Page 1 of 2
Why not just 1 or 2 Negatraits?
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 7:54 pm
by Sixpack595
I'm starting to think Negas in general are a crappy idea, they seem so out of balance. So if theres no way to balance Big Guys without neutering them, why not just use RS and BH for everyone? Why not just BH? If BH were the only Nega, you wouldn't see people only taking Ogres, there would be more variety. Balancing would be simple. If you are going to take a big guy right now you want an Ogre. Make the others viable choices too, and let the stats/skills make them different.
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 9:16 pm
by Grumbledook
bonehead is too weak making ogres too good
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2003 5:34 am
by Sixpack595
Grumbledook wrote:bonehead is too weak making ogres too good
OK, so if every BG has BH the Ogres will be like the rest of them.
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:24 pm
by Grumbledook
making all the other big guys also too good
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:08 pm
by Sixpack595
Thats the disagreement then. I think Ogres are right where they should be.
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:54 pm
by GalakStarscraper
Sixpack595 wrote:Thats the disagreement then. I think Ogres are right where they should be.
Don't agree. I've had some really good Ogre players. This is why I had no issues with the recent 4 team purge of Ogres from the game.
Galak
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2004 8:33 pm
by Sixpack595
I've had all kinds of really good players, that doesn't mean they're overpowered. If we just went by nasty players there would be a push to remove Blitzers from everyones lists.
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2004 9:37 pm
by sean newboy
He does have a point, if we go by the broken ones, then both gr's and wardancers have to be nerfed.
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 4:52 pm
by BlanchPrez
Except that the difference is that Ogres are supposed to be bad players.
Also, I think that by making only one or two nega-traits, it get boring. Why have all those different big-guys if they're all the same?
Chris
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:12 pm
by Ithilkir
Remove really stupid, wild animal, take root and bone head. Replace them with...
Double all big guy costs..
some skill name here
A player with this racial trait is a bit slow moving/stupid/wild and must roll a 3 or more on a d6 to make an action if this roll is failed the player loses the declared action and his tackle zone until he can pass the dice roll.
You may add a maximum of +1 to the dice roll if there is a teamate standing adjacent to the player.
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 8:24 pm
by Sixpack595
Why are they supposed to be bad? Why can't they be average?
LKet the stats and the figs diferentiate the Big Guys, In all the time Negas have been around there have been problems with them...mostly WA. Fluff wise BH could work for all of them.
BlanchPrez wrote:Except that the difference is that Ogres are supposed to be bad players.
Also, I think that by making only one or two nega-traits, it get boring. Why have all those different big-guys if they're all the same?
Chris
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 8:34 pm
by mikeyc222
sean newboy wrote:He does have a point, if we go by the broken ones, then both gr's and wardancers have to be nerfed.
amen brother!
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 10:52 pm
by soren
mikeyc222 wrote:sean newboy wrote:He does have a point, if we go by the broken ones, then both gr's and wardancers have to be nerfed.
amen brother!
I presume you're both playibg either Wood Elf or Skaven since you think these players are the so good?
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2004 7:59 pm
by Sixpack595
I don't think anyone would disagree that they are very good players.
soren wrote:I presume you're both playibg either Wood Elf or Skaven since you think these players are the so good?
Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:14 pm
by Grumbledook
i actually think wild animal was the one that worked whilst the others were too weak