New Handicap Table ... right idea?

[Jugular]

I think you're reading my post wrong Galak and getting my idea screwy You dont get a player of your race, you get a player of the opposing teams race therefore youre halfling team may end up with a Bull centaur against a CD team. Maybe it's a little fantastical but it'd keep those who miss the allied teams happy Maybe you could add the Big Guy skill to this player so they can't use your rerolls. Obviously in some games against certain teams this frenzied player is very powerful but then again not in others. I imagine a halfling vs gobbo game would be majorly swung with such a player on the pitch. If an orc team or an Lizzie team gets this player I think it unlikely that even a non highly skilled team would make much use of it. By taking a player of the opposing race the player is then tempered in strength by the participating teams. If its deemed that taking ANY player would be too strong then how about taking a nonpositional player.....?

[BadMrMojo]

i like the table alot better now. But i thought the main reason the cards went away was cost. they used to print those things on cardboard stock which i'm sure is not very cost effective. I bet they could churn out some decent priced cards and make some $$ since all of would buy it and use it instead of the tables. It could at least be an optional add on.

BadMrMojo's guide to getting the cards back into Bloodbowl!
1) Lay out 3 sets of 8 cards.
2) Label the backs of them as "Good Karma", "Random Events & Dirty Tricks" and "Desperate Measures". 8 each.
3) For each of the cards, put an appropriate handicap result on the front of the card.
4) Get the cards printed double-sided on card stock (at your local copy shop).
4) Calculate the difference in TR and the underdog picks an appropriate number of cards with GK = 10, etc....

Voila.

...If its deemed that taking ANY player would be too strong then how about taking a nonpositional player.....?

How is getting a Skeleton, Zombie, Halfling, or Hobgoblin with 3 skills better than getting a STR 4, frenzied player? It is potentially as good (potentially even better if you roll great skills) but just as likely to be crap. At lower TRs it's even worse (say 100 vs 140) as you'll get a 'star' lineman who will hog all your SPPs. A STR 4 Frenzy player will be great for making holes, crowd pushing and other assorted 'unglamorous' tasks. If they beat him down and foul him into oblivion with his AV 7, then so much the better. It kept your opponent focused on a disposable player and not killing off a real player or (gasp!) scoring.

I actually think the new table is looking pretty good.

[Jugular]

OK BMM you argued against my secondary argument given that people didn't like the first. To a certain degree I agree that the player maybe not as good as the STR4 player in some circumstances. Personally I'd take that zombie and sit it in front of their Mummies and find it very useful. You still didn't address my first idea. Am I to assume you couldn't find fault with that? Your argument on SPP hogging...its the coaches choice really, you could always just not take a handicap and then lose anyway. Is there no cost to pay for using handicaps? Surely the idea of the handicap is to allow the possiblity of victory I sense the ST4 player is going to cause me too many turnovers to bother putting him on the pitch.
What race is this strangely repetitively cloned player supposed to be anyway?

[GalakStarscraper]

What race is this strangely repetitively cloned player supposed to be anyway?

Crazed BB fan ... you decide his race.

And by the way ... I'll gladly take a KNOWN ST 4 Frenzy player over a random player that might end up a Zombie or Hobgoblin. In your own words:

Surely the idea of the handicap is to allow the possiblity of victory

And the crazed fan does that a lot better than a Zombie.

Galak

[gken1]

BadMrMojo's guide to getting the cards back into Bloodbowl!
1) Lay out 3 sets of 8 cards.
2) Label the backs of them as "Good Karma", "Random Events & Dirty Tricks" and "Desperate Measures". 8 each.
3) For each of the cards, put an appropriate handicap result on the front of the card.
4) Get the cards printed double-sided on card stock (at your local copy shop).
4) Calculate the difference in TR and the underdog picks an appropriate number of cards with GK = 10, etc....

Voila.

actually i was refering to the old cards where u could play them at any time and your opponent didn't know what u had. Like Is it a TD? or extra time. those cards added flavor to the game and didn't allow coaches to take any thing for granted.

Ken

[BadMrMojo]

OK BMM you argued against my secondary argument given that people didn't like the first.
...
You still didn't address my first idea. Am I to assume you couldn't find fault with that?
...
Is there no cost to pay for using handicaps?

I didn't address the first idea because I thought you'd suggested the secondary argument as a replacement due to its being unpopular. The many perils of communicating via a forum, I guess.

I think that the idea of using any possible player from an opposing team is too potentially useless for a 40 point handicap. Yes, a skellie would be good line bait, but it would be pretty useless if you're playing against TR 140 Khemri with your rookie Necro team. At best, that skellie will save one of your zombies. Not a 40 point handicap, IMHO. Meanwhile, getting a wardancer for your rookie Khemri against a TR 140 WE team would be a little much, perhaps? Yes, these are extreme cases, but that's how you have to look at things when measuring them up for play balance.

Regarding the potential cost for using handicaps, no, I don't think that a handicap should have a significant (or even minor) cost associated with it. Conceptually I can see the appeal of a - dare I say it - desperate measure at a cost, but isn't that what a lot of people said about aging? Adding a cost to a skill roll? I'm not trying to take this off topic, but rather just saying that you can insert all those arguments here.

actually i was refering to the old cards where u could play them at any time and your opponent didn't know what u had. Like Is it a TD? or extra time. those cards added flavor to the game and didn't allow coaches to take any thing for granted.

I was being a little flippant, for the record. Hiding your draw would be a great house rule, however, even using the table as presented here. Maybe with a few tweaks to allow you to use things at any time, if you were so inclined.

[gken1]

yeah i knew you were being flippant...but i didn't want to call u a smart a$$

[Jugular]

Fair arguments BMM but it was still a fun idea :D. Is the current handicap table now to be accepted as a part of the TBB package? I like the way it looks personally and overall the poll shows it to be popular. A poll reset would be good to see how many people think it needs more amending.

[GalakStarscraper]

The think bugging me is the 6 votes of don't like it. Those folks didn't post at all which leaves me wondering ... "what was it you wanted???"

I don't think I need the poll reset necessarily. A lot of the folks that posted disapproval to start with have said the current table looks pretty good to them.

And yes I'm really hoping that Ronald can program in the scaled handicap table so I can use it for the MBBL and MBBL2 as part of "the package".

Galak

[gken1]

well i voted later...i'm not one of the 6

[David Bergkvist]

How about the following addition:
It is possible to spend HPs to pick a result on the tables. Doing so costs double the amount of HPs compared to rolling on said table.

Ie, if there is one particular good karma result you really want, you can spend 20 HPs to get it, rather than 10 HPs to make a roll and hopefully get it.

[GalakStarscraper]

How about the following addition:
It is possible to spend HPs to pick a result on the tables. Doing so costs double the amount of HPs compared to rolling on said table.

Not a bad idea ... I have to really think about this one. For instance getting one reroll for 10 points down 1 in 8 is okay odds ... getting one guaranteed for 20 ... hmmmmm.

Not saying no, but my gut says this might not have the result we want.

Galak

[Orin]

The way it is now seems pretty good to me. I'll probably suggest it as a house rule in our league.

Only the appearance fee seems too weak to be in the 40 points table. (I think this has already been discussed somewhere. As long as the opponent has money in the bank, it's not going to be a problem. Usualy, people have some money, because they are saving up for a new player or a reroll,
Furthermore, I don't really like the 2d6. The difference between 10.000 and 60.000 is just a bit too big. Maybe you can make this one a bit more effective with a roll of D3 x 10k + 20k. (or +30k) This would also get rid of the 5k (half a point of TR).

But apart from this: I like it!!

[wishing]

My only problem with these tables is the option to pick how many rolls on each table you want. Not that it is unbalanced, but I don't like how you have to make a choice. Handicap rolls should not be a tactical part of the game where you have to think about what you want to achieve.. that puts far too much emphasis on the rolls IMHO. I would prefer it if it was straightforward, with no aspect of choice - say, if the difference is thus you roll once on this table, if the difference is this you roll twice on that table. I like the pre-match preparations to be something you just go through the motions to do, rather than something you have to speculate on.

Other than that, great stuff!

[Dangerous Dave]

this complicates the table a bit. However, I feel that it does make it better. The ST 4 frenzy player will be very useful in a game at fairly low TR. However, in a high TR environment, he will be much less useful and may even be a liability (when blocking).

So, how about having the ST 4 Frenzy player if your opponent's TR is under 200 and a rookie Ogre when your opponent's TR is 200+?



Dave