Joemanji wrote:Yeah, having covered just one evening of that work whilst Phil was on holiday, I can attest to just how much is involved. That is the annoying thing about all these discussions I guess. Easy to have an opinion on the internet. Less easy to spend hours and hours of your free time doing admin so that the NAF / FUMBBL can work.
Yes, yes it is.
My first main point, is I dislike the Blood Bowlers being split into Table Toppers and Onliners. I see little difference here (being a player that started and spent most of his life on TT and has moved to Computer based clients). Yes there are differences in how post/pre game is handled (which can and should be house ruled depending on the environment), and yes I cried when my IGMEOY was taken away. However if something is troublesome to monitor on TT, so be it take it out.
For me we should be considering the 3 common formats, rather online vs tt. These being Resurrection/Short term leagues, Long term leagues/Mid term leagues, Perpetual/arranged matches. This I feel is far more important.
However, unlike some I feel now is not the time. Let's see what happens with the Cyanide release (or until we know exactly is going to be the Cyanide release) and what happens with NAF/Cyanide relations.
As to FUMBBL, I don't think it would be FUMBBL's (as a site) lack of interest in play testing new rules. I think there would be some worry about testing something that is purely Cyanide and annoying a commercial company. If that can be avoided, it's really not in FUMBBL's interest to annoy the tail of commercial companies.
However as pointed out the main problem would be coding. FUMBBL, simply cannot do this overnight. Yes, there is one key coder. He has had helpers, but they come and go. He is also very very busy and has a personal life that isn't swimming along perfectly. As for his dedication, I do not doubt this at all. However patience and sympathy is needed for a lot of the key players on FUMBBL, it's a hobby after all. This of course, doesn't take into account how easy it is to code. Something that may seem simple, may not. It also may involve several people. Graphics/Site/Client coding are all lead by 3 different incredibly hard working (real and on the site) people.
Regarding the old client and being left behind. That was a coding problem, the coder could no longer work on it and it was patched in such a way, it would have been easier to make a new client than to sort out the old one.
The downside of getting FUMBBL to do any testing is..........getting them to do the testing. If it's not in a main division, the player base simply will not do it. With the release of the latest client, we needed to test changes that would affect them directly. The response for testers in a test division was very poor, whilst the main divisions got just as many games as usual. With an outside organisation, requesting testing...........sigh.
Regarding the key questions:
Who would a new set of rules affect (i.e. where would they be used)?
Well that's the million dollar question isn't it? That's for each representative to decide. I have no doubt that FUMBBL at least would follow, if the NAF followed. So it's key for this new BBRC to be at least NAF approved.
Who should be on the BBRC?
Just me and only me....... Well of course, the more organisation representatives you can get on board, the more likely a BBRC would be accepted. One person (or type of person) I would stress to have on the board would be somebody who understands the original premise of GW and has a good understanding of the GW gaming worlds. Especially each of the BB eras. Somebody who understands and has sympathies for the portrayal. I feel this is eroding away, with the competitiveness of the game.
How should the rule changes be decided?
If there was a BBRC, and they were to consider Cyanide changes (seems to be the core behind the idea). This would mean the rest of the BB world would have a different ruleset to Cyanide (unless the BBRC was just a rubber stamp committee). So it doesn't seem to be a huge leap, to then consider other play tested rule changes. If you're going to try and leap the grand canyon, you may as well give it your best effort; failing has the same result anyway.
But in seriousness, it is hugely important that a potential BBRC is a meritocracy. No voting in the people who shout loudest on the internet. No token representatives. 
