Talk Fantasy Football

Anybody got a scoop on the next version of Brettonians. I know alot of people hated the questing knight even with it's exorbant cost. I'd just like to see where the team is heading.
On a side note: why are there squire throwers and catchers? I think there should be just a squire position 0-4 with access to agility and passing skills. This makes the team develop a throwing game...because personally I don't see bret's starting out as a throwy team.

I really have no solid idea where they're heading, but I'll be sure to let everyone know when they come up again for BBRC discussion. Don't expect a Pass/Agil combo on the same player, though. Currently, only Elven Throwers hold that combination. It's not a likely combo for a human.

-Chet

gken1 : If even NAF gurus don't know

Why create a bretonnian team when a human team already exist ?
Cos the vanilla human team is only for Empire team ?
Don't really fond of the multiplication of teams !

On 2002-03-24 20:59, Trambi wrote:
Why create a bretonnian team when a human team already exist ?
Cos the vanilla human team is only for Empire team ?
Don't really fond of the multiplication of teams !

For me, there are two reasons for it:

1/ Bretonnians are a part of Blood Bowl History, under other names.
2/ Warhammer World has Bretonnians. So why not having a brets team ? Logical that they could have a team, no ? Please stop me if I say something wrong, but Empire and Brets are different in WHB world, aren't they ?

I like the basic concept of Brets, especially the 'knights don't foul' limitation.. i think it is possible to have harder hitting knights and less skillful peasants than a standard human team, but I do think the old Bret team list was a bit too powerful....

In fact, it was a very powerful team... I remember I've seen a version with only peasants and knights... A translation of Albion's Wanderers (First Edition). Maybe on Galak's website ?

The debate is always: can we play with only original rosters, or may we add some teams, with a lot of condiitons (see excellent Builing Teams Rules on Galak Website... the ultimate resource )

In my opinion, don't add a plenty of team.
Like bretonnian team which can be play as an human team with some players who don't foul.
Like Bright Cursaders who can be play as an human team which play without dirty tricks, fouling action ...

I have play a long team with such human team ... and I understand why Bright Crusaders have never won the BB.

Sorry Trambi I disagree on yhis one.

My Bright Crusader team is just plain MEAN!!!! I've only lost 1 game with them so far out of 6 I've played.

Ask voyagers_uk who played against them with his Undead.

Galak

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: GalakStarscraper on 2002-03-25 16:04 ]</font>

i still don't think that 'knights don't foul' is a realistic limitation... knights might find the boot to be out of line against those who are _their equals_ but lets be honest here, who on the pitch do these guys consider equals? at most, other brett knights... every other player they run into is either peasant filth or inhuman scum... either way, the code of chivalry bears them no quarter, the boot is the best those buggers deserve!

In the background, Bright Crusaders could be win if they play like other dirty.
So Bright Crusaders should loss a lot of match according to the background ...

And i am agry with you Valen

Lucien makes a good point regarding mediaeval chivalry codes...

Only equals would be treated with respect on that level. That said, many knights were overcome with self-hatred at their acts on the battle-field and so the 'no-foul' rule maybe the most workable way of implying Catholic blood-guilt on the BB pitch...

Unless you want to give all knights NI due to self flaggelation between games...

On 2002-03-25 16:17, Trambi wrote:
And i am agry with you Valen

Ouch, a mistake, Bambi it's not valen, but lucien

May I could say I find your answer not very good: Ogres teams haven't won a BB Trophy too, but you play it... and it's not an official team too.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't remind the Albion Wanderers from the 1st edition (not bright crusaders from 2nd) had to make no foul...

The only thing which seems good for me is what we call "syndrome révérenciel" in french: they can't do a pass to a peasant without rolling a dice, or something like that...

On 2002-03-25 16:46, DaFrenchCoach wrote:

Ouch, a mistake, Bambi it's not valen, but lucien

eh. everyone else is using a cool referential name, so i got me one too...

The only thing which seems good for me is what we call "syndrome révérenciel" in french: they can't do a pass to a peasant without rolling a dice, or something like that...

ahh... good old 2e dislike rules... i'd welcome that instead of the fouling rules... much more in keeping and just plain fun...

as for the albion wanders and bright crusaders.... i never got the impression these guys were compelled not to put the boot in because they were being chivalrous, it always seemed like they were just plain goodie-goodies... there's a difference between idealistic knights and realistic knights... i say make bretts one thing and the crusaders another...

as for the wanderers, they went home and started kicking the ball everywhere instead...

Lucien: I all the more understand you my ID on ebay is oberwald (a great well known tennisman) I didn't laugh after you but after trambi fast answer... Without offence, of course. I hope you would have understood it, Trambi.

But I'm agree with you: there's an enormous difference between what chevalry code is for Lancelot, Perceval (euh, this last one is maybe near the reality )... and the real knights... So that's why I foud good the idea to make a bretonnian team based on strengh, like they did with the last version... even if this roster was maybe too powerful (especially with the star -cost 220k-)