LRB favors AG teams (Rant)

[BullBear]

I'm not referring to you specifically here, just the community at large. Although my post count isn't very high, I've been lurking for some time, and I did the same on the old bbowl-l list for years before. Now, more than ever, what the BB community "celebrities" say is taken as gospel by a lot of folks on the online community at large. Because the BBRC has a certain style of play that they obviously prefer (not because of it's superiority, just because of their play preference) then that is the style of play that the LRB very strongly promotes.

And I think a large portion of the community doesn't do a whole lot of rules thinking for themselves. I hear constantly over here, whenever anyone proposes a dissenting opinion, that "at least the rules are more balanced than any other version, so we don't care about any other flaws in them." In my opinion, they are balanced at the expense of good design (wordy complex "patches" may play fine, but they aren't good designs) and the very spirit of blood bowl itself.

Sure, no one wants to play a team that can't support itself because of excessive casualties, but the rules now promote something more akin to pansybowl than bloodbowl. Even the fluff contradicts the way the game plays, now.

IMO, you are correct on all points. I too, would prefer a little more blood and mayhem (maybe at least ONE card apiece, or something!). The game has become much more strategic, and I suppose that's 'better' for some, but if I want high strategy I'd play Chess. The lure of this game is the chaos and violence on the pitch, both of which has been restricted. On the other hand WM is more strategic (if you must play a GW game). Maybe some folks should play that, and allow the blood to flow in this game again.

[Joshua Dyal]

Well, there's two kinds of tactical skill sets that you need to develop in Blood Bowl: 1) the ability to craft a well-laid plan and play it out to fruition, and 2) the ability to roll with the unexpected mayhem that is part and parcel of the game.

Currently, the LRB emphasises the first and marginalizes the second. Most likely, IMO, because that's the play style of the BBRC -- I imagine they like that type of strategic development, and of course, the second interferes with that. However, the second has always been a major part of the game, and I, for one, miss it.

It's very difficult to actually hurt another player anymore, for one thing, and most of the random, wacky and downright dangerous-ness past editions of the game is blatantly missing in an attempt to create a game that is well-balanced, plays smoothly, and favors coaches to are great tactical thinkers in a chess type of way.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that, I suppose, although I think it betrays the spirit of the game. It's just counter to my own personal preferences.

[GalakStarscraper]

Where's the lack of blood ... really how many casualties do you need a game???

I looking at my league stats right now:

Chaos Dwarf 2.4 Cas a game after 18 games
Dwarf 2.8 Cas a game after 33 games
Khemri 3.5 Cas a game after 10 games
Lustrian 2.3 Cas a game after 9 games
Norse 2.2 Cas a game after 17 games
Old World 2.4 Cas a game after 5 games

6 races with 5 games or more played averaging over 2 Cas a game. Not going to be happy guys until you have average more like 4 a game???

When I look and see teams still averaging over 2 a game ... I guess I don't feel like its Pansy bowl at all. Pitch clearing is still a valid tactic in LRB. If you like massive bloodshed ... house rule it ... I disagree that races cannot still bash.

Galak

[Joshua Dyal]

Then your experience is certainly different than mine. I've recently been running a "mini-league" between a friend and myself so he can learn the rules. I have an orc team, he has a helf team. After five games, we've had three casualties, and one of those was an off-the-pitch death, so it doesn't even count. My two black orcs and my troll, who supposedly that's all they're good at -- haven't been able to get anything at all.

You can tell me all you like that pitch clearing is still a valid tactic. I've been trying it unsuccessfully for five games now with a team that supposedly is relatively good at it.

Of course, you may be referring to further out when you've got more developed teams. If both my BOs and my troll had piling on, for example, and block, and maybe mighty blow, maybe they'd do a better job of it. But the way things are now, they'll never get there until they've had three or four MVPs each.

I'd also bet that most BB players out there don't play in long-running leagues -- I've yet to play in a really long-running one, for example, or even meet one in person. The BBRC does, though, so they've built up a ruleset that, again, supports the way they play the game. Great. But the rest of us get an inferior product in terms of our requirements of the game, or are forced to house rule just to have a game as fun as we used to.

[roysorlie]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

I'm an elf coach, always have been, and always will be.

I would much rather have more violence on the pitch, than the stupid, annoying, hateful aging tablle.

I want to allow fouling 1 SPP, and keep IGMEOY.
I'd like to see MB allowed on both AV and INJ.
I want the aging table to start kivking in at the third skill roll. And an aging result means a roll on the SI chart.

It lends sligthly more injury towards actual play. And it reduces the severity of aging.

I see this a a compromise between those who want it as it is, and all tose who'd like to see more carnage.

[Ghost of Pariah]

I think if the powers that be would just admit that people don't like their babies and try out the +1 to injury for niggler, or some other system they would find they could acheive the same turnover and please the public.

Unfortunately, from what I can see, too many people want their name on something.

[Skummy]

Joshua: New Orc teams are not very good at bashing. Orc teams that have devleoped a lot of Tackle, have a Piling On big guy and some Black Orcs with Mighty Blow/Piling On are excellent at clearing the pitch. Last night I cleared everything but one Saurus off the pitch by the end of the game. Newbie Orcs really aren't a power team because they lack some key skills.

[roysorlie]

I think if the powers that be would just admit that people don't like their babies and try out the +1 to injury for niggler, or some other system they would find they could acheive the same turnover and please the public.

Unfortunately, from what I can see, too many people want their name on something.

Actually, I think this could be a good idea. a +1 injury for niggling, or maybe leave niggling the way it is, and create a new injury result that results in a +1 to injuries against him. Maybe add bonehead as a potential injury as a result of a bit too many blows to the head.

Nuffle knows BB players get enough of them. Anything, just get rid of the aging table, and make the game slighlty more violent, to account for the loss of effect the aging table has.

I agree completely with bullbear, the aging table is very very inelegant. I also agree with the intention of the aging table's fans. To make sure of a greater recycling of players. I just belive strongly that aging kills a little of the fun in gaining skill increases.

To be perfectly honest, I think most finesse team coaches are very annoyed with aging, since it seems to penalize them far more then anyone else. Most Power team coaches are annoyed because on field damage is harder come by. and it's become "pansybowl".

Fouling has become something of a anathema, I've played coaches who get all mad at me, because I foul their Piling on, tackle, frenzy mummies. !!
Playing elves, it's practically the only way to get rid of them, now isn't it?

*rant*

I will shortly be posting my thought's on changes, that I would like reviewd, tweaked, and sent forward to the BBRC. They can call it whatever they want. I don't even want my name on it. (then I'll get all the heat for it's flaws.)

Cheers, I have a pounding morning after headache!

[BullBear]

To be perfectly honest, I think most finesse team coaches are very annoyed with aging, since it seems to penalize them far more then anyone else. Most Power team coaches are annoyed because on field damage is harder come by. and it's become "pansybowl".

The most accurate comment to date.

[Milo]

Hey fellas,

I just played the first BB game of our new season, and a suspicion of mine has been confirmed. 'Bashy' teams have become handcuffed and placed at a serious disadvantage. I quick look through most leagues will show that AG teams are generally placed higher than the ST ones. Here's a list of a few things that I feel are 'wrong' about the current state of BB. (I'm sure these points have been brought up before, but I don't have time to read through multiple threads).

In our league, we had two Wood Elf teams and two Skaven teams make the playoffs. That said, we also had two Orc teams and two Chaos teams, a Norse team, two Human teams, and a Lizardman team. I'm still keeping an eye out for it, but I'm not seeing a distinct advantage one way or another. (Ours is just one league, though.)

1) Like it or not, w/out SPPs for fouling, ST teams grow at a slower rate than AG teams. ST teams also gain exp more 'randomly' than the AG teams (w/ more SPPs given out for AG actions - which the coach has more control over, ie. who scores, who passes the pussy pass, etc. IMO, SPPs for fouling can work under IGMEOY, and gives ST coaches more control on how they receive SPPS.

This *might* be true, but I've found that AG teams tend to gain more SPPs on a small number of players, but ST teams gain them scattered all over. We've got a smattering of both types of players in our top player list, though.

2) MB needs to go back to 3rd (or 'My AG skills are better than your ST skills'). Example: Dodge can be used during blocks OR dodging. MB has been reduced to ONLY being used during a block, if I want to have a skill effect a dodge, I need to get Tackle. Two skills to 'counter' the one.

I'm confused. This has ALWAYS been the case. Dodge has ALWAYS modified the block dice, and ALWAYS offered a re-roll on dodges. Tackle nullifies Dodge in either circumstance. Tackle increases the chances of knocking another player over, whereas Block decreases the chances you'll fall over on the block. This dates back to 1993.

-If I may take a moment here, a failed GFI causes a straight armour roll, during a block I can use MB, BUT if a character fails to dodge away, I can't hit'em with MB, he simply trips? The chance of breaking armour is no more than a GFI? If a player fails to dodge out twice, the opponent should be able to use his hitting skills, as he has simply decked the dodger. Am I missing something?

Again, this has always been the case. Injuries caused by failed GFIs or dodges have never allowed the application of Mighty Blow. The fact that an opposing player suffers a turnover and takes an armor roll without having to roll the block dice should be satisfaction enough.

3) Bashy skills and actions are being reduced, while 'tarted rules like intercepting BEFORE a pass is thrown are being put in place to increase interceptions. Another AG based action, with SPPs to go with it, I might add. (BTW, who was complaining about a lack of interceptions?)

Again, rolling for interception before pass has ALWAYS been the correct method. This has not changed, just been clarified.

4) Ageing is now in place, since the kid gloves are on the teams. The turnover rate isn't as high on the high AG teams, so we have a whole new chart to bring down players with dizzying amounts of SPPs. Now, it's more fun to see players just fade away...

This is a problem that the BBRC is familiar with, and we've been discussing some possibilities with how to deal with it.

Milo

[Milo]

I hear constantly over here, whenever anyone proposes a dissenting opinion, that "at least the rules are more balanced than any other version, so we don't care about any other flaws in them." In my opinion, they are balanced at the expense of good design (wordy complex "patches" may play fine, but they aren't good designs) and the very spirit of blood bowl itself.

Joshua,

For what it's worth, the BBRC realizes that less rules are better. Our first goal was to try to address what we considered were some problem spots in the rules. We realize that it's not perfect, though, and are looking for ways to improve on it (reduce some of the ruleage in favor of a simpler, cleaner system.)

One suggestion currently on the table is Chet's "No-INJ-Modifiers" ruleset, which removes a lot of the special casualty handling. Again, though, that's only a suggestion which is being discussed at the moment. I just wanted to point out that we are trying to address rules creep in this coming Rules Review.

Milo

[Zombie]

Joshua Dyal, i play in a long running league, and i'm not part of the BBRC. I know that most people who post here do the same. My chaos dwarves this season average about 3 or 4 CAS a game, so there's a lot of blood, no doubt about that. Of course, low TR teams cause less CAS, but that's a good thing. You don't want to totally anihilate teams before they even get a chance to get going.

I also very much like that Blood Bowl is more strategic and less luck-oriented, and i know that many other people on this board who are not BBRC members think the same, and pretty much all of the 15 or so coaches in my league as well.

[GalakStarscraper]

Joshua Dyal, i play in a long running league, and i'm not part of the BBRC. I know that most people who post here do the same. My chaos dwarves this season average about 3 or 4 CAS a game, so there's a lot of blood, no doubt about that. Of course, low TR teams cause less CAS, but that's a good thing. You don't want to totally anihilate teams before they even get a chance to get going.

I also very much like that Blood Bowl is more strategic and less luck-oriented, and i know that many other people on this board who are not BBRC members think the same, and pretty much all of the 15 or so coaches in my league as well.

Lord help me ... I completely agree with every single word Zombie just said both in general and in how it applies to my 2 leagues that I commish.

Galak

[Colin]

Lord help me ... I completely agree with every single word Zombie just said both in general and in how it applies to my 2 leagues that I commish.

Galak

THE APOCOLYPSE IS APON US!!!

[MistWraith]

Fact #1 the highest rankes naf coaches are bashy teams.

Fact#2 the main online leagues, all have a good mix of top teams, with bashing teams being currently slightly ahead. Do a search and look for your self.

Fact #3, in the 3 years we have been running a BB league here (adverage of 10 coaches w/2 teams each per season, currently 26 coaches each season is 3 months long) we have never had a high or dark elf team even make it into the final game. Woodies have won it twice, humans once, all the other times it was won by bashy teams. We have used 3rd ed, 4th ed and BB:tLRB ed rules. with resets every 3 seasons or so.

Now, do you have any facts to counter this? No, you have your randomly formed opinions. Just because your local enviroment favors agility teams, does not mean the comunity as a whole does.