NAF World Headquarters
North America - Would there be interest in a PBBL Tournament?
neoliminal - Nov 21, 2005 - 02:52 PM
Post subject: Would there be interest in a PBBL Tournament?
A blood bowl tournament using the PBBL rules?
You could bring a team of value 1,600,000 or less. If teams were uneven, the Inducements would be used to even the teams.
What tactics would you use in such a tournament? How would you maximize your team? Would you low-ball your team to get inducements?
GalakStarscraper - Nov 21, 2005 - 04:44 PM
Post subject:
Interesting concept ... you'd have a bring a heck of a team to field all your possible inducement choices.
Would you allow the 1,600,000 to purchase skills and stats for their normal development cost?
I could see such a tournament not being very fun for me if it was filled with ST 4 AG 5 Wardancers with Strip Ball and Claw, Mighty Blow, Piling On, Block Chaos Warriors.
===========
To answer the main question of the header ... I'd absolutely go to a 1,000,000 gold PBBL tournament because it is no different in any way that matters from an LRB 4.0 one.
The type of tournament you describe ... I'd need to see some very carefully laid out and clear rules before I would attend.
Galak
CyberHare - Nov 21, 2005 - 04:53 PM
Post subject:
GalakStarscraper wrote:
I'd absolutely go to a 1,000,000 gold PBBL tournament because it is no different in any way that matters from an LRB 4.0 one.
What? The new skills, roster changes, fouling and apo changes don't matter? I'm sure I'm missing others as every time I pick up the vault to try and go through it I get frustrated and toss it away in disgust. Forget everything else, how can the skill and roster changes not matter? That boggles the mind that you would even say that.
Oh my god Tom how can that not matter. aaack you've got me all flustered here.
AnthonyTBBF - Nov 21, 2005 - 05:01 PM
Post subject:
Rules shmules.
I am up for a tourney. It can be 4th Ed. Gold for all I care.
CyberHare - Nov 21, 2005 - 05:11 PM
Post subject:
AnthonyTBBF wrote:
I am up for a tourney. It can be 4th Ed. Gold for all I care.
So how was the spike again 
AnthonyTBBF - Nov 21, 2005 - 05:29 PM
Post subject:
Out. Of. Town.
CyberHare - Nov 21, 2005 - 06:10 PM
Post subject:
GalakStarscraper - Nov 21, 2005 - 06:15 PM
Post subject:
CyberHare wrote:
Oh my god Tom how can that not matter. aaack you've got me all flustered here.
You are one of few folks that I talk to that believe that anything material actually changed for TR 100 tournament play (I bolded this because I want to be clear that I'm not talking about league play at all). Especially since most the skills that changed aren't used in tournaments anyway.
And I'm comfortable saying that because of the number of TR 100 PBBL games that I've played, seen played, and had folks respond.
>> The new skills
Are skills that aren't normally seen in TR 100 tournament play anyway ... and actually match up better with most leagues trying to give Chaos and Nurgle more mutations anyway (don't need special rules for that now).
>> roster changes
Were not any worse than we've had in most Rules Reviews and many teams went unaffected other than a more expensive Big Guy
>> fouling
Base chance of eject at 1 in 6 is what you get in LRB 4.0 and most tournaments I've gone to house ruled to use the PBBL Diry Player anyway.
>> apo
Apothecaries are almost never seen in tournaments so what do these matter. Odds are most tournaments will just not allow the apothecary with PBBL games which will have pretty much zero impact. I think GenCon had 1 apothecary show up on 56 teams.
Sorry Brian ... I stand by what I said .. and not in theory from actually having played several TR 100 games and talked to coaches playing the same. PBBL has no material impact on TR 100 tournament play.
But don't feel bad Brian ... I feel the same way about your posts when you say how Blood Bowl and tournament will be destroyed by PBBL as you feel about mine that it doesn't affect tournaments in any material way ... so its a yin and yang thing ...
Galak
Hoshi_Komi - Nov 21, 2005 - 08:32 PM
Post subject:
GalakStarscraper wrote:
>> The new skills
Are skills that aren't normally seen in TR 100 tournament play anyway ... and actually match up better with most leagues trying to give Chaos and Nurgle more mutations anyway (don't need special rules for that now).
>> roster changes
Were not any worse than we've had in most Rules Reviews and many teams went unaffected other than a more expensive Big Guy
>> fouling
Base chance of eject at 1 in 6 is what you get in LRB 4.0 and most tournaments I've gone to house ruled to use the PBBL Diry Player anyway.
please correct me if I'm wrong,
Mutations are toned down to the point they are NOT worth taking over the regular skills anyway now for chaos. The lack of block and sure hands, etc. No point to play chaos in a tourney with PBBL.
Humans will suffer since the big guy costs more, I'm sure other teams will too.
fouling is higher chance of getting caught isn't it? double on either av or inj is more than 1 in 6.
GalakStarscraper - Nov 21, 2005 - 09:47 PM
Post subject:
gken1 wrote:
please correct me if I'm wrong,
Mutations are toned down to the point they are NOT worth taking over the regular skills anyway now for chaos. The lack of block and sure hands, etc. No point to play chaos in a tourney with PBBL.
The toning down is up for debate ... I'd be curious to try. If there are a lot of Orc and Dwarf teams ... Claw is +2 to AV on those player ... just like the LRB 4.0. More speed ... take Tentacles still stops equal ST players cold 1 in 3 times. To be honest ... I didn't see Chaos doing that well in tournaments even with the take Mutations as normal skills rules either ... it is just a tough team to start with.
Quote:
Humans will suffer since the big guy costs more, I'm sure other teams will too.
All teams with Big Guys pay more for them. So this was an across the board change for them.
See I guess I need to clarify. I don't consider these items to be major changes to tournament play at all. If a Big Guy is more expensive you cut back or don't use him. When the Master Chef went from 60k per an ingredient to 80k for tournament play ... I adjusted my team and played on ... I didn't consider that a major change to tournament play. Changes by a 10k to 30k for the Big Guys falls in this same category to me. Minor stuff that has no meaning to me. A good coach plays around this.
Major tournament changes to me would be changing how hand-offs work (like was done with LRB 1.0 from 3rd edition). Or how passing works. Or how blocking works (like saying that if you are double a players ST with assists you get 3 dice). But we didn't do any of that. Yes Fouling changed ... but overall the mechanic is the same ... the major change was to fouling ejection rate.
Quote:
fouling is higher chance of getting caught isn't it? double on either av or inj is more than 1 in 6.
Equal odds on the AV ... if you get an injury roll odds of ejection are another 1 in 6 ... however it never gets worse ... so the 50% ejection of LRB 4.0 doesn't happen on the 2nd. So it is only more severe if you actually break AV and overall it is not as harsh for ejection since it doesn't get more likely to be ejected with each additional foul.
So ... I'm not arguing at all that it didn't change some ... I know there are changes. I just don't see the changes as outside anything that has happened from the last 3 Rules Reviews.
Galak
CyberHare - Nov 22, 2005 - 03:28 AM
Post subject:
GalakStarscraper wrote:
So ... I'm not arguing at all that it didn't change some ... I know there are changes. I just don't see the changes as outside anything that has happened from the last 3 Rules Reviews.
Galak
So in essence you've changed the entire feel of the game in how skills work, team costs, fouling, apo's etc but these things don't matter. I'm sorry to belittle you're tourney expertise Tom but these things do matter.
You're heralding in the era of mass fouling for starters. Why would I not take dirty player as one of my first skill picks now. Especially if I'm undead with a few extra skeletons to blow off. You're 1 in 6 math will not pan out on the field. The 50% math doesn't pan out on the field now! After having sat through umpteen number of tournament games where I've been mass fouled and not been able to throw out the fouler I can tell you it doesn't pan out. Yes yes the math on paper it's really nice and in league play it must be a smashing success I'm sure. Who cares. Sitting at the table in a tournament I've traveled 10 hours to get to and taking foul after foul without being able to eject the player simply sucks! Now you want the odds of that player being thrown out to never increase. YAY for the foulers
You can't compare the little tweaks from the previous rules reviews to this. You're comparing a couple of little skill tweaks and roster changes here and there to a complete rewrite of the skill set and rosters 
How is that the same?????
You've given Big guy's back a chance at using re-rolls for gosh sakes and you say that doesn't change the game!
The changes to the way the APO works are incomprehensible as far as I'm concerned. It was broken before in some manner? Now you've made it useless. And yes I've seen plenty of Apo's in tournaments. Not anymore, why waste the cash.
And a personal grudge. Amazon re-rolls at 50k? Why? Were they suddenly overpowered? You take away one of the few bonuses they have and still leave them with no big guy
The changes do matter Tom. They matter a lot!
CyberHare - Nov 22, 2005 - 05:05 AM
Post subject:
Let me put it another way. You, myself or any of us who spend 24/7 browsing these forums taking about the smallest minutia of Blood Bowl will grind our teeth and bear change simply because we love the game and the people in it. People who only have a passing interest in the game and may show up for one tourney a year are the problem. Minor changes from year to year are easy to absorb. Massive change turns people off and sends them away. It's a simple fact that people don't like change, for good or bad.
Case in point is my local Blood Bowl scene. When I started DBI I knew of at least 50 coaches in the area who played. 18 people showed up half of whom were from out of town. I went back to the local stores and leagues and asked why they weren't interested. You had the time, the money, but more often than not, it was the rules. Honestly and no joke there are some leagues in the area still using 3rd ed rules. I started working with one league to show them the LRB. DBII saw 18 coaches again but this time most were local. Last year I helped run a tourney at a local store to show how the tourney system works. Get people interested. It was a big success. This year there were 32 coaches at DBIII and even more locals showed up. Now you expect people to simply go "yeah sorry about that whole LRB - BBRC thing, we've decided to start over again". Three years down the tubes because of one mans vanity.
It's not right. These changes do matter for tournament play.
GalakStarscraper - Nov 22, 2005 - 06:10 AM
Post subject:
CyberHare wrote:
It's not right. These changes do matter for tournament play.
Hey if you think they'll hurt your tournament ... don't use them.
Contra to anyone's belief ... I don't want to force these rules on anyone.
If you think it will flush 3 years down the toilet ... then have a copy of the LRB 4.0 on your website and say ... this is the rulebook for our tournament. I'm completely serious about that.
And Brian ... you more than any other single person have been the anti-PBBL poster child ... so I don't expect you to ever embrace PBBL. But then I've never said anyone would have to.
And as for one man's vanities causing unwanted change .... all I can say is you've ignored a lot of what I've read of late.
http://www.talkbloodbowl.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=17881
http://www.talkbloodbowl.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=17915
http://www.bloodbowl.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=2657
I could post a lot more, but I'm just trying to show what I'm seeing of late. I don't see new faces joining the against PBBL crowd ... I see the die-hards that have been on your side from day one that are still there but not as many as there were 13 months ago. I'll leave it at that because you and I have been at this for 19 months.
Galak
neoliminal - Nov 22, 2005 - 07:53 AM
Post subject:
WHOA!!!
I'm talking about playing a tournament using the PBBL rules and allowing people to buy players with more skills. To equalize the unbalance this causes, the incentives will be in effect... so even if you play your 100 TR team against some 175 TR monster team, you're going to have a decent chance.
As for the added rules/rules changes... it's STILL Blood Bowl. I can't repeat this enough. Nothing that makes this game great has changed. When you play it, it's still Blood Bowl.
Now back on subject. Would you stack skills on players or go with a smaller team in the hopes that you could get a wizard?
AnthonyTBBF - Nov 22, 2005 - 08:05 AM
Post subject:
I thought this was a thread about running a tournament...
AnthonyTBBF - Nov 22, 2005 - 08:06 AM
Post subject:
I think I would be tempted to take a middle of the road approach. Then again it would depend on the team too. Some teams obviosuly will do better with less additional skills.
CyberHare - Nov 22, 2005 - 08:36 AM
Post subject:
Where's my soap box? Who took my soap box dang it! 
All right I can take a hint
GalakStarscraper - Nov 22, 2005 - 08:51 AM
Post subject:
I think it would be an interesting tournament John. In theory if we get inducements working the way you want ... you would be giving up a 5 to 15% handicap right off the bat if you went with a lower TV team and planned on picking inducements for each match. Yeah you would get to tailor your inducements for each game, but an inducements is always worse than developing the item on your own.
Rerolls ... purchased is 40k to 70k ... induced is 100k
Positional players ... induced cost 30k more and have to roll a 4+ to not waste a team re-roll if they try to use one.
So I admit it would be an interesting contest.
Just thinking about strategy. If I ran Amazons for instance to this 1,600,000 tournament ... I'd probably bring a team worth 1,300,000 with the assumption that if I ran into any of the Undead teams I could put Zara on my roster (assuming that said Undead team brought a TV of at least 1,570,000)
But what I meant about optimizing ... an Amazon team at 1,600,000 if tailor built for your tournament and decided to spend the full 1,600,000 might look like this:
4 Blitzers 6337 Block, Dodge, Strip Ball, Juggernaut
1 Thrower 6337 Block, Dodge, Pass, Accurate, Leader
1 Thrower 6337 Block, Dodge, Pass, Accurate
2 Catchers 7337 Block, Dodge, Catch, +1 MA, Fend
3 Linewomen 6337 Block, Dodge, Fend
4 re-rolls
3 Fan Factor
Apothecary
That team is worth 1,600,000 in PBBL and would play pretty darn well ... it would be interesting to see how it fared against other teams that were designed to that level.
The other interest would be if folks would not spend the full 1,600,000. If two such players played ... their stategies would be really disrupted since they probably came planning on using inducements and suddenly may not have any at all.
It would be interesting to see some of the other races ... I'd definitely try Halflings with these rules.
2 Treemen with Block, Pro, Multiple Block, Grab
4 Halflings with +1 AG
6 Halflings with Diving Tackle
Apothecary
3 Rerolls
6 Fan Factor
This would add up to 1,250,000. Assuming I faced a full 1,600,000 I could then add Deeproot (250k) and a Master Chef (100k)
Joemanji - Nov 23, 2005 - 05:52 AM
Post subject:
I think 1,600,000 is a bit over the top. When I considered how you might run a PBBL tournament, I thought a Team Value of up to 120 would probably work. This would allow some scope to throw in some skills and develop some players, but without carte blanche. I think this would be the really interesting part of desigining a team for a PBBL tournament: do you go for extra players or extra skills? With TR160, there is no choice involved. Too open to abuse ... everyone would just take OTS gutter runners. Yuck. 
I don't really see Inducements as an integral part of a PBBL tournament anyway. The possibility to gain skills is enough for me. But if a tournament did use Inducements, I would take my team at full cost minus 10K. So in Neo's example, I'd pick a TV159 team. My assumption would be that coaches planning to use Inducements would leave the exact difference they wanted to use between their TV and 160. So, for example, Galak left exactly 250K off his team to buy Deeproot and a Master Chef. Against me he would only have 240K to spend ... which would hopefully put a major spanner in the works for him. That would be worth 10K IMO.
GalakStarscraper - Nov 23, 2005 - 07:11 AM
Post subject:
Nazgit wrote:
So, for example, Galak left exactly 250K off his team to buy Deeproot and a Master Chef. Against me he would only have 240K to spend ... which would hopefully put a major spanner in the works for him. That would be worth 10K IMO.
I do agree though that 1,600,000 might be a bit much ... however ... if you didn't allow stat increases ... it might not be so bad.
Galak
neoliminal - Nov 23, 2005 - 09:38 AM
Post subject:
So the event would be more interesting at a lower value. What would be an interesting starting value that would allow for some variation but also some room for lowballing and going for stars to fit your opponent's team?
GalakStarscraper - Nov 23, 2005 - 02:57 PM
Post subject:
neoliminal wrote:
So the event would be more interesting at a lower value. What would be an interesting starting value that would allow for some variation but also some room for lowballing and going for stars to fit your opponent's team?
The most expensive Star is Morg at 430k. However a lot of the Big Guy stars get complained about and are the things we are working on the most.
My best thoughts on what would be interesting to me.
1) 1,300,000 team values allowed.
2) You may add normal or doubles skills to your players and a player may have more than one skill added (but not more than 6).
3) Statistical increases may not be added to any players.
4) You must have 11 players on your starting roster without using Star Players, Mercenaries, or Journeymen for any of the 11.
5) Any of the 1,300,000 not spent on your roster does not count toward Team Value.
===
I think that would make an interesting event. With that roster you'd have to really low ball your roster to get any of the Big Guy stars.
Galak
Joemanji - Nov 23, 2005 - 03:32 PM
Post subject:
I agree that ruling out stat increases would be the only way to go. Even allowing for one is too much, as it allows easy access to OTS for some teams.
Joemanji - Nov 23, 2005 - 03:39 PM
Post subject:
For Goblins at TR130 you might look at:
Varag (230K)
Ripper (220K)
2 Trolls (220K)
10 Goblins (400K)
Looney (40K)
3 re-rolls (180K)
FF 1 (10K)
I've only had a game and a half at it, but I have found that four ST5+ players and a chainsaw can be quite effective.
GalakStarscraper - Nov 23, 2005 - 08:12 PM
Post subject:
Nazgit wrote:
I've only had a game and a half at it, but I have found that four ST5+ players and a chainsaw can be quite effective.
Hey Naz ... my math might be bad ... but who is the 4th ST 5+ player?
Galak
Joemanji - Nov 24, 2005 - 08:13 AM
Post subject:
Sorry ... there isn't one. Varag's combo of skills makes him almost as useful though (Block, MB, Pro & Jump Up).
Looking back at that Gobbo list above though, I'd still rather take a standard roster with a few skills. E.g. Humans.
Xeterog - Nov 27, 2005 - 06:57 PM
Post subject:
I'd play if I could easily afford to get to the tournament (usually the limiting factor for me). I'm kinda hoping Galak uses PBBL for GenCon next year
Anyway, 1.3 mil with no stat increases would be a good one.
Could you keep back money for Chirurgeons and/or inducements (oh, I guess any money not spent does not go to TV means you could get them if the team you are playing has more TV than you do)... (a chirurgeon would be of use in a tourney..)