Talk Fantasy Football

Manuel wrote:Mmmmh...
The best thing they could do is ask for a new, public and open BBRC, and let them update the rulebook as the community demands it. And restrict themselves to miniature production.

The parts in red sound really bad ideas... Like "Grak and Crumbleberry" kind of bad.

Manuel wrote:Weeping dagger: completely unnecessary. Matching aesthetical criteria with rules was already a bad idea when Khorne was designed for Cyanide, and it still is.

Okay, I'll agree with you that this skill should not have been added just to match the models. But it has been -- why is it a problem?

Manuel wrote:Use of RR for PO: introduces new mechanic when there were many other ways to approach the "problem" they wanted to solve. "Problem" that was only present in perpetual or very long leagues. No deep thought on how it would affect resurrection tournaments.

I don't know if I would say it introduces a new mechanic. Team Re-rolls are an existing mechanic, restricted from being used on armor and injury rolls normally. The new Piling On just allows you to use one on a dice roll it's not normally allowed on. The rules vis-a-vis Loner are just to maintain consistency with other uses of Team Re-rolls. How is that a new mechanic?

But I agree, Piling On is not yet fixed. It did have problems before, and it needed to be addressed, but I don't like the way it's been addressed.

Manuel wrote:Regarding they accepting free help... well, I hope you are not referring to Galak and the LRB6. If that story didn't end tragically it was mainly because of 1 man's altruism.

Have they contacted someone this time? Well... secret seems to be the norm. And this hypothetical experienced coaches would have been ignored anyway, as it seems.

No, I wasn't referring to Galak. I was referring only to the new FW Specialist Games team, not any other previous instance of GW.

I won't out anyone else, but I'll go ahead and say it here -- I'm one of the "experienced coaches" who has been helping them review rules. I will state upfront that these rules did not come past us for review because they were written long before we got involved. Others involved may not want to become lightning rods for criticism, so I respect their decisions to announce their participation or not as they see fit.

Manuel wrote:The best thing they could do is ask for a new, public and open BBRC, and let them update the rulebook as the community demands it. And restrict themselves to miniature production.

I doubt that will happen, and it wasn't really what the BBRC was in the first place. GW/FW will be involved in rules generation moving forward and I think that's the way it should be. (Without GW's involvement, ANY other governing body would not be seen as "official", no matter who you got to do it.)

Well, that honours you Milo, thank for stepping forward.

The bitterness you may read in my comments are because I think we had a very polished ruleset, optimized for resurrection environments, and I see GW's need of keeping things in permanent evolution will bring flashy but unbalanced rules as they update3 their miniature catalog.

I really hope you value the "competitive" level achieved by the LRB6, and do not surrender to the "more random more fun" current. (Remember for when goblins are out).

Milo wrote:

Sandwich wrote:Question I don't think anyone has asked: is Kick Team-Mate a new skill that I can give to a player?

Follow-up question: would it stack with Kick??

Is Throw Team-mate?

Can't check the rules at work but can't you choose Extraordinary skills when winning the Chaos Cup? So potentially yes.

True, its a long shot.... but then this is the internet and I demand my right to spout nonsense!!

Manuel wrote:Regarding they accepting free help... well, I hope you are not referring to Galak and the LRB6. If that story didn't end tragically it was mainly because of 1 man's altruism.

Ah Thanks ... I'd still be happy to review anything anyone wanted me to even with that history from GW. I am that confident in the goodwill of Andy and James.

Manuel wrote:Well, that honours you Milo, thank for stepping forward.

The bitterness you may read in my comments are because I think we had a very polished ruleset, optimized for resurrection environments, and I see GW's need of keeping things in permanent evolution will bring flashy but unbalanced rules as they update3 their miniature catalog.

I really hope you value the "competitive" level achieved by the LRB6, and do not surrender to the "more random more fun" current. (Remember for when goblins are out).

Let me say that I do value the current competitive rules, but I also value the kooky weirdness that BB is based on. I think there's room for both.

You are right that the current rule set is optimized for resurrection style tournaments, but it's a fallacy to think that is the only way Blood Bowl is being played. There is a wide variety between tournaments, casual leagues, those crazy nut jobs on FUMBBL, and computer players. And it's a tricky job to balance the rules for all of those options.

Piling On may be fine for resurrection tournaments, but it's flat out BROKEN for perpetual BB, especially with Claw. The new version isn't perfect -- I'm of the opinion it needs further revision -- but it does resolve a serious problem with the game in perpetual leagues.

I like the special Play cards for league games -- it adds a degree of uncertainty that reduces the likelihood of one coach stalling for a 1-0 win -- but they certainly don't belong in tournament games.

GalakStarscraper wrote:You come in and bash us...

Tom

I did no such thing.

JT-Y wrote:

GalakStarscraper wrote:You come in and bash us...

Tom

I did no such thing.

Apologies ... that is how my mind reads your comments about being here just for people to be angry at along with saying everything is okay since it was done long ago and not meant to be serious. IE that to me reads like you feel no one has a point who is asking for a bit more self review by GW which is basically when I read it with the tone I picture you using is bashing the posters for posting meaningless words (ie you are dismissing the posters). Which to ... totally dismissal is a form of bashing (actually one I respond normally more negative to than angry discussion)

So yes ... to me you are bashing the posters. But I can understand why you would feel your language does not match.

I will be very clear ... I agree with supporting Andy and James. I get that you are tied to them and so have been very defensive on their behalf. So I get all that. I think Andy and James are trying to do great things ... just would like them to make sure someone outside GW looks at that because they are doing Jurassic Park quote errors with that awesome drive that I respect them for. IE this quote "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should." That is where I currently see Andy and James. If we can get someone outside GW to add in the "think if they should" I see only awesome stuff for Blood Bowl to come.

So consider this open support ... but stuff like the Ogre and Halfling rules just make me feel even more strongly that GW needs someone to be doing some more thinking if they should preferably without any reason to fear giving a negative comment to a GW person (ie someone outside the company for that step).

Deathrain wrote:

howabe wrote:

JT-Y wrote: I eagerly await your angry responses

More disappointment than anger on my end at likely missing out on some nice looking models.

As for the rules, any unofficial league/tourney etc. can simply not allow them, or alter the stats/price to what they see fit.
Any idea on the likelihood of GW enforcing their legality in anything they run?

Maybe even on the contrary. Note that most events up to this point (like the one at Warhammer world) up to this point specificaly allowed the base game, DZ1, and sometimes teams of legend. No flat out "all official GW material". These two guys will probably be in DZ2, which isn't great, but a chance to revisit them (in which case there is real potential here). So, what should the comunity do? Say they are unhappy in a polite manner to keep the good will of the team and more importantly motivate them to listen. Communicate how these guys can be fixed (I don't have anywhere near the experience with BB to make these calls, but from this thread I'd say add loner to both, increase price by 10-20.000, limit them to apropriate teams like Human, Ogres, and Halflings).

This is a screwup, but there is lots of room to fix it and the new team might be inclined to do so with the right motivation.

Well said. I would be more worried if the minis were messed up, as that's not an easily fixable error. For all I know, the cards were printed up months ago, so there was no way to fix them. A posted errata is an easy fix. Yes, not everyone is going to see it, but I see errata's released all the time for other boardgames as well. Just make sure the errata is posted on Games Workshop site, for all to see/reference. Hopefully the rules for the two minis can be fixed up for DZ2 as well.

Now I have to go find the info about Goblins getting released next, I could have sworn it was Dwarves!

Milo wrote:Okay, I'll agree with you that this skill should not have been added just to match the models. But it has been -- why is it a problem?

You admit it should not have happened. It did happen. Why is this a problem you ask? I refer you back to yourself - you just admitted it should not have happened!

Milo wrote:I won't out anyone else, but I'll go ahead and say it here -- I'm one of the "experienced coaches" who has been helping them review rules.

Oh really? That is interesting. Hadn't you practically stopped playing Blood Bowl even seven years ago when you were on the BBRC? How much high level Blood Bowl have you experienced?

faust_33 wrote:Well said. I would be more worried if the minis were messed up, as that's not an easily fixable error. For all I know, the cards were printed up months ago, so there was no way to fix them. A posted errata is an easy fix. Yes, not everyone is going to see it, but I see errata's released all the time for other boardgames as well. Just make sure the errata is posted on Games Workshop site, for all to see/reference. Hopefully the rules for the two minis can be fixed up for DZ2 as well.

Now I have to go find the info about Goblins getting released next, I could have sworn it was Dwarves!

It seems unlikely that the card could not be changed in the last few months. They are pages in a new White Dwarf. More likely there was space for a Blood Bowl article and they just mashed in the provisional rules last minute without reviewing them. Someone obviously thought a low price and any team availability was a good way to sell some pricey models. Correct on that point probably but clearly poor customer service in terms of rule balancing. A simple 10 minutes comparison to some other star players would have helped them.

Milo wrote: You are right that the current rule set is optimized for resurrection style tournaments, but it's a fallacy to think that is the only way Blood Bowl is being played

Well... tournament play has been what kept BB alive all this years. So perhaps trying to maintain its health above the rest of the possible styles of play would be advisable.

And the idea of spending RR for using PO definitely ruins that skill in tournaments. There were dozens of ideas out there about that matter... all of them without introducing the need of spending RR for activating a skill (something definitely new).

They just couldn't publish a cool looking LRB6, couldn't they? Why not?

And, to be honest, some level of recognition to Galak would have been a very polite gesture. Ideally he would be the one making the rules, and I am sure most of the people would trust more this obscure process.

Heres my pennies worth on Grak and Crumbleberry and all other rule changes potential rule changes or scale changes from someone ho as played the game casually after someone brought in a handbook from 2nd edition to school and three of us trotted of to the closest GW to buy a team. I've never played in a tournament, play online quite a bit don't consider myself a blood bowl expert but I know the game well enough to know how it's changed over the years. This recent release is as close I've come to that initial excitement of seeing that handbook all those years ago. I have to take more experienced players word for it when they say a rule imbalances the game but isn't it already unbalanced? It feels like it when playing online. Claw piling on is broke yes? GW try and fix it people are unhappy, and I'm not saying this as a big GW fan I moved away from GW stuff towards historical gaming only blood bowl keeps my interest it seems the new men in charge are trying their best with everyone judging them on GWs lack of support for the game which a lot of people on here kept going despite that. I come on here to keep up with all the new exciting stuff but it just feels negative, the board size, scale creep, limited miniatures, not enough dice or winter boards, don't like the figures, the dwarfs hairs to long, bugs carrying the ball, that halfings as big as a dwarf, the slavers got a weary bladey thingy..... I've seen much worse products and figures praised to the heavens aren't GW breathing new life into the game in a way only they could? and if I see it so will potential new players. I honestly thought the forum would be buzzing and there is some positivity but much more negativity. Hasn't the pitch increased in size with every new box set? Figures have crept up in scale constantly it used to be 25mm then 28mm then 28mm heroic scale. Big positives for me is price of new miniatures compared to some 3rd parties I could get four or five teams from GW for the price of one. I like the fun and unpredictability being brought back certainly more than playing some one who stalls for a full a half, gameplay yeah but not much fun and I bet not how it was intended to be played. The players like me who just want to have fun game will like most of what GW are doing and those who know the game inside out will be able to chop and change it till it's fixed especially for your tournaments.

JT-Y wrote:They aren't getting a general release, they aren't intended or even expected to appear in tournaments.

They might not expect that, but how is a new player going to know that?
People, including you have stated repeatedly that this release is for new players, and yet poor rules like this will pass new players by and leave them wondering why when they try to use them experienced players say no.


And I thought it was pretty obvious Milo was one of the "experienced coaches" from his postings here the last few weeks/months. Didn't even realise it was a "secret".

Manuel wrote:Well... tournament play has been what kept BB alive all this years. So perhaps trying to maintain its health above the rest of the possible styles of play would be advisable.

Really? You don't think there have been (and are) leagues that have been running as long, if not longer, than tournaments?
There are still players that, while being up to date with the rules, have never played in a tournament, or intend to.

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy tournament BB, but I don't think it's any more important than league play in the health of BB.