kilinrax
Joined: Jan 12, 2015
|
 Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 16:13 |
 
|
| Macabeo wrote: | | - Dark Elves: Blitzers dominate the rest of the positionals (except maybe the witch at the beginning) thanks to having better stats, same skill access and Block. |
This is a problem with literally every roster that has linos and blitzers:
- Amazons: +40k, Block, +S access
- Dark Elves: +30k, +MA, Block
- (Pro) Elves: +50k, +MA, +AV, Block, Side-Step
- High Elves: +30k, +MA, Block
- Humans: +40k, +MA, Block, +S access
- Orcs: +30k, +MA, Block, +S access
- Skaven: +40k, +AV, Block, +S access
- Slann: +50k, +MA, Diving Tackle, Jump Up, +AS access
With the exception of Slann, for all of those rosters, I'd imagine the team would be stronger if you replaced all linos with blitzers. The only reasons I can think for not doing this are:
- A cheap dirty player
- Bench (i.e. players above 11)
- LOS duty, if you really think a rookie with Block doesn't add enough survivability for the TV
Of course other positionals are often linos plus a skill and extra normal roll access, but they're not universally better in every way (e.g. -ST or -AV catchers).
I feel like linos should offer something over a positional. Fluff-wise if feels to me that either they should be more suited to at LOS-duty, or they should be as-yet unspecialised players with more potential. It seems reasonable to me that the NAF would regulate teams access to big guys and the more esoteric positionals, but within a race it doesn't make much sense that the coach would be so restricted if the linos offer nothing but their lower cost.
Some ideas I've been kicking around:
- All linos get Thick Skull - as skellies vs Blitz-Ras or Dwarf pseudo-linos/blockers, make them last more on the LOS.
- Linos get easier doubles access - something like if either skill dice rolls less than the number of skills they already have, it counts as a double. Would give them more variety, and stop coaches from firing G-only access linos who don't roll doubles. Note: This would probably mean tweaking the Pact roster accordingly.
- Bring back Mega-Star, but only for linos - gives them almost as much potential as the blitzer frame you probably wish you'd built them on.
|
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 16:24 |
|
| tmoila wrote: | High TV elf team wins (wins=is heavily favored versus) any bash team any time.
Problem is (...or is there a problem? I think there is not.) that said elf team most likely won't win the next game, if it's against heavy bash team.
It's all balance between power and durability. |
I tend to agree. I would prefer though that the chance would be less volatile, almost flat. So elves vs bash would be balanced at the actual game, and elves would stand the same chance next game. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 16:28 |
|
I think you've missed the point.
This is the Lineman/Blitzer relationship. A blitzer is better in every respect. What should happen is that you are forced to take Linemen due to a limited amount of positionals. However due to TV, coaches are playing with small/to no benches.
The only way a lineman is superior is the cost. Simply they are cheaper to purchase because they just aren't as good. Find a way for coaches to look to field teams of 16 each match and the need for Lineman will be plentiful. As it is, they're still in demand due to TV weight watching and the need to protect the skilled few. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 16:58 |
|
Yeah, linos are important. Some teams would really really REALLLY would appreciate the current lino, plus an even cheaper lino. For example an elven team would probably buy snots just to fill the bench on the cheap. (This was an extreme example. A less extreme example would be an elven lino of 5346 for 40k-50k. Probably most elves team would buy 1 or 2 of that at some point in team development.) |
_________________
 |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 17:01 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | Wreckage wrote: |
Blodgers are very hard to kill.
|
At low TV, yes, at mid-high TV, when Tacklepombers are common, no.
|
Have you ever played box? Tacklepombers are not common at all in the box. And certainly not at 1500 TV.
And you know.. just having 1 TPomber doesnt make you capable to handle a team of blodgers. At best it lets you keep up. |
|
|
Loew
Joined: Feb 02, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 17:09 |
|
| Wreckage wrote: | | Tacklepombers are not common at all in the box. And certainly not at 1500 TV |
well, there are a lot of dwarf and c-dwarf teams around lately...
what is this, a new discussion about the box? am I late to the party?  |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 17:27 |
|
| Loew wrote: | | Wreckage wrote: | | Tacklepombers are not common at all in the box. And certainly not at 1500 TV |
well, there are a lot of dwarf and c-dwarf teams around lately...
what is this, a new discussion about the box? am I late to the party? |
Dunno waht you mean with many. I feel they have been basically non existent ever since the introduction of the CRP. They used to be in the top 3... |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 24, 2015 - 17:45 |
|
| Wreckage wrote: |
Have you ever played box? Tacklepombers are not common at all in the box. And certainly not at 1500 TV.
And you know.. just having 1 TPomber doesnt make you capable to handle a team of blodgers. At best it lets you keep up. |
No I never played Box, what is it?
A new division? Let me guess, maybe a matchmaking division pairing teams by TV? 
I never said that at 1500 TV tacklepombers are common, I said that it's better to play at TV 1500 or lower in order to avoid many tacklepombers that you can find mid-high TV (i.e. over TV 1500).
Anyway claiming that Blodgers are very hard to kill make me think you played Box in a parallel universe.
|
|
|
SquirrelDude
Joined: Mar 22, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 05:05 |
|
| footballolb16 wrote: |
Rule related issues:
[list]
[*] Piling On is too powerful, it should be changed in someway to make it less effective
- Can only PO when you have more strength?
- PO can have some risk to the PO-er (e.g., Roll d6, on a 1, make an armor roll)
- A PO roll can only cause a KO not a cas?
- Can only PO Armor or only PO injury, etc.
|
One of the common suggestions I have seen people make is to make fouling more powerful, or make dirty player better. In that vein, I'd suggest this change to piling on.
"When the player piles-on, they aggressively target the opposing player and leave themselves more vulnerable than they would usually be. The opposing coach may add a +1 bonus to either their armor or injury rolls on a foul attempt against the player who piled-on. This bonus would stack with dirty player"
In short, any the opposing team gets dirty player, or potentially dirty player x2 against a piece that uses piling-on. |
|
|
akaRenton
Joined: Apr 15, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 10:49 |
|
| SquirrelDude wrote: | | footballolb16 wrote: |
Rule related issues:
[list]
[*] Piling On is too powerful, it should be changed in someway to make it less effective
- Can only PO when you have more strength?
- PO can have some risk to the PO-er (e.g., Roll d6, on a 1, make an armor roll)
- A PO roll can only cause a KO not a cas?
- Can only PO Armor or only PO injury, etc.
|
One of the common suggestions I have seen people make is to make fouling more powerful, or make dirty player better. In that vein, I'd suggest this change to piling on.
"When the player piles-on, they aggressively target the opposing player and leave themselves more vulnerable than they would usually be. The opposing coach may add a +1 bonus to either their armor or injury rolls on a foul attempt against the player who piled-on. This bonus would stack with dirty player"
In short, any the opposing team gets dirty player, or potentially dirty player x2 against a piece that uses piling-on. |
I like this idea, adds some risk to spamming cpomb each turn although teams with multiple cpombers could still throw several a turn knowing only 1 could be fouled. |
_________________
Dirty Cranberries - All zombie funtimes
Fumbbl Image Library - Free images to make logos, player bio pics etc |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 13:20 |
|
It's a little bit messy though, particularly for TT. If you had half a dozen PO players on one team, keeping tabs is problematic. I think there are some easier, cleaner methods.
The Fluff's a little forced too. How would you be more vulnerable jumping on somebody, than if you had just been knocked over by a 650lb Ogre? |
|
|
Fabulander
Joined: Oct 11, 2014
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 13:22 |
|
I like the basic idea behind this suggestion: PO is too safe, make it more dangerous.
I don't like that the rules text then practically tells you which counter you should use. "Your opponent uses PO? Try fouling him, we've made that the best sollution for you!" It doesn't exactly encourage creative game play, and doesn't leave room for teams who for whatever reason don't focus on fouling.
If PO is too safe, make it dangerous to actually perform the pile on. Or, if POMB'ers seem to develop too fast, maybe just take away SPP's for hitting people on the ground, just like with fouling.
Hmmm, what was this thread about again? |
|
|
animefreak2599
Joined: Jul 11, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 15:01 |
|
As a new coach who can't stand slow teams I feel like the biggest problem for me is how unsustainable elf teams seem to be. I'm always one early turnover away from completely losing initiative in a game, and from there on out I'll be shedding players in a hurry. It seems like vampires probably offer a very similar high TV experience, but with much more durability due to regeneration on their worthwhile players and Ag 3 on their linemen. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 15:07 |
|
| animefreak2599 wrote: | | As a new coach who can't stand slow teams I feel like the biggest problem for me is how unsustainable elf teams seem to be. I'm always one early turnover away from completely losing initiative in a game, and from there on out I'll be shedding players in a hurry. It seems like vampires probably offer a very similar high TV experience, but with much more durability due to regeneration on their worthwhile players and Ag 3 on their linemen. |
Do you stall with your elves? |
|
|
JackassRampant
Joined: Feb 26, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2015 - 17:24 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | How would you be more vulnerable jumping on somebody, than if you had just been knocked over by a 650lb Ogre? |
650 lbs? I didn't know they let toddlers play Blood Bowl. I know some Black Orcs over 650 lbs.  |
_________________
Lude enixe, obliviscatur timor. |
|
|
|
| |
Grotty Little Tourna...
Search
