Proposal to vote on adding Khorne and Brets to NAF database

News and announcements from the worldwide Blood Bowl players' association

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
User avatar
frogboy
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:20 pm
Location: South Wales

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by frogboy »

Dude if your trying to sell me blood bowl i already have it.

So yeah its been playtested in a buggy format which dosn't contain all the enducments. So is frenzy working now, for chain pushing? I would have thought thats a big part of the khorne roster.

I mentioned teams on FUMBBL, someone complains that they are not proper teams so i give my example of failings in cynide game, but die hard fans will claim its just as good. Or whatever. I couldn't care less tbh. People want to play khorne or brets so what, go for it. But i dont think you can open the door to one and not include others.

After all we are talking about the NAF, they are not the only tournements being ran, people play leagues outside of using OBBLM.

Personally i think the NAF should stay true to GW now. Mutual support. As is showing in this thread already, anything else just splits the community, i hope not to a point where people will stop playing. After all these are just individuals opinions, who can say if khorne are good enough or if FUMBBL teams should be included?

Reason: ''
I'm a British Freebooter, will play for any team including Undead (I have my own Apothecary). Good rates.
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Darkson »

@rolo - GW have released Pact (Renegades) and Underworld (I forget the new name) for BB2016.

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
User avatar
spubbbba
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2267
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: York

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by spubbbba »

Have Cyanide even got round to releasing Khorne for BB2 yet?

Reason: ''
My past and current modelling projects showcased on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
User avatar
sann0638
Kommissar Enthusiasmoff
Posts: 6609
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:24 am
Location: Swindon, England

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by sann0638 »

spubbbba wrote:Have Cyanide even got round to releasing Khorne for BB2 yet?
No, and not on the agenda either by all accounts. People still play bb1 though as it's more complete.

Reason: ''
NAF Ex-President
Founder of SAWBBL, Swindon and Wiltshire's BB League - find us on Facebook and Discord
NAF Data wrangler
User avatar
Bakunin
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:39 am
Location: Norsca

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Bakunin »

frogboy wrote:
Bakunin wrote:If you can have Slann, you can have Bretonnia.
:o

So what about all the team rosters on FUMBBL, they have been play teasted to death, I'd love to play Squigs.
We can stsrt a new section on the NAF website, seen as there is going to be some work done anyway lets not waste the opportunity to get stuff done.

I'd like satistics for Casulties added.

Also an unnamed account to record unregistered coaches at sanctioned events

Also if there is new teams then can we add a future proof button to add more new teams as they are released
tournaments
How about a separate league for non 24 tournements, like the INDY league.
TOs could add the name of roaster (fill in the blanks) at the tournement and this records games etc between registered coaches using fun teams like Squigs or Hobgoblins etc.
I agree.

I also think that the NAF should do separat ranking for Stunty Leeg tournaments.

Also, I think I can speak for the danish BB community - we support Bretonnia.

Reason: ''
Galak 3:16 says "There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook."
User avatar
Purplegoo
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Purplegoo »

straume wrote:Rosters are established and non broken. I say: the more the merrier.
I know this was a quick response, but I've seen versions of this argument about the place. Isn't this the starting point to any discussion, not the clincher? If the NAF had a 'the more the merrier' approach, we could rustle up 10 non-broken rosters from the internet by next weekend, decide they are 'established' because of FUMBBL or PBEM or whatever else and stick them in. We're here only because of the Cyanide providence these rosters have, and because of that, I think it's fair to explore it.

As Harvestmouse summarises above, not all is totally rosy in that garden. I completely understand where Cyanide have got these rosters from and why they've been added into the video game; one very good reason is to create a novelty buzz and shift units. However, while it's a good business decision to include some new, pseudo-community friendly rosters (that are also pretty beige and don't upset the balance of the game) for them, that logic doesn't necessarily follow for the NAF. That's especially true when Cyanide appear unwilling to support the rosters in the longer term; when Space Marines (or whatever) are included in BB3 and Brets join Khorne on the scrap heap, why should the NAF keep them alive? Because some of the community remember old iterations of a video game? We should absolutely be reaching out to Cyanide coaches and bringing them under the NAF umbrella, but including these rosters to appeal to them seems like quite the stretch to me.

We don't have performance numbers for Khorne and Brets when used (optionally) at NAF events yet, but actually, I'd really like it if all anecdotal predictions were confounded and one of them was T1 and the other rubbish. That would be far more appealing to me than adding two more average rosters into the game. Also, there are actually relatively few people beating down the door of TFF or the NAF forum to express how wonderful these races are to play with (cue an army of people who can't live without them, I'm sure). The lists don't appear to me to have the point of difference of Pact or the sexiness of Slann; they're not average but fun and zany (and so attractive), they're average and well, average? Do I really need more filler in my life?

I'm trying to keep an open mind on this, but when you add the above to the pretty solid, probably more important arguments about BB2016 arriving and the timing of this being pretty rum, it's going to take quite some persuading to win over to the 'yes' camp, I think.

Reason: ''
User avatar
BillyDee
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:45 pm
Location: Sitting in front of a mountain of lead, that ain't gonna paint itself...

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by BillyDee »

+1 to what Purplegoo says above.

It's the timing of this that really puzzles me. I understand that there was apparently a concensus to include Khorne in the past but implementation wasn't then possible. But with GW now firmly back in the rules making business and apparently with no intention of introducing either Khorne or Brettonia into the tabletop rules, it really seems like that window has passed (especially for Khorne, which is now just a legacy issue).

It would make more sense to be discussing removing Slann, seeing as Pact and Underworld have now been rubber stamped, and apparently GW have no interest in Slann, but removing an established team would obviously be more contentious than adding new teams wherever they are from (and I am not advocating removing Slann).

I am a long way from being a GW fanboi, but at this point it really seems more logical to fall in step with their new rules rather than a video games old rules.

Reason: ''
"Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, and everybody’s gonna die. Come watch TV?"
User avatar
sann0638
Kommissar Enthusiasmoff
Posts: 6609
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:24 am
Location: Swindon, England

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by sann0638 »

Purplegoo wrote:We're here only because of the Cyanide providence these rosters have, and because of that, I think it's fair to explore it.
This is correct, yes.

@BillyDee - the timing is easy to explain. The NAF database has been looked after by webmasters mostly on a caretaker basis for a good many years, and making substantial changes has been more time-consuming than any individual volunteer has been willing to do. The NAF is now investing in making changes to the website, which are slowly being rolled out as they occur. One of those possible changes is adding new races to the database.

Just to be clear to everyone, the current NAF committee as a whole has not formed a collective opinion on this decision - we recognise that the NAF membership as a whole is pretty split, and so this seemed like a good way of making the decision. Hopefully it can be talked about in a relaxed way, without people getting cross about a board game.

Reason: ''
NAF Ex-President
Founder of SAWBBL, Swindon and Wiltshire's BB League - find us on Facebook and Discord
NAF Data wrangler
User avatar
frogboy
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2083
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:20 pm
Location: South Wales

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by frogboy »

sann0638 wrote:Hopefully it can be talked about in a relaxed way, without people getting cross about a board game.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Reason: ''
I'm a British Freebooter, will play for any team including Undead (I have my own Apothecary). Good rates.
User avatar
Bakunin
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:39 am
Location: Norsca

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Bakunin »

sann0638 wrote:
Purplegoo wrote:We're here only because of the Cyanide providence these rosters have, and because of that, I think it's fair to explore it.
This is correct, yes.

@BillyDee - the timing is easy to explain. The NAF database has been looked after by webmasters mostly on a caretaker basis for a good many years, and making substantial changes has been more time-consuming than any individual volunteer has been willing to do. The NAF is now investing in making changes to the website, which are slowly being rolled out as they occur. One of those possible changes is adding new races to the database.

Just to be clear to everyone, the current NAF committee as a whole has not formed a collective opinion on this decision - we recognise that the NAF membership as a whole is pretty split, and so this seemed like a good way of making the decision. Hopefully it can be talked about in a relaxed way, without people getting cross about a board game.
But decision is easy enough? Put it to a vote, and you go from there. It will be the active (internet) democracy, that rules, but the losing party would probably survive :D

Reason: ''
Galak 3:16 says "There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook."
User avatar
BillyDee
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:45 pm
Location: Sitting in front of a mountain of lead, that ain't gonna paint itself...

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by BillyDee »

I understand that in the past we couldn't. I understand that now we can. I just don't understand why we now should incorporate two new teams because of Cyanide, when they have already dropped one of them, we have no idea if Brets (or any other team they come up with in their next paid for DLC) will join Khorne on the scrapheap come BB3, and that GW are now back making rules and have no plans for either. So I maintain the timing seems strange.

Reason: ''
"Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, and everybody’s gonna die. Come watch TV?"
User avatar
BillyDee
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:45 pm
Location: Sitting in front of a mountain of lead, that ain't gonna paint itself...

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by BillyDee »

I also think "Referendum planned to introduce Khorne and Brettonia to NAF sanctioning" might be a better title for this thread. This has been 'discussed' endless times, this is the first time (I am aware of) there being a vote proposed.

Reason: ''
"Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, and everybody’s gonna die. Come watch TV?"
User avatar
Purplegoo
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:13 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Purplegoo »

frogboy wrote:
sann0638 wrote:Hopefully it can be talked about in a relaxed way, without people getting cross about a board game.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
“Amongst all unimportant subjects, Blood Bowl is by far the most important.”

(Probably not a pope)

And I agree with BD. Totally get why the timing is off. But it is off. How much that matters is, of course, up for debate. Timing is often everything.

Reason: ''
User avatar
sann0638
Kommissar Enthusiasmoff
Posts: 6609
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:24 am
Location: Swindon, England

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by sann0638 »

BillyDee wrote:So I maintain the timing seems strange.
Sure. And I think most people agree with this. But is that a reason for not doing it?

Not sure that BB3 is worth talking about. BB2 is still being actively supported, with the next tranche of races being delivered.

Reason: ''
NAF Ex-President
Founder of SAWBBL, Swindon and Wiltshire's BB League - find us on Facebook and Discord
NAF Data wrangler
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: Discussion of new races

Post by Darkson »

sann0638 wrote:Not sure that BB3 is worth talking about. BB2 is still being actively supported, with the next tranche of races being delivered.
Using that logic then why are we discussing Khorne, as they're not being actively supported?

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
Post Reply