Why rule of 1 and 6 for FF is lame

Khankill · Post by **Khankill** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 7:20 pm

If you are a winning team, and you keep losing FF, then you are just plain unlucky. In the leagues I have been associated with it has just never been a problem.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 8:16 pm

Having had it happen to me fairly recently

I have to say it's very annoying, and more so because I foolishly started my team with FF of 1

and am now strapped for cash, having worked my way up to the lofty heights of 4FF.

But, I have to agree with Khankill, if you win consistently then you will gain more FF than you lose from this rule and it's not that big a deal. If it helps to even the playing field and make the game more fun to play then it's a rule worth keeping IMO.

neoliminal · Post by **neoliminal** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 9:24 pm

Amon242 wrote: Either way, Milwaukee isn't that far away so I will keep my eyes open for information on the tourney.
.

It's in Indianapolis this year. Not Milwaukee.

Amon242 · Post by **Amon242** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 9:31 pm

Just goes to show how informed I am

Amon

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 10:40 pm

Thadrin wrote:Hurts the big teams but not the new ones.

Well, the "-1 if beaten by 2 TD or more" will hurt smaller teams, hell, that'll hurt my big teams

BoB · Post by **BoB** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:41 am

I know thats a general brushing, but personally I think it would be a pain in the ass to role gate with a 30 FF, much less a 300.

I think your right, if everyone has similar ff then the kickoff table results dont go to hell. It really wouldnt be fair to have the high powered teams always win pitch invasion and got the ref.

Post by **Thadrin** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:24 am

Darkson wrote:
Thadrin wrote:Hurts the big teams but not the new ones.
Well, the "-1 if beaten by 2 TD or more" will hurt smaller teams, hell, that'll hurt my big teams

I meant the new mods to replace the straight +1 for a win/-1 for a loss.
the rue you've misquoted (conceeding 2 or more TDs...not losing by) is countered by the score 2 or more bonus that exists...encouraging Elf and Skaven teams to actually play defence not just full out offence. Smaller teams can still lose to a better team and not get a negative modifier, but a bigger team had better not get beat by an underdog.
After all, in real life fans of winning teams demand continued success, and even a close win against an opponent considered inferior can cause uproar (imagine Man U only beating Scunthorpe 1-0 for instance.) whereas a smaller team's fans would be happy to have played the big boys close (like the scunthorpe fans in the example.)

Not a fully formed idea yet...just an idea. I think changes to the modifiers are a much better way of handling things than the 1-6 rule.

Indigo · Post by **Indigo** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:16 am

If anyone would like to read the experimental rules that I am about to submit to fanatic regarding the balancing of FF, PM or email me.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:10 am

GalakStarscraper wrote:Almost all the teams of legend in the 2nd edition books translate to this range.

How were these determined? Did these teams ever have full rosters released or something? Also, the rest of the Reavers must really suck if they have Griff and Morg on the team...the SPP ratings of these guys are WAYYY above what the average tr 300 team would have.

GalakStarscraper wrote:TR 300 to Jervis always has been Legend status for a team ... the current rules finally back up his view of BB.

Galak

I'm not sure 300 is quite reachable under the current rules. I think it's close, and I'd like to make a few tweaks to it to make it so...one of which is the subject of this thread, the other I mentioned (winnings after all other mods), and finally I'd like the FF roll mods to start at 20 instead of 10. Hell I start most of my teams with 9ff, I don't feel like I should start being punished for being "too big" after my 2nd game!

The current lrb stuff seems just a bit too restrictive for me...I like it overall, great improvement over 3rd ed (esp the vanilla 3rd ed star fest), but I think it goes just a bit too far with it as far as money goes.

Indigo · Post by **Indigo** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 8:50 am

I personally think the mechanics of Blood Bowl the "game" are very very good, and much more refined and balanced than the likes of WFB or WH40k.

However, where I feel the game is lacking somewhat is in the long term league and tournament aspects. Fair enough, when it was conceived way back when, the emphasis was on getting a workable game system, but now it needs the extra refinement to allow it to "go the distance"

To this end, I've been writing a series of documents looking at different areas that could be fleshed out and expanded for leagues, such as new Fan Factor rules (covering mis-matched teams etc.) the role of assistant coaches, sponsorship, training etc.

When my new BB site (finally) gets up, I'll have them all up for DL so you can read for yourselves. Andy [Hall] has accepted two of them and seemed to like them, so you never know, they could be in BB mag

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Tue Jan 21, 2003 5:09 pm

I do believe morg was a choas all star not a reaver, I also think you can reach 300 tr in the current rules.