delusional
Joined: Jan 18, 2013
|
 Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:06 |
 
|
Asking this outside of the CPOMB thread namely to get an opinion on this specific change.
Looks like the great rule fix (from GW) is to make PO optional and return Claw to +2 on av.
Personally I think that is an absolute joke. Claw was incredibly powerful. C+MB means that with 2x skills you attack an AV10 (rolling + 11 to break armor) as if it was av7 (rolling + 8 ). What's worse you come up against av7 armor, you are now rolling to beat +4!
Now I do think Mutations are botched anyway. My thoughts are that a mutating player should take +ve's with -ve's. I.e. you want claws... Ok no hands. Prehensile tail, you loose -1mv. So that players become mutated and weird rather then just strong.
But back to the point I think that this change is out and out wrong. PO had one distinct advantage, the player is PRONE. The other big advantage of PO is that it applies to anyone with ST access. By boosting mutations we boost a few teams to the cost of the rest of Fumbbl.
Curious if others agree. |
Last edited by delusional on %b %26, %2016 - %17:%Nov; edited 2 times in total |
|
DrPoods
Joined: Nov 14, 2013
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:08 |
|
What +2 claw rule? |
_________________
"Gallifrey falls no more"
Do your part! Join the Adoption Agency NOW! |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:21 |
|
** I copied this from another thread that I posted in **
So the bottom line for me is that the new rules are a collection of older editions that they mashed into a new rule set. Thus the debate of if "we" are going to look at older rule sets why did they pick this and not these other 3 "rules/fluff" that where really cool and left them out?
I have a feeling this new rule set is going to discombobulate a lot the new coaches to Blood Bowl who have not played any earlier editions. I have been playing since 1st edition of Blood Bowl so my perspective on rules and changes is a little bit different than the majority of coaches on FUMBBL.
I still remember the days that if they broke AV and then rolled a 10+ your player was DEAD.  
*********
So, the first thread with the idea being that if "we" are going to look at older rule sets why did they do this and not do that. Why did they leave that cool rule out and put in this variation of a old rule to balance it out.
Which in the end leads to the big question. Why are coaches so afraid of their pixels getting crushed, maimed and killed? |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:24 |
|
Here is the context of the question for the newer coaches in terms of rule sets.
LRB4
Claw: +2 on AV check
Razor Sharp Claws: +2 on Injury check
Oh, the humanity!! those poor elfs, flings and Gobos.
NO MODIFIERS. Could not stack with MB.
Then with a FUMBBL twist: Pile ON, you select to use PO before your block and if you fail to break AV you Pile On and reroll the AV check. This was because the skijunke client had a bug on Pile On and that was how it was coded.
Very few coaches used that combo but the ones who did...made CMBPO look like kiddie gloves where on.
So one could answer the question with a follow question as the response. Why revert Claw back to LRB4 and not re introduce Razor Sharp Claws as a "new" mutation? |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
uzkulak
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:30 |
|
Because in a competitive environment it nerfs your team when the best players die and it can be expensive/time consuming to replace them...
Thankfully with the new rules on spiralling expenses and MVP assigning this should be less of a problem - hopefully people will mother their better players a little less as a consequence? |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:41 |
|
I've read the OP three times, and I think I'm being really slow.
The new edition has been out for 24 h. Without FUMBBL ever using it, you'd like to revert a skill (Claw) that hasn't changed since CRP to it's LRB 4 state, so two editions ago now? Is that all right? If so, I think that's an unlikely scenario... |
|
|
Balle2000
Joined: Sep 25, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:45 |
|
Should what? This is a non-topic. |
|
|
Uedder
Joined: Aug 03, 2010
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 16:47 |
|
I think you missed an "e" on your "Uedder" poll option.
Claw is fine as it is imo. I'd make av10 immune to claws tho. |
|
|
delusional
Joined: Jan 18, 2013
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:19 |
|
Ok, new/old rule:
Claw: +2 on AV check
instead of Claw makes armor roles a +8 check.
So basically we go back to how the rules were instead of proceeding with the +8 check. |
|
|
delusional
Joined: Jan 18, 2013
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:31 |
|
| PainState wrote: |
So one could answer the question with a follow question as the response. Why revert Claw back to LRB4 and not re introduce Razor Sharp Claws as a "new" mutation? |
If it was just pixel hugging you would have a point. Hey, no problems if a game goes bloody and gory.
The problem I have is this: the changes mean that Chaos, Skaven and other warped teams benefit hugely.
I love a bashfest. But the bashfest should be orcs and Chaos going thud for thud.
If Chaos add a nice killstack (ie C + MB + B) then for 3 skills they have an awesome killer.
Orc's on the other hand have to push MB to it's limit.
You have 2 strong teams where vs AV9 Chaos could have a +6 roll to break armor while orks have a +8!
That's just Dumb. We already see characters skilling out once they get Block + guard, maybe dodge. Chucking mutated teams extreme advantage just leads to boring games.
Do we want more cookie cutters? I could see Chaos and/or skaven coaches going B+MB+Claw on most characters.
If you are going to have Claw as +2 then make it double edged.... +2 when blocking another player, +2 for any injury checks on the player with claw (trips on claws, etc). |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:39 |
|
It just bugs me that people have to whine over every little thing. No wonder Christer is so reluctant to move one step fourth or back in any direction.
I am really grateful we see some changes.
Hopefully they will work out. |
|
|
Nightbird
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:43 |
|
It's getting silly now. Simple fix was claw stays the same & doesn't stack w/ mighty blow. Problem solved. Yes they can still stack it & use mighty blow on the injury roll, but that's a small advantage IMO & being that pure chaos teams start w/ 0 true starting skills it's ok in my book. Plus, fluff, chaos are to be feared! If only that little extra bit.
Edit: This was to include PO causing a possible KO as well, but still stacking. That was my preference. |
_________________
"If most of us remain ignorant of ourselves, it's because self-knowledge is painful
& we prefer the pleasures of illusion." ~Aldous Huxley
Last edited by Nightbird on %b %26, %2016 - %19:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:45 |
|
I get it guys, I really do. CMBPO was a pain in the butt and messed with the meta of the game for a lot of coaches.
BUT
Now teams will load up with MB/T and maybe, just maybe run with some DP. Then quess what happens. The elves will still not play against you in ranked because now you have to much MB/T and DP linemen. Elves will be elves man. They dodge any team that can possibly hurt their precious players. This has been a universal mind set of elf teams since 1st ED. IN fact this has been the one and only constant of Blood Bowl since the very start. ELVES duck matches against teams that can hurt them.
THIS RULESET WILL NOT CHANGE THAT. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 17:48 |
|
BTW in case there is any confusion...Reverting claw back to LRB4 is, well, I will be kind, stupid.
 |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 26, 2016 - 19:35 |
|
You should fix the poll: "Leave Claw as it is (means av8 block before modifiers)."
Claw considers the AV 7 before modifiers, not 8. |
|
|
|
|
TSC Draft
Search
