42 coaches online • Server time: 18:15
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Creating a custom to...goto Post Secret League Americ...goto Post DOTP Season 4
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
PainState



Joined: Apr 04, 2007

Post   Posted: May 24, 2017 - 23:30 Reply with quote Back to top

Iam just throwing this out there for something to chew on and discuss.

Lets just say the new direction of BB2016 goes like this.

BB season #3 expansion comes out and it is 64 pages just devoted to wizards. Every team/race has specialized wizards. No longer Fireball/L.Bolt.

30+ new spells.... Grey wizards for humans who can cast a spell that allows a player to leap 4 squares on a 2+ with no modifiers, as an example.

I think deep down some coaches are concerned that this game is going to go away from the foundation it had built up in CRP and go full monty and revert to a more chaotic approach to BB by adding new Core/Optional rules that introduce a lot of fluff and fun stuff BUT it also introduces a new dynamic of random stuff that is purely based on luck and so forth. Not to mention new fun/Fluff stuff that is borderline OP because it does effect the actual game on the pitch in drastic ways.

_________________
Comish of the: Image


Last edited by PainState on May 24, 2017 - 23:59; edited 2 times in total
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: May 24, 2017 - 23:52 Reply with quote Back to top

I have to agree with the frustration about the 'drip-drip' nature of the new rules releases. It's not such a big deal if it's just 'optional' rules - use what you want and leave the rest. But I don't like it, if they're actually releasing core rules in a drip-drip fashion. I think it could be very confusing for the player base (especially newer players) and there's more risk that they'll release something on a whim, which hasn't been properly play-tested and just breaks the game.

I have mixed feelings about this ruleset so far. I guess most of the changes seem fairly harmless. I like the removal of Piling On and Spiraling Expenses, although I am concerned about this new two-shot wizard thing and the removal of Petty Cash. I find it disappointing (although, obviously, not surprising) that GW's priority, as usual, is on how they can maximize their returns on the game, rather than making the best game they can make. It's a shame that those things don't seem to be aligned. Sad

Seems kind of similar to the recent trend in video games, where you pay for a half-finished game, then buy the rest through 'expansion packs/DLCs'.

_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2

"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" Razz
PainState



Joined: Apr 04, 2007

Post   Posted: May 24, 2017 - 23:57 Reply with quote Back to top

What would you think if they reintroduced Tom O Landry and could hire him as your coach and all undead players regen on a 2+ instead of 4+ for the game?

OP?

You guys do know who Tom O Landry is from 2Ed right?

Very Happy Surprised

_________________
Comish of the: Image


Last edited by PainState on May 25, 2017 - 00:32; edited 1 time in total
fidius



Joined: Jun 17, 2011

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 00:04 Reply with quote Back to top

It actually doesn't take much for this to happen.

My (former) TT league adopted BB2016-DZ1 for the current season -- filtering existing teams through the End of Season process, using tweaked rosters... and drawing the 2-4 cards per side before each match. Recognizing the unbalanced nature of the BB2016 deck we used the 4 50k decks from CRP instead. But even this was too much -- it became a game of "who has the Pit Trap", the cards deciding several matches that otherwise would have been up for grabs. It was not at all the same experience.
ben_awesome



Joined: May 11, 2016

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 00:20 Reply with quote Back to top

picked up the 40th anniversary edition of white dwarf containing not 1 but 2 optional star players - the white dwarf and the black goblin.
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 03:31 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly wrote:
I have to agree with the frustration about the 'drip-drip' nature of the new rules releases. It's not such a big deal if it's just 'optional' rules - use what you want and leave the rest. But I don't like it, if they're actually releasing core rules in a drip-drip fashion. I think it could be very confusing for the player base (especially newer players) and there's more risk that they'll release something on a whim, which hasn't been properly play-tested and just breaks the game.

I have mixed feelings about this ruleset so far. I guess most of the changes seem fairly harmless. I like the removal of Piling On and Spiraling Expenses, although I am concerned about this new two-shot wizard thing and the removal of Petty Cash. I find it disappointing (although, obviously, not surprising) that GW's priority, as usual, is on how they can maximize their returns on the game, rather than making the best game they can make. It's a shame that those things don't seem to be aligned. Sad

Seems kind of similar to the recent trend in video games, where you pay for a half-finished game, then buy the rest through 'expansion packs/DLCs'.


This has been the GW model for several years. I have way too many army books for Warhammer Fantasy and 40K. They will milk this for as long as they can.
Garion



Joined: Aug 19, 2009

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 09:42 Reply with quote Back to top

c9805222 wrote:
picked up the 40th anniversary edition of white dwarf containing not 1 but 2 optional star players - the white dwarf and the black goblin.


Yes these are really cool and fun optional rules. I'm all for this stuff. Its really great to see white dwarf especially in his Blood bowl gear

Fidius wrote:

It actually doesn't take much for this to happen.

My (former) TT league adopted BB2016-DZ1 for the current season -- filtering existing teams through the End of Season process, using tweaked rosters... and drawing the 2-4 cards per side before each match. Recognizing the unbalanced nature of the BB2016 deck we used the 4 50k decks from CRP instead. But even this was too much -- it became a game of "who has the Pit Trap", the cards deciding several matches that otherwise would have been up for grabs. It was not at all the same experience.


indeed

_________________
Image
JellyBelly



Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 13:18 Reply with quote Back to top

I don't think I would like it, if the game became significantly more dicey. I feel like there's enough of a luck factor as it is and a lot of work was done in the last few versions to try to make the game more balanced and skill-based. Not sure I'd be as interested in playing it, if it just turned into a giant dice-bag ... might as well go play craps or online poker.

Edit: that's the reason that I didn't like CPOMB in the first place: it removed too much skill from the game and reduced it to 'whoever gets the first couple of lucky hits in wins'.

_________________
"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody's got them and they all stink." - The protagonist, Fallout 2

"Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!!" Razz
JimmyFantastic



Joined: Feb 06, 2007

Post   Posted: May 25, 2017 - 17:35 Reply with quote Back to top

JellyBelly wrote:
Edit: that's the reason that I didn't like CPOMB in the first place: it removed too much skill from the game and reduced it to 'whoever gets the first couple of lucky hits in wins'.


Meh, Bloodbowl always has and will always be heavily influenced by removals. Sure, CPOMB put the odds in that players favour but removals(especially early ones) being so decisive is the problem.

_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby!
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic