" would go along way to find out what makes for a good/bad race in the long run. |
Good point... I'd be interested in this as well. I'd bet that much of the preference for races in the Stunty Leeg derives from the ability to cause injuries, or the likelihood of survival (these often go together, too). Races that are likely to injure themselves, have half the team thrown out before halftime, or find themselves unprepared to deal with Big Guys may not be as tempting to coach. I suppose someone could make a poll...
| Macavity wrote: | | You used the word Manifesto! You are now obligated to grow a beard and smoke a pipe! |
I have already purchased land in a very rural area and have built a simple shed for bomb construction. Since I know little of making bombs myself, I have hired a Gnome to assist. Completed bombs will be strategically dispersed via the secret "Garden Gnome" society, who only become animate at night. I'm not going to say who the bombs will be sent to, as that would be off-topic, suffice to say that many a brave Garden Gnome around the world will risk life and limb to carry out this "Master Plan".
| Furious George wrote: | | How exactly are the changes that you or whoever deems nessecary impressed upon peikko ? Smile (if impressing is nessecary) |
Excellent question... I have not heard anything from Peikko directly or indirectly regarding my opinions in this thread. I imagine he'll probably respond when he has time.
Regards,
~hunter |
_________________
Stunty Leeg Central - For ALL your Stunty needs! |
|
Furious_George
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 08, 2006 - 13:38 |
|
Seems a tough wait, My cheaters need a few changes to keep them playable at higher TRs i feel, like no stunty on bombers, but Im not sure Im waiting for something that will happen, or just passing time til my next FWC game
I dunno, and heres my problem, it seems as if theres a RECOGNISED method for getting 'new' teams INTO stunty leeg, i.e the playtesting, but no way to make (and this is what i see as being far more important) SMALL CHANGES to keep existing races playable and fun. Is it possible i could enter cheaters with those slight modifications* into the playtesting to see how they balance/don't to perhaps lend weight to my argument that they need to be adjusted.
* changes implied are thus:
No stunty on Bombers, finally making them capable of bombing
At least S access on the Fanatic, a-la pump wagon, or perhaps G access, but I wont hold my breath |
_________________
Dead Men dont tell tales... But they sure play a mean game of Bloodbowl.
"Hugh Mann eh? Now theres a name I can trust!"
Me Loves Futurama |
|
PandaPower
Joined: Aug 17, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 - 17:55 |
|
One change i think is neccessary : - all of the skills fanatics have available are unusable, they dont have any tackle zones so diving tackle is useless, they cnt take extra steps (in my experience) so sprint and sure feet are useless, they cant take blocks (so sidestep is useless) , they've got no arms (so catch and diving catch are useless)... I'd be happy with just one skill that fanatics / pump wagons could find useful |
|
|
Tinkywinky
Joined: Aug 25, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 - 18:17 |
|
Fanatics get S-skills in the vault rules, I certainly agree with that. Considering the earlier stated problems with cheaters I don't think GS access would be too good either, how long does a fanatic live anyway. |
_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league! |
|
Furious_George
Joined: Aug 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 - 19:48 |
|
To be honest I want no stunty on bombers, like the star bomber in ranked, like the gnomes, it wouldnt unbalance the team, it'd give them some more options in terms of a possible passing game, and it owuld make them mmore fun to play. I want to playtest it to prove my point, that it woudlnt unbalance things, but theres nowhere to do that afaik, since the playtesting areas i have seen have been for NEW teams, not redone old ones. I mean, no stunty on bombers and at least S access on fanatics, given how long they live GS wouldnt kill either, i dont see the problem here tbh. As i say, if theres a way to playtest it and prove its all kosher, then id like to be involved, and then id like to see if it cant be made official. Live in hope n such |
_________________
Dead Men dont tell tales... But they sure play a mean game of Bloodbowl.
"Hugh Mann eh? Now theres a name I can trust!"
Me Loves Futurama |
|
hunter
Joined: Aug 11, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 12, 2006 - 05:33 |
|
Cheaters definitely need some work, and I agree with the suggestions here.
That said, I'm not sure how open I am to allowing various iterations of existing rosters into the Compendium. Here are my reasons:
1) Drawing the line: I would have to be pretty subjective in what I allow and do not allow in, since I wouldn't want to blindly accept every roster change suggested. This could quickly become a problem, and would actually not help the cause as it would dilute the focus on a single roster.
2) Time: It takes time to create the rosters, update the pages, etc. This isn't a big deal every now and then, but if there are frequent changes or many rosters to add it would add up considerably.
3) peikko: peikko is aware that Cheaters (and some other races) are in need of help, and historically has modified races based on feedback in the forums. If you make good arguments, my guess is that he'll make changes at some point. One of the side benefits of this is that whenever positive changes are made, the team becomes more popular. As such, more people would start Cheater teams if they were made more viable. (However, since two new races were recently included in the Leeg, it is unlikely that any modifications will take place soon.)
4) New rules: The new LRB will soon be official, and although FUMBBL will not transition immediately, we should start modifying teams with a look towards the future. Since the client doesn't currently support the new rules, we can only conjecture at this point about future changes. However, I think this would be a good idea, and I'm going to try to make time for it sometime in the next few months.
I think the suggested changes are sound, and there is nothing to stop you from making a test roster and running some playtesting. However, I think that because of the reasons above, I would like to keep the Compendium to new races at this point.
Good luck, and keep playing stunty!
Regards,
~hunter |
_________________
Stunty Leeg Central - For ALL your Stunty needs! |
|
|
|
| |
Raising a Thrall wit...
Search
