Macabeo
Joined: Feb 13, 2011
|
 Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 16:46 |
 
|
I skimmed most of the thread. Anyway, I agree with rat_salat.
Changes in the ruleset don't have to happen continuously, every few years would suffice (your mileage may vary). How many years have passed since we got CRP already? |
|
|
Leilond
Joined: Jan 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 16:59 |
|
| Macabeo wrote: | I skimmed most of the thread. Anyway, I agree with rat_salat.
Changes in the ruleset don't have to happen continuously, every few years would suffice (your mileage may vary). How many years have passed since we got CRP already? |
The problem is not CRP, but the fact that CRP is not intended the way we play BB in [R] or [B]
If rule changes are needed (and I'm not saying thet are), the changes have to be made HERE, to make [R] and [B] teams developement be more like perpetual leagues, because the rules are a bit more balanced (a bit more, not totally) for those environment
If they change the CRP to make it more balanced for leagues and NAF (because they write the rules for those environment), they will be not more balanced in [B] and [R], that works in a completely different way.
Thus, in my opinion, if there is some balance issue in R or B, it will never be solved by a "BB rule change" but only by a fumbbl rule change
And I say IF there is some balance issue... and we know that not everyone agree on this |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 17:22 |
|
| Calcium wrote: | | koadah wrote: | So why would you want to change.  |
Just to be clear Koadah, I have never said I want to change the rules....and I don't create countless stealth anti-clawPOMB threads to try to affect change either  |
I don't create the threads either. But if someone creates one I'll definitely comment on it. 
I didn't mean that you wanted change. I meant that you wouldn't want change if it already works the way that you want.
But hey, do you guys really want the rules to stay exactly as they are until the end of time? You wouldn't even say yes to a fouling buff? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Macabeo
Joined: Feb 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 18:09 |
|
| Leilond wrote: | | The problem is not CRP, but the fact that CRP is not intended the way we play BB in [R] or [B] |
The problem *is* CRP. As Rat_salat pointed out, the evolution of the rules disregarded for the most part the principles of game design. CPOMB is a prime example because it's:
- Suspected to be overpowered
- Easy to pull
- No fun
Three negative aspects of such magnitude together just cannot be ignored. And it's not the only thing, other stuff can certainly be improved.
Also:
- As you correctly say, matchmaking might also be improved independently of whether the rules change or not.
- The change in the rules is not only to improve BB, but also to avoid it from becoming stale. |
|
|
Calcium
Joined: Apr 08, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 18:15 |
|
| Macabeo wrote: |
The problem *is* CRP. As Rat_salat pointed out, the evolution of the rules disregarded for the most part the principles of game design. CPOMB is a prime example because it's:
- Suspected to be overpowered
- Easy to pull
- No fun |
Personally I find it great fun! And is it any easier than mass blodge? They both require dice right?
Im so glad the future of BB is not in the hands of coaches like this..... |
_________________
 |
|
Macabeo
Joined: Feb 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 18:25 |
|
| Calcium wrote: | | Personally I find it great fun! And is it any easier than mass blodge? They both require dice right? |
I doubt you find it fun when you're on the receiving end. Blood is fun but unavoidable blood is not, it doesn't reward coach skill.
Also, Blodge is the second biggest problem with CRP in my opinion (eyeless fouling would be third), I won't disagree with you here. However, Blodge doesn't arbitrarily trump the development of the opposing teams and at least has an active counter in Tackle, CPOMB has only passive counters like Fend. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 18:29 |
|
| Calcium wrote: |
Personally I find it great fun! And is it any easier than mass blodge? They both require dice right?
Im so glad the future of BB is not in the hands of coaches like this..... |
Anyways, the reintroduction of TS would not really impact on your concerns as it would balance any strong build.
Also everybody else either seemed to think it was a good approach or just didn't get what we were talking about. |
Last edited by Wreckage on %b %23, %2015 - %18:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
Aflo
Joined: Jun 16, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 18:30 |
|
Eh, think I've slowly leaned over to the 'it's fine' camp. I don't play CPOMB, mostly box humans. As mentioned before not everything is supposed to be balanced in this game. Some big horrible, mutated half-demon psycopath in plate armour probably would be quite good at beating people up.
You'll get games where you lose all your mens, you'll get games where all the elves work. Just makes it more satisfying when the underdog pulls through. |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 19:06 |
|
Blodge is only a problem when combined with picking. Someone shared the win % data of teams in box and ranked, and it was shocking how much worse Dark Elves are in box, as opposed to ranked. Many veteran coaches have created ranked DE teams, spammed blodge, and played low-skill coaches without tackle. That's about as unbalanced a playing field as you are going to find, Clawpomb included.
Good coaches actually don't lose to dark elves, especially good bash coaches, because they understand that getting that tackle/mighty blow player online is an extremely high priority. There are also two hard counters to blodge (wrestle, tackle).
The real overpowered skill here isn't piling on, claw, or tackle. It's actually mighty blow itself. There is almost no winning strategy in bloodbowl that doesn't somehow incorporate mighty blow into the equation. Skaven and their stormvermin, Dark Elves and their blitzer doubles, even halflings with their treemen, we all abuse the mighty blow skill to some extent.
If an expert player can consistently beat other experts by just doing one move or one tactic, we have to call that game imbalanced because there aren’t enough viable options. Such a game might have thousands of options, but we only care about the meaningful ones. If those thousands of options all accomplish the same thing, or nothing, or all lose to the dominant move mentioned above, then they are not meaningful options. They just get in the way and add the worst kind of complexity to the game: complexity that makes the game harder to learn yet no more interesting to play.
This is clawpomb in a nutshell. Player removal is so important in bloodbowl, and the snowball effect so large, that with few exceptions we all must incorporate mighty blow somewhere into our teams and strategies. We may laugh at the dwarf coach with 10 mighty blow, but we also know that so long as he has built that team without neglecting other core skills (guard, generally), a large portion of our skill advantage will be nullified when we play that team.
That's a crappy situation, and while bloodbowl is still fun to play, it would be nice if this aspect was a little more balanced. At the moment, the Fumbbl metagame consists of tactically positioning your players in a manner which allows you to use the mighty blow skill more times than your opponent, with the occasional distraction of the actual ball.
This is, of course, very loyal to the fluff, which teaches us that many blood bowl teams could care less about the ball, and simply want to smash their opponents. The issue is that at high TV, team destruction becomes the only viable winning strategy, the very definition of imbalance. |
Last edited by Rat_Salat on %b %23, %2015 - %19:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
Harad
Joined: May 11, 2014
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 19:12 |
|
Back on topic. I get my hardest games in the box and my easiest. |
|
|
Aflo
Joined: Jun 16, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 19:17 |
|
I'd say this is on topic, the original post mentioned CPOMB being the distinct difference between the two divisions. |
|
|
Kam
Joined: Nov 06, 2012
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 20:05 |
|
| Rat wrote: | | If an expert player can consistently beat other experts by just doing one move or one tactic, we have to call that game imbalanced |
And we don't give a damn, because the game is meant to be imbalanced, and fun as it is.
And if you disagree, if you don't find it fun anymore, if you're no longer excited by the fluff, by the DYK from the rulebook, by the fancy minis, etc, it's perfectly understandable, especially after having spent more time playing the game than it was designed for thanks to this online communty, but maybe, maybe it's time to take a break.
Oh and by the way, the game wasn't designed for this or that. It was designed for selling miniatures. |
_________________
GLN 17 is out!
 |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 20:12 |
|
| Kam wrote: |
Oh and by the way, the game wasn't designed for this or that. It was designed for selling miniatures. |
Talk about lack of long term vision. |
|
|
RedDevilCG
Joined: Jan 09, 2010
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 21:59 |
|
Just curious if anyone mentioned that the more even win rate in box could have more to do with how CPOMB vs.CPOMB works than with a more competitive environment? A great coach should win out against a good coach, but with CPOMB vs CPOMB it's all about player elimination which can go either way any given game.
This leads to great coaches having a lower win rate, because the good coach is good enough to win when he has a 2+ player advantage. CPOMB is stochastic enough to make things closer to 50/50 and the better skill only brings it up a bit from there.
TLDR: Maybe CPOMB vs. CPOMB is a slippery slope where CAS snowballs the win between good or better coaches? |
Last edited by RedDevilCG on %b %23, %2015 - %22:%May; edited 2 times in total |
|
Leilond
Joined: Jan 02, 2012
|
| Posted:
May 23, 2015 - 22:13 |
|
CPOMB do not dominate leagues like it do in B
Again, I still think the problem IS NOT crp, but the use we made of it.
We judge the rule using mostly our fumbbl experience... but fumbbl B and R IS NOT blood bow as it the rules are written for |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
