fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
 Posted:
Jun 26, 2015 - 23:27 |
 
|
Just to throw my 2 bits in:
o I find "Big Guy" as a descriptor a bit weird; Loner accomplishes the unreliability and unresponsiveness to coaching aspects of "large monster creatures" just fine imo.
o It's important Big Guys keep their wild nature, their unpredictability adds a great deal to the fun of the match imo. Even though more often than not it's freaking frustrating!
o Big Guys should be able to do more damage than anyone else. POMB Halflings should NOT be just as destructive as Ogres, I see this as a massive weakness in CRP rules. Making PO more advantageous/less risky/exclusive to BGs strikes me as a good idea. Giving them access to other (new) damage skills is another good idea. Making them the best damage dealers is probably the best way to improve their value proposition imo.
o How about adding something to Pro along the lines of: "if this skill is added to a player with Loner, it cancels the effect of Loner, and has no other effect." |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
@fidius: your last point 'Pro cancels Loner' was a league option that I requested. It would have the same effect as removing negatrait on doubles though really
Also I think it's a bug in the client but currently Loners don't use Leader rerolls before normal ones. I think maybe having them unable to use Leader re-rolls would be a good choice |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 00:48 |
|
The both sound like good ideas to me. Though the loner/leader one maybe hard to code (no idea though).
Pro suffered slightly with the stand firm skill being halved. Pro's pretty effective at rerolling non-vital skills. On old Norse Blitzers (berserker) so combining with Block, Frenzy, Tackle, MB, Stand Firm you'd be using it regularly per match. Either to reroll failed block dice, or to dodge away from your mandatory follow ups. It would have been good on similarly made Rogres and Minos too. On these types of players, it was a pretty good skill. |
|
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 00:50 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | | @fidius: your last point 'Pro cancels Loner' was a league option that I requested. It would have the same effect as removing negatrait on doubles though really |
Well, part of what I like about editing Pro this way rather than adding another potential benefit to the doubles roll is precisely that it couldn't be used to cancel WA or RS or BH or TR or RH or BL. Those characteristics are fundamental to their respective players imo and ought to stay no matter what. Enabling a full TRR on doubles improves them enough imo, as almost all those rolls are already 2+, ie going from 84% to 97% reliability is a HUGE boost. |
|
|
SquirrelDude
Joined: Mar 22, 2015
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 00:55 |
|
I am generally against Big Guys losing loner for a couple of reasons.
1. Halflings don't need an indirect nerf. One of the very handy things about Halfling trees is that they don't have loner. I don't like every other team suddently getting this advantage as well.
2. I'm of the opinion that Big Guys are supposed to be unreliable to make up for their makeup, but I can see why that might frustrate players. I personally like the challenge and strategy involved that the loner skill brings to Big Guys.
I understand that they're a little overpriced, though. If you told me that Big Guys lost loner, but couldn't reroll their negatraits, I'd be happy with that. I also wouldn't hate it if Pro simply cancelled out loner.
I'm heavily against Big Guys being the only players allowed to take Piling On. That is taking a cludgel to the problem that I think requires more finesse. It's unfortunate, but there are in fact teams that rely on their blitzers or other dedicated players being able to KO and BH opposing playersl, so that they can keep the body count something approaching even. Norse, Skaven, and Underworld all come to mind immediately. |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 00:57 |
|
I would just get rid of loner. Star Players would be cooler then too. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Seventyone
Joined: Dec 02, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 01:03 |
|
if you want to buff big guys why not make a 3db more likely to injure someone? Seems to fit the fluff and would be good an encouraging big guy usage. I appreciate that this might not be so good for stunties however.... |
_________________
[img w=400]https://fumbbl.com/i/493475[/img] |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 02:22 |
|
| JimmyFantastic wrote: | | I would just get rid of loner. Star Players would be cooler then too. |
What about JM? 10k extra in TV? I dislike removing traits totally, as they can be a useful tool. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
I'd like to remove loner from stars too. I think they're good enough to fit in with a new team.
Part of the problem i have with Bigs not being able to remove traits is that all the star Bigs ate ace and don't have them. I think it should be possible to build Stars through regular play but the star Bigs are unique.
I also think Bigs are a great part of bb fluff and I'd prefer them to be over powered than under. I don't think this would overpower them, but if it did I don't think it would be a bad thing. |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 18:04 |
|
How about keeping loner but making it a 2+ roll for bigs or 3+ for JMen/Mercs/Stars (or any combination you like) instead of removing it completely? |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 18:55 |
|
I forgot about Jmen and Mercs but meh, you pay more for Mercs and good Jmen would please the zero attrition crowd. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 19:35 |
|
Whilst I hate cheap cpomb as much as the next guy, the general idea that Chaos/nurgle can take ANY mutation as a normal skill is I believe quite positive as it should encourage the use of interesting mutations and other unique players. The problem is that the only mutation most people ever take is claw. The solution would be in my view improving some of other mutations and lessening the impact of claw (or its ability to sync with MB and PO - but let's not get into that dicussion here).
The point is, I would like to see a lot more players with prehensile tail or extra arms or two heads. Making M doubles only will mean you never see these skills... |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 20:02 |
|
"I understand that they're a little overpriced, though. If you told me that Big Guys lost loner, but couldn't reroll their negatraits, I'd be happy with that. I also wouldn't hate it if Pro simply cancelled out loner."
I would be cool with that, but I don't see it necessary. With that said, it would be an accepted compromise to me.
"I would just get rid of loner. Star Players would be cooler then too."
Hah, gotcha, Jimmy is wrong. Merc and linos need it. Plus another argument which is very important with resurrection in mind:
Big guys compete with stars for the same roster slot in many tournaments. If you add that big guys suck generally, then removing loner would be their unique selling proposition compared to very similarly, or even more game breaking star players. (without making them broken.) |
_________________
 |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 21:05 |
|
| uzkulak wrote: | Whilst I hate cheap cpomb as much as the next guy, the general idea that Chaos/nurgle can take ANY mutation as a normal skill is I believe quite positive as it should encourage the use of interesting mutations and other unique players. The problem is that the only mutation most people ever take is claw. The solution would be in my view improving some of other mutations and lessening the impact of claw (or its ability to sync with MB and PO - but let's not get into that dicussion here).
The point is, I would like to see a lot more players with prehensile tail or extra arms or two heads. Making M doubles only will mean you never see these skills... |
Thats why I have advocated for making S skills doubles on Beastmen and Pestigors - you can still build your pombers on NWs and CWs fine, but you have to get super lucky to make that a reality for the players with mobility and the built in ST4 blitzes. I can see a lot more Block/Claw/Tackle/Prehensile Tail developing on normal rolls.
On my underworld team I've taken Horns on a wrackle player and will probably look at prehensile tail |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 27, 2015 - 21:15 |
|
On a separate note, separate issue. Seems like that most woodies are too soft for the long haul. They usually cant keep up buying new players. On the other hand waredancers seems to be super efficient for their TV.
The solution to both problems would be as follows:
wardancers cost 130k or 140k
lineman are 6347 60k |
_________________
|
|
|
|
| |
Designer's Comm...
Search
