Big Guys and Piling On-Smell the Cheese

[MistWraith]

I'm sue this will be a popular solution, why not only roll to see if the Ref spots the foul when the the armor is broken?

Example 1: you gang up on the ogre that just flattened your mate. Everyone puts the boot it, but you fail to break armor...no foul has occurred.

Example 2: You bring over some more mates next turn because the big guy is down again, this time you bust his armor good and proper, but your opponent gets to see if the ref spotted it at 6+. (next time it's at 4+)

I don't like the idea of toning any skills down. I like the game the way it is, if anything I want more blood. To lose superstars is actually refreshing as dealing with adversity builds character...even in BB.

A foul has still occured if you hit a downed player.

And, what will the rest of his team be doing while all of my team is trying to hurt the oger? Not to mention, that more than just big guys can have the skill.

If a skill is to powerfull, then it needs to be changed, like the old 2+ regneration skill.

[Milo]

I think there are a lot of downsides to Piling On, some of which have already been mentioned --

1) You're prone, making you vulnerable to fouls.
2) You have to spend 3 MA to stand up on the next turn, severely hampering the movement of most Big Guys. Jump Up is a trait now, and so cannot be gained by the players Piling On is most useful for.
3) You have no tackle zone, making it easier for your opponents to dodge away from you and deny you an easy block next turn.
4) Taking Piling On prevents you from taking another more generically useful skill with a Big Guy, such as Pro or Block.

The example of four mummies with Piling On discounts the fact that a smart team will only give them, at most, one hit every other turn. If they form a cage -- well, that's tough to crack, but it won't move very fast, there's always Dauntless, and I can't think of a better opportunity for a fireball from a freebooted Wizard.

I'm not saying that Piling On isn't a powerful skill, or that it may not be in need of further revision. Members of the BBRC (including myself) are testing it and if necessary, will alter the skill during the next Rules Review. Personally, the two suggestions for changing it that I think are most likely are to:

1) Set it back to 3rd Ed, where you must decide before rolling, or
2) Make it a Strength Trait, reducing it's impact by reducing it's availability.

Leagues who find it overpowering now are welcome to test either of the above suggestions and let the BBRC know what you find.

Milo

[DoubleSkulls]

1) Set it back to 3rd Ed, where you must decide before rolling, or
2) Make it a Strength Trait, reducing it's impact by reducing it's availability.

Either of these are good fixes. ECBBL has already adopted #1.

I quite like #2 as it keeps the skill rules standard (they all occur after the dice roll).

[Skummy]

Milo, I think that changing the bonus to armor break to 1/2 a player's strengh rounded up would be in line with the current rules. This way a 3 strength would get +2 to crack armor and a str. 5 would get +3. It would still be very good without being unbalancing.

[Longshot]

As long as mummies are not big guys, i dont see the problem with this skill on a big guy. Mummies already doing it.
They should be BG

[Darkson]

2) Make it a Strength Trait, reducing it's impact by reducing it's availability.

NOOOOOOO!!!!! My poor Norse Blitzers

[wesleytj]

Why do I think that DP is too good?
Rival has piling on = luckily DP skill can help.
Rival has freebooted a star = DP can help.
Rival has trained/created a really good player = DP can help.
Rival still has players on the pitch = DP can help.
Rival has a DP = DP can help.
Rival has 2 DP's = better get 3 yourself.......

Nah, new igmeoy means you really have to pick and choose when/where you use your dp's so it's not overpowered. Now if your opponent has 2 dps just let him foul you and get kicked out. So it's not a big deal at all.

I regularly play gainst an orc team.
All his BOBs and blitzers (and the troll) are hard hitters.
His linemen? 4 dirty players.
Martin

A: that's dumb (see above)

B: why does he still field 4 line orcs? 4bobs, 4blitzers, 2throwers, 1 ogre(or troll in that case). If you don't like fielding throwers all the time, that could either be goblins, or at most, 2 line orcs on the field.

[BoB]

To be perfectly honest, big guys with PO upset me a lot less then the current minotaur in our league with razor sharp fangs.
+1 armour role, +2 inj every block
If he had piling on then i might be able to get him off the damn pitch

[wesleytj]

To be perfectly honest, big guys with PO upset me a lot less then the current minotaur in our league with razor sharp fangs.
+1 armour role, +2 inj every block
If he had piling on then i might be able to get him off the damn pitch

Well all I can say is at least he had to roll doubles for that, wheras Piling On is a Strength skill that he could have taken without that. Also he is only 1 player.

Mutations are generally supposed to be better than normal skills...it's one of the built-in advantages of chaos and skaven teams (and by extension minos and rat ogres)

[Zombie]

2) You have to spend 3 MA to stand up on the next turn, severely hampering the movement of most Big Guys. Jump Up is a trait now, and so cannot be gained by the players Piling On is most useful for.

Can anyone say piling on + jump up vampires?

1) Set it back to 3rd Ed, where you must decide before rolling, or
2) Make it a Strength Trait, reducing it's impact by reducing it's availability.

Leagues who find it overpowering now are welcome to test either of the above suggestions and let the BBRC know what you find.

We've been testing option 1 ever since the Rules Review appeared, and before that under 4th ed and 3rd ed (never played any differently).

Under the current rules, with our piling on, you still see a couple players on every bashing team with it, and big guys all take it, usually as a second skill.

Some players with ST3 have it, but it seems to hurt them more often than it helps (either they still don't break armour and went down for nothing, or would have broken armour anyway and again went down for nothing). For ST4 and ST5 players, it seems to work very well, especially in conjunction with mighty blow but even without it. The most feared players on any team are usually the ones with piling on.

In our experience, the skill is just powerful enough that way. Not too strong, but not too weak either.

It also makes more sense that way since the position of the player on the pitch is changed, and that's why we also play diving tackle like in 4th ed, and you have to choose whether to use it before the dodge roll is made.

[DoubleSkulls]

In our experience, the skill is just powerful enough [before Av roll]. Not too strong, but not too weak either.

Exactly my feelings. IMO S4 its a toss up between PO and MB.

PO has 34.7% of a KO or casualty vs Av8, MB 22% chance. That is a decent enough trade off for going prone whether you need to or not.

[Munkey]

I think part of the percieved problem with PO is that its effectiveness is dependant on the player it is given to (ie. their ST).

While this applies to a fair few skills (how many Kroxigors are there with catch )it is more obvious with PO. Once it is given to a player with ST 5 people start to get worried.

In my opinion this is not a problem, providing it is played like the pre-LRB version, and this is the ammendment that I would support (and the way we still play it).

[D'Arquebus]

Personally I think as Zombie does, both PO and Diving Tackle should be BEFORE the roll.

I think it is merely a holdover from 4th Ed, where they changed skills to 1 per turn and so let you choose after the roll. Change these two skills back and suddenly the player in question has to make choices without knowing if he will either get through or fail regardless.

Classic example, Mummy with PO and Jump Up (under old rules when this was permissable) Piled On on my Zug. After rolling Armour of 4 he didn't get through anyway. Scared of facing the Jump Up/PO combo the rest of the game I ran over with a single blitzer, no assists, and fouled the mummy, killing him which he failed to regenerate.

Choosing before the roll would make people think twice about using it everytime, and without definate knowledge of success everytime!

[Ghost of Pariah]

The only prob I see with turning it back to the 3rd edition version is that the BBRC is stuck in the "consistency" mindset. If they turn back PO then they feel they must turn back DT. Personally I don't feel it's necessary but I'm sure that's one of their issues.

IMO PO needs to be turned back but DT should be left as is.

[Grumbledook]

I agree pariah, they can make exceptions though. Like you have to use frenzy, not many other skills or traits that are compulsory. I don't see a problem with just taking it back.