GW's Triple B League --- TBB WE NEED YOUR VOTES!!!

Valen · Post by **Valen** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 7:41 pm

I do agree Thadrin, it would become Elfbowl

Chaos Dwarf · Post by **Chaos Dwarf** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 8:41 pm

Thadrin wrote:Chet's "Big Idea" - the more I think about it, the more I hate it. Its a huge overhaul of the rules that I will be beyond flabbergasted if it actually works without major revisions to the skills to rebalance everything. The rules are FINE AS THEY ARE.

Never been a fan of the "big idea" back when I read it the first time. All the changes seem to make the game less flavorable. Can't help but think it's Blood Bowl for dumies. Mightblow/Claw/RSF are all good the way they are right now. Piling on needs to be changed, perhaps the armor reroll is a good alternative. Overall I think the PO change is the only good change I can see.

BlanchPrez · Post by **BlanchPrez** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 8:56 pm

Okay, so I'm not following all of this here... what's the 'Big Idea'? Is that what we're looking at here? Or is that related to Chet's "Modest Proposal?" Just curious.

Also, am I reading things wrong, or does it seem that all skills are aimed at armour rolls now rather than injury rolls?

Chris

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 9:06 pm

Chet and I talked and we openly agreed that the whole new SPP table was not a good way to go.

The way to balance the system is NOT to make it impossible to advance. Folks play league Blood Bowl to watch their players develop. Yes the change from 11 to 16 was accepted ... but a change like the one being proposed will not be.

Why the heck would I play a halfling team if my best hope is to only have 1 skill on 1 player at any one point in the team's lifetime.

I was hoping JJ could be talked out of this before "trying it out" in the GW league. ... but it appears not.

I'll go over this all with Chet and John and see what the thoughts outside of GW are. I know that given the no injury mods a chance was desired so I'll hold off on that, but the rest of it is of concern/interest.

Galak

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 9:17 pm

I repeat myself:

More Money. No Ageing. More fouls. More Casualties. More Star Player Points.

Quicker Advancement, Faster Death, Easier Replacement.

You level up, you die, you level up again.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 9:38 pm

thats what 3rd edition was like toby and you could get tr800 teams under those rules

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:16 pm

Hmm... I agree with the point that sometimes the rules get patched beyond repair and an overhaul is needed but I don't really think that is needed in Blood Bowls case and I don't agree with most of the changes here.

Besides usually a drastic overhaul means a relaunch, and I just don't see GW gearing up for BB 5ed yet.

SPP's, Yuk. I would like to see some of my players get a skill at some point in the game.

No injury mods might work but would need some serious playtesting and rebalancing of skills as has been mentioned here already. I know Siguards is regarded as a patch by GW but in my opinion it's pretty simple and it works, there's no need to change.

I could live with the dropping of aging but the negative winnings thing seems a little harsh, and would be really annoying. It also brings up a weird situation - if I saved money to pay the 'fine' this might be what made my TR high enough to cause it in the first place.

Of all the changes I think I could most live with the 'Handicap' tables. Personally I prefer the current more strategic approach to the game that the LRB offers but I know players in my league who would like the game to return to the slightly more random days of 3ed, without some of the broken aspects.

Mostly though I hope that any changes get thouroughly playtested, discussed by the BBRC and discussed by the community before being implemented and not just pushed through by GW otherwise we are taking a step backwards. Time to write to fanatic methinks.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:08 am

Okay ... I've had time now to read through the whole thing.

With the following changes, I'd be okay with it:

1) Veteran teams are at TR 200
2) Keep the current winnings table (but add in the new rules for having negative winnings for a game).
3) Keep the current SPP table.

Make these 3 changes and I'd be interested in trying them out. Otherwise .. I have zero interest.

Galak

Xtreme · Post by **Xtreme** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 2:28 am

the thing I loved most about LRB was that it was changing little things often and getting the game to where the people playing wanted it. I think we have a great rule set the way it is now, an overhaul would be incredibly frustrating at this point.

Do not take away Sigurds!!! It was one of the greatest house rules to ever become offical.

The only thing I agree needs to be changed from their list is piling on.

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 2:45 am

Looks like Chet's "Big Idea" may have a chance to become official, don't know if I like that. I think if you change the rules just for the sake of simplifying and streamlining, you will lose something in the process. There was nothing wrong with having skills that affected injury rolls, I have to agree that I see nothing wrong with Siguard's injury table, no need to make such a big change.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 3:30 am

Okay some numbers on the Big Idea to give you an idea of the change the Bugman's league rules causes:

Claw/RSC Chaos Warrior:
Currently against AV 8 with a knock down

Code: Select all

State    LRB 2.0     Bugman's    Bugman's w/MB
Prone      42%          17%             8%
Stunned    16%          48%            54%
KO         18%          21%            23%
CAS        24%          14%            15%

I would argue that the Bugman's CW is a more effective player on the pitch (especially if he picks up Mighty Blow (+5 to AV)) ... but the game definitely loses a level of carnage from the change.

Galak

Halfling Math ... knock down by any player without an AV modifer skill

Code: Select all

State    LRB 2.0     Bugman's 
Prone      28%          17%           
Stunned    30%          48%           
KO         22%          21%           
CAS        20%          14%

My poor stunties will die less ... but its going to be tough doing strategy with an 18% increase in Stuns ... ouch!

Galak

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 4:52 am

So what we need to ask is are these changes desirable for the game?? Less carnage seems to take away from what BB is all about, do we really want a kinder, gentler BB??

Post by **Thadrin** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 6:34 am

Bi point on the Bugmans rules regarding casualties:

Lets forget claw/RSC Chaos Warriors. Only 3 teams can get a player with Claws/RSC. Orc, Dwarf, Chaos Dwarf etc players get shafted.

When using mighty blow alone - as most of us do - you will see no increase at all in armour breaks. The rule there hasn't changed. You either break armour with the +1 or you don't. What IS gone is the ability to transfer that +1 to the injury roll on a natural armour break. Even without any maths, that means less casualties.

Its very simple, to understand, and its utterly wrong.

of course, with this insane idea of SPP levels none of my longbeards or Black Orcs will ever GET mighty Blow.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 11:09 am

Toby wrote:I repeat myself:
More Money. No Ageing. More fouls. More Casualties. More Star Player Points.
Quicker Advancement, Faster Death, Easier Replacement.
You level up, you die, you level up again.

Shhhhh, Toby ... that doesn't work.

Galak

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sat Aug 16, 2003 11:41 am

Thadrin wrote:Big point on the Bugmans rules regarding casualties:

Lets forget claw/RSC Chaos Warriors. Only 3 teams can get a player with Claws/RSC. Orc, Dwarf, Chaos Dwarf etc players get shafted.

When using mighty blow alone - as most of us do - you will see no increase at all in armour breaks.

Mighty Blow Math ... knock down against AV 8

Code: Select all

State    LRB 2.0     Bugman's 
Prone      58%          58%           
Stunned    20%          24%           
KO         12%          11%           
CAS        10%           7%

Actually the move here is not nearly as drastic ... you'll only notice a change 1 out of every 25 Mighty Blow knockdowns from the LRB.

of course, with this insane idea of SPP levels none of my longbeards or Black Orcs will ever GET mighty Blow.

Now on this Thrads we agree ... the whole SPP concept is for the birds.

Okay let's seperate out the changes:

1) Advanced SPP table
2) No injury mods
3) No more auto +1 to AV for fouling ... however no more IGMEOY or Referee roll.
4) No more aging
5) No more handicap table ... new tables for game effects based on TR
6) Piling On changed
7) New winnings table 15k bands
8) Negative winnings rules

Okay that's the list .... here are my thoughts on the list ... I've had a lot of time to think about them ... as I had some clue to these changes from a long time ago. Before the new season of the MBBL which tests rules for the BBRC, I was given some insight as to what might be coming for Bugman's and we talked about what the MBBL should test and should not test.

1) Hate it ... hands down this is a bad idea. Developing BB teams is what its all about. This is JJ going back to the fact that OSPA was originally supposed to be OSPT (one skill per a turn, YES ... JJ admitted in a chat room session once that the original OSPA rules only allow your entire team to use one skill each turn). The SPP change is JJ going back to the well that less skills means better Blood Bowl. Unfortunately, he's the only person who thinks so. Is there ANYONE here that thinks the new SPP table has merit. I really want to hear the argument for the new table as I've been lost trying to play devil's advocate for it.

2) No. I understand the reasons for it. I don't think the game would become Elfball really as the decrease in CAS won't be that significant. However, is all this really necessary to get rid of Siguard's, IGMEOY, and the Referee roll. Will the game be better without these 3 very infrequent rolls? The more I think about it ... I highly respect what Chet tried to do here ... but don't think I like what it does to the game. I'll keep the anticipation of Sigard's thanks along with the rest of it.

3) Okay now this I'm okay with. You could make these changes to fouling to remove IGMEOY and the Referee roll without introducing the whole no injury mods rules.

4) I'm in favor of this. I'm seeing in the MBBL where matches are assigned (you don't get to pick your opponent's) that even without aging (we ditched it based on rumours of Bugman's upcoming rules) the teams are stopping TR wise just fine without it. The winnings table and the handicap table are doing the job just fine by themselves without this cumbersome and annyoing rule.

5) I really like the Chet's revised handicap table used by the MBBL for its simplicity. Giving the choice, I'd rather stick with that system.

6) Oh yeah. This is my favorite fix to Piling On of all the changes suggested.

7) No way. See point 1 for my thoughts on BB team development and enjoyment of the game.

8) Yes. The original LRB 1.0 rules had this in there, but they were removed during the final stages of the BBRC discussions. I have no problems with these rules returning as I've already played a 12 game league season using them in the MBBL3 when that league was playtesting the BBRC's proposed LRB rule fixes before they became official.

So that's the breakdown of the 8 changes in Bugman for me.
4 Yes votes - 4 No

So can the rest of you break down your thoughts on the 8 major changes with Yes / Undecided / No. It will help guage the crowd a little better.

Galak