Talk Fantasy Football

If starplayers cost double at BB '04, does this mean Zara, for example is 280k or 140k because normally for a one-off match you pay the half-price freebooter fee?

Cheers

Leip

You must pay double full cost, in this case 280K

Doc Drak

Thats so stupid.
I mean, blood bowl was originally made to be a one off game game.
Starplayers were there to mix things up/make it interesting.
Leagues developed outside the early rule sets.
As leagues got longer people saw that SP's "unbalanced" the game so offical rules were changed so that they could be hired only for one game at a time ( at half face cost).
That rule change takes care of that problem for the "leauge people" and the "one game at a people". Everyones happy.
Next Comes ( and this is by no means intended to offend anyone, I am a member as well) The NAF. Now what used to be played for fun is played for rankings/points.
Starplayers, who IMO add a great deal to the game, are now "unbalancing" tournaments.
Solution to the problem=
!?! I know lets change things once again to make them way overpriced to play in a series of one off matches ( a tournament) that they were intended for in the first place. All for the sake of balance.
Then lets bitch about it when they release new ones! Its unreal!


Glad my cracker ass wont be there.

JasonC wrote

Starplayers, who IMO add a great deal to the game, are now "unbalancing" tournaments.
Solution to the problem=
!?! I know lets change things once again to make them way overpriced to play in a series of one off matches ( a tournament) that they were intended for in the first place. All for the sake of balance.
Then lets bitch about it when they release new ones! Its unreal!

Sorry but that is a real load of rubbish. Stars are way too good at their normal cost. When Stars could be hired permanently, they had a negative impact on team development - soaked up SPPs and since they couldn't develop, the "normal" players could catch up. Notwithstanding this, most players (myself included) believed that Stars at original cost are under priced.

In tournaments this is not the case - they do not soak up SPPs and you have a well developed player to win you the game. Having Luthor or Griff basically walk away with games is not a testament to coaching skill.

Further look at Lord Borak. For 60k more than a rookie Chaos Warrior, you get:

+1 ST
Block
Mighty Blow
Dirty player
and a reroll

Now given that Chaos rerolls are 70k each, its not hard to see that this decsision is a no brainer.


Dave

Add to that the overwhelming opinion when asked at last years BB en-masse by Jervis as to whether to allow Star Players next year, saying no way ... this is a reasonable compromise in my opinion.

If you really want them and rely on Luthor/Griff to win games then your team will be severely hindered in other areas. Star Players dominated many games last year (I came up against a guy with Luthor, Griff and an Ogre!). This I think will be deemed a lot fairer in a tournament environment, where you can't even kill off the star player (except for the rest of that match).

Given a choice between LRB Star Player rules and no stars at all I think most coaches who went last year would choose no stars. Be thankful you can take them at all.

JasonC wrote:Next Comes ( and this is by no means intended to offend anyone, I am a member as well) The NAF. Now what used to be played for fun is played for rankings/points.
Starplayers, who IMO add a great deal to the game, are now "unbalancing" tournaments.
Solution to the problem=
!?! I know lets change things once again to make them way overpriced to play in a series of one off matches ( a tournament) that they were intended for in the first place. All for the sake of balance.
Then lets bitch about it when they release new ones! Its unreal!

As has been shown before stars are clearly underpriced, so in a tournament where people have paid £40 for the ticket and $500 for the flight, it makes sense to make the playing field as balanced as possible to ensure everyone gets maximum enjoyment. Most people agree that there is very little fun to be had in playing with or against a Griff/Luthor combination - making a series of 2+ rolls with a re-roll is hardly fun.

IMO the stars were added to 3rd ed with the express aim of selling more figures and as a result were given super stats to promote this - look at the trend in 40k & WFB where the newer stuff is made better than the older stuff to promote sales.

Stars add no value at all to our leagues, so we've banned them completely with the exception of Goblin secret weapons, and even that is just until the proper SW rules become official. BB should be about tactical skill on the pitch, not who can pick a roster that allows the most super powered star players.

Anyway, what's more fun - building a team, watching YOUR stars grow and crying when they die, or seeing Griff receive a handoff on a 2+ for his 4th touchdown. If he dies, so what buy the same player again.

Stars should be there as nice models used as alternatives to regular player minis IMO.

My thought....

The problem is this ruling just makes taking virtually all the stars impossible. If it was a 1.1 mill environment then maybe, but in 1 million you can get Griff, 9 linemen, 1 Thrower, 2TRR and 2 FF, which is a pretty poor team. (I'll also probably now get beaten by that line-up at the BB!).

I like all the different tournaments having different rules as it brings some thought into your team selection beforehand. I therefore feel that this ruling of double the cost turns this tournament just into a 1 million no stars tournament. Maybe a 150% of cost for them would have been fairer and enabled players the option of taking them whilst still rewarding those without the stars, or Galak's rules of double over the 100k. Shouldn't the main tournament of the year be slightly different to the others?

If you are going to allow stars you may as well try and factor them in at realistic prices for their abilities, rather than this overcosting or last years undercosting.

Richard

Yaay!

Balance!
Full of sheeyat.
I call it like I see it.
Keep the blinders on. Enjoy the "tournament"

JasonC wrote:Yaay!

Balance!
Full of sheeyat.
I call it like I see it.
Keep the blinders on. Enjoy the "tournament"

If you had been there last year you would have seen first hand exactly how unbalancing stars are. The teams in the final both had griff, one had Luthor, the other had Zug.

It was great fun seeing Luthor, Varag, Griff et al dominating almost every game they were a part of. Honest it was. The stars are wildly broken at the prices in the rulebook.

It'll be sad that there will likely not be many Goblin Weapons around (a few Gobbo teams may throw in one of them) but if it means that we don't have the same situation as last year then I'm all for it.

Me thinks you need to get your sight tested.

Altogether now

Are you Toby?
Are you Toby?
Are you Toby in Disguise?
Are you Toby in Disguise?

Nope, i think Toby hated stars. Additionally, Toby expresses himself in well-set words, not that rubbish Jason presents us.

Don't feed the Trolls...

do like the restriction on star players.

but still big problem where to write my 600 word thesis on my team background on my roster, as there is no spare space

I'm going to use the photocopier at work to put my roster on one side of a sheet and my blurb (around 400 words atm - I'm trying to do it like one of the official team profiles) on the back.