GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:06 |
 
|
| Frankie wrote: | | Big guys worked just fine IMHO |
There are a lot of folks that don't agree with this statement ... sorry .. I know its has mixed opinions on FUMBBL ... but even here where you guys have a lot of folks that push for the agressive side of BB ... I've seen a lot of support for no General access on Big Guys.
Galak |
|
|
GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:08 |
|
| LordSigmund wrote: | | now im left wondering if all these important new in-game rules will be possibly implemented in the client and on the site :s |
I'll wish Ski luck and lots of it. I'm hoping to have all the changes programmed for the PBeM program by the end of the month ... not sure if I can do it ... but I really want to get the MBBL up and running to test the rules so I'm going to push hard. I wrote down the 30 things I need to program in to make the rules work right.
Galak |
|
|
SnakeSanders
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:16 |
|
some things i guess will be easy enough to do... eg secret weapon skill will probably be a sending off roll of 2+ or whatever... if you put the weapon out it will be spotted by the ref
some however will not be easy to do! |
|
|
Stovaa
Joined: Apr 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:23 |
|
I hate the idea of a freebooted apoth.
I'll probably never play my Norse again if these become official.
Also, the reasons you gave, Galak, indicate to me that having a crap team facing an opponents skilled one is one of the best ways to win. Thats not a tactic, or a reason. I reccomend you reconsider these changes, along with the rest if the BBRC. |
|
|
Frankie
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:33 |
|
I'm a bit sceptic about the changes. Low-armoured teams will suffer greatly if they can't hire their quack doctor and big guys worked just fine IMHO. PI causes only a stun? I can hardly imagine... I think that the most important rule changes was rather made by business consideration than to correct the game's flaws. But there are some real good changes too (the use of cheerleaders, more stable ff, etc) |
|
|
GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:36 |
|
| Stovaa wrote: | I hate the idea of a freebooted apoth.
I'll probably never play my Norse again if these become official.
Also, the reasons you gave, Galak, indicate to me that having a crap team facing an opponents skilled one is one of the best ways to win. Thats not a tactic, or a reason. I reccomend you reconsider these changes, along with the rest if the BBRC. |
Not true ... at least I hope that's not true. Stunty teams are really the only team that will be able to play that card IMO.
Look your Norse will still be able to have the apothecary ... its just going to require more careful team management. There is a lot more gold in the system with these rules so its easier to sock back 50k to have the apothecary each match and if you are 5 TR points down then the apothecary is free and you don't have to spend the money on him.
Also the goal with the system was to allow the underdog a 1 in 3 chance of winning NOT be favored ... definitely NOT be favored. The thought is that the skills will matter more.
Compare some things:
Which is better ... a Wizard or having 5 players get doubles roll skills/traits
The idea here is that with good team management the team with the higher TR STILL has the advantage because skills are better than rookies. If the addition of Stars give the underdog too much advantage ... well we leaned towards denying them team rerolls from the start ... that could easily come back.
So do I think being the underdog is the best way to win ... nope .. definitely NOT. I do think that by playing the system right with a Stunty team ... you can have a heck of a lot of FUN ... will you win ... not sure ... but I think you'll still have fun playing the stunties which is the most important part.
Galak |
|
|
LordSigmund
Joined: Jan 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:39 |
|
stovaa> You have to remember that you are going to be winning a lot more money, even at high TR, so freebooting your apoth wont be that hard, you can either choose to spend your cash on making your team stronger, or on keeping it safer against injury (though i think as apoths are freebooted, multiple ones could be interesting).
I dont think the new rules make playing up the best way to win, it is just a lot better way of handling handicaps. They even the playing field better, as you get to buy things that give your teams the same value before a match. I prefer this method to the handicap table.
edit: Galak beat me to it and he explains it a lot better than me |
Last edited by LordSigmund on %b %10, %2004 - %22:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 22:41 |
|
| Frankie wrote: | | I'm a bit sceptic about the changes. Low-armoured teams will suffer greatly if they can't hire their quack doctor and big guys worked just fine IMHO. PI causes only a stun? I can hardly imagine... I think that the most important rule changes was rather made by business consideration than to correct the game's flaws. |
Since this is the 2nd time that's been said ... I'd love to know how making Big Guys WORSE is a business consideration. Its an easy thing to say that the rules were driving by business consideration but it doesn't work when you actually look at what was done.
And having been present for all 4 months of discussions on these rules the ONLY time business consideration was brought up was LAST WEEK when we realized we needed to add rules for Ugroth Bolgrot and Barik Farblast since GW was still selling miniatures for them.
You can of course choose to believe I'm lying through my teeth ... but its the flat out truth that the BBRC isn't driven by "business considerations".
However, if you have specific rules that you think were driven by this and not really for a good change to the game reason ... bring them up and explain your thoughts on it as to why you feel that way. I'll be happy to try and explain the logic behind the change if I can.
Galak |
|
|
Frankie
Joined: Oct 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 23:06 |
|
I didn't accuse you of lying and I emphasize that most of the new rules are good. But do you fancy putting ogres into the official league? Cause they seem to be more acceptable now, that they can have block with a double. And that freeboted apoth is obviously good for undead teams in stock.
I don't really know about how things going at BBRC or at GW, and when I say "business consideration" I refer to GW, who products the miniatures and don't want them to be stucked in the warehouses. I feel like you took offensive when I said about business. Well I didn't mean it. It's also part of the entertainment. |
|
|
Loof
Joined: Feb 21, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 23:24 |
|
I presume that the darkelf thrower not haveing pass is a typo?
Other then that i think the new system looks promising, with a few exceptions that i will have to test to see how they work.
I especialy like the new kickof table with less random gamedesideing results.
The only three things that i have doubts about where:
Fanfactor seems next to useles in these rules as the only 2 things that i could see it afecting where throw a rock and PI on the kickof chart.
The lost skillrolls for rolling a third ability increase i cant understand what point that rule serves.
And finaly is'nt +60k or 50k for +ST and +AG a bit much? thats 3 skills for that increase alone. |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
possible 120K winnings from a game with a 3K gate seems a little wierd. But the proof will be in the playing. |
|
|
GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 23:47 |
|
| Frankie wrote: | I didn't accuse you of lying and I emphasize that most of the new rules are good. But do you fancy putting ogres into the official league? Cause they seem to be more acceptable now, that they can have block with a double. And that freeboted apoth is obviously good for undead teams in stock.
I don't really know about how things going at BBRC or at GW, and when I say "business consideration" I refer to GW, who products the miniatures and don't want them to be stucked in the warehouses. I feel like you took offensive when I said about business. Well I didn't mean it. It's also part of the entertainment. |
Thanks for the explaination ... I'm used to FUMBBL being a lot more critical than TBB so I tend to come here with shields at full and phasers on slightly crispy.
Okay ... the Ogre team ... well yes, I'd like to see the Ogre team become official ... and yes the loss of General skill access means they'll finally be balanced enough to become official ... so I can kinda see the logic there. However, the main focus was on fixing Big Guys and the side effect was we realized afterwards that the Ogre team would get fixed also ... really it was the one first which led to the other.
And while the freebooted apoth makes Undead better, Mummies lost General skill access which definitely isn't going to help clear shelves of them ... see that's what I mean by not being dollar driven here. For just about anything you might point at and say ... hmmm that seems driving by business more than good rules sense ... I'm pretty sure I can show how something else was changed that isn't necessarily good business sense or why the rule change makes sense.
Just wanted to make sure that folks understood that the BBRC wasn't considering GW's bottom line at all during the process ... other than the 2 extra star players we added right at the last minute.
Galak |
Last edited by GalakStarscraper on %b %10, %2004 - %23:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
GalakStarscraper
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 10, 2004 - 23:53 |
|
| Loof wrote: | | I presume that the darkelf thrower not haveing pass is a typo? |
Typo
| Quote: | The only three things that i have doubts about where:
Fanfactor seems next to useles in these rules as the only 2 things that i could see it afecting where throw a rock and PI on the kickof chart. |
It also can effect Cheering Fans. And FF was meant to be much less impact on the game than it currently is.
| Quote: | | The lost skillrolls for rolling a third ability increase i cant understand what point that rule serves. |
That has been a rule since 3rd edition. The documents need to have added back that a ability increase can be used as a normal skill.
| Quote: | | And finaly is'nt +60k or 50k for +ST and +AG a bit much? thats 3 skills for that increase alone. |
Yes ... they really are worth that much ... I'm pretty sure of this.
Galak |
Last edited by GalakStarscraper on %b %11, %2004 - %00:%May; edited 1 time in total |
|
LordSigmund
Joined: Jan 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 11, 2004 - 00:01 |
|
| Quote: | | I'm used to FUMBBL being a lot more critical than TBB so I tend to come here with shields at full and phasers on slightly crispy. |
Heh, Galak's scared of us  |
|
|
Michael_Warblade
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
May 11, 2004 - 00:20 |
|
Hmm well im happy with these new rules (although i play necromantic which is one of the only teams which is unchanged after the rules review so i am slightly biased)
And im with Galak and the BBRC on Stat increases they are worth a lot
hoping fumbbl runs different divisions with different caps when these new rules come in |
|
|
|
|
Vamps win another ma...
Search
