 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Mordredd |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 05:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| Well I blame the members of the BB community who forced the change from 0-8 Ogres, as it was originally, to 0-12 Ogres on the grounds that 8 Ogres wasn't enough to make it an Ogre team. The new roster wouldn't be half as controversial if that mistake hadn't been made. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Khaine |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 05:40 PM
|
|
Joined: Sep 06, 2003
Posts: 193
Status: Offline
|
|
Paul wrote: Quote: And once again, the GW machine keeps rolling. Sorry to sound cynical, but forthe most part, the "change in rules means you have to buy new minis" method of GW was mostly free in BB.
Geze, its only 1 team thats effected. You're ogres are still good, you gotta shell out for some Snotlings (which, last I checked are pretty cheep when you consider you get 10-20 of them in a pack) Its not like they're eliminating all the blitzers in the game.
Also, GW is a business right, they've gotta make money. Name any other game company that doesn't change the rules and make previous purchases out-dated.
What would you prefer, a team that is grossly overpowered that stays that way forever and ever amen becuase some people "already bought the minis"?
I have to agree with GW being a money grinding machine. I have examples of FULL 3k point armies that are either partially worthless, or full worthless because of rules changes. I was glad when i started playing BB again and though well now I won't have to worry about this anymore. BTW a business can make money through means besides killing off mini's  . You can do like various other games that have a great following and just realease updates that keep the same mini's. |
_________________
Touch my Mini's and Pull Back A Stump!!!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 05:43 PM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Spazzfist wrote: GalakStarscraper wrote: So far 22 votes saying in the end game balance is more important than money spent compared to 4 votes that the cash spent should be the major factor.
But you are misrepresenting the stats Galak...So if you want to look at it that way Galak, there are 22 people who say they do care about investment, which overrules your side of the fence as it were.
Code: Yes, they should think about mini's as well as balance. 17% [ 11 ]
NO, game balance is the be all end all of the rule set. 38% [ 24 ]
Maybe, there should be some consideration but balance 44% [ 28 ]
should be the over riding factor.
Total Votes : 63 Note that the third question says that balance should be the over riding factor so they are saying that balance is more important than what people have bought.
Also the first question says that investment and balance are of equal importance. So if anything Galak overplayed the support for investment being more important than balance. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 06:09 PM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
I think the 'sales' point is getting twisted here somewhere. Although it's obviously harsh on those who have already shelled out on Ogres, surely reducing both the number on the roster and the 'power' of the team in general means that GW are going to in fact sell a lot less Ogres than they are currently? (I don't think snotling sales are going to compensate somehow.)
I'm maybe missing something obvious, but to me this actually seems the very opposite to 'changing the rules to sell more minis'. |
_________________
 Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
biggy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 06:18 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 57
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Paul,
I'm doing my best to keep this post civil. If you truly cannot see what GW does as an inefficient and 'punishing their customer' way of, as you say, 'making money', then you might as well bow out of this debate. Even long serving GW employees now concede that long term gamers get screwed by their companies policies. Open your eyes mate. As I said I have multiple fully painted (and several unpainted) armies unusuable as the army that they were originally due to constant edition changes and their 'sorry the big toe used in that conversion isn't GW can't use that mini' policy.
The point I was making from the beggining was that you don't need to cripple a team to balance it. Most ogre coaches would only have included 8-10 ogres on the roster as without at least three goblin on the pitch at a time you're gonna get hosed. Lowering the number of ogres to say 8 would no have impacted as badly on those coaches. As I've said before, lowering the goblins strength to 1 and maybe their armour to 6 and calling them Gnoblars (or whatever, I know we're distancing from WHFB) would have had the desired tone down effect without
a) completely screwing the team,
and,
b) completely screwing the coaches who spent literally hundreds of dollars on a LEGAL team.
GW has made a habit of extorting customers. Go to any Australian tournie these days and you'll see Flames of War outnumber both 40k and WHFB. Most of those people playing it are ex-GW gamers fed up with constantly being rodgered. BB even outnumbered 40k and fantasy at Cancon (our biggest con) for two years running simply because B hasn't succumbed to the aforementioned rodgering policy.
As I stated before, people will SEE this as GW continuing with this policy regardless of whether or not it is INTENTIONAL. BB will lose players.
Please don't reply with another GW 'love-in' speech, we get it enough from them.
Andrew |
_________________
"Crush your enemies. See them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women!"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 06:45 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 18, 2005
Canada
Posts: 423
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Maybe I should have said it earlier, but I agree with you that GW does a great job of screwing over their customers. They do eliminate armies, they do release new editions that makes some old figures redundant, but again, there are very few game companies that don't do this.
but, you still say that the Ogre team is "Compleatly Screwed" by this change. Prove it. Try out the PBBL rules, play an ogre team with Snotlings, and see how bad you do. Thats the whole point of these rules being up now is to play-test them isn't it? Stop whining about what you read and give it a shot. You may find out that the team is just as good. Yea, you're going to have to change your strategy because you can't have 10 Ogres on the field. Maybe, you will find that the team is compleatly screwed, and you can report your findings to the proper channels (the SG forums I believe) and the people who are making these rules can say, gee, maybe we should tweak this abit.
I can tell you right now, that the team as is, is broken. I'm playing them right now, I've got about 15 games in, and the team is a tank. My opponents usually leave the game with 5+ casualties against them, and I usually win because I take the numbers advantage.
All you've done is whine about the money you've spent, and to be quite honest, its getting alittle old. I think it'd be a bad policy to not fix something thats broken because people have spent money on it, now matter how much.
I'm sorry if you're out a few hundred doalrs on this. It sucks, its a GW move, but a game will be better off if they do whats right for the game, and not whats right for the players all the time. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khaine |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 07:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Sep 06, 2003
Posts: 193
Status: Offline
|
|
Paul wrote: Maybe I should have said it earlier, but I agree with you that GW does a great job of screwing over their customers. They do eliminate armies, they do release new editions that makes some old figures redundant, but again, there are very few game companies that don't do this.
but, you still say that the Ogre team is "Compleatly Screwed" by this change. Prove it. Try out the PBBL rules, play an ogre team with Snotlings, and see how bad you do. Thats the whole point of these rules being up now is to play-test them isn't it? Stop whining about what you read and give it a shot. You may find out that the team is just as good. Yea, you're going to have to change your strategy because you can't have 10 Ogres on the field. Maybe, you will find that the team is compleatly screwed, and you can report your findings to the proper channels (the SG forums I believe) and the people who are making these rules can say, gee, maybe we should tweak this abit.
I can tell you right now, that the team as is, is broken. I'm playing them right now, I've got about 15 games in, and the team is a tank. My opponents usually leave the game with 5+ casualties against them, and I usually win because I take the numbers advantage.
All you've done is whine about the money you've spent, and to be quite honest, its getting alittle old. I think it'd be a bad policy to not fix something thats broken because people have spent money on it, now matter how much.
I'm sorry if you're out a few hundred doalrs on this. It sucks, its a GW move, but a game will be better off if they do whats right for the game, and not whats right for the players all the time.
<Antifanboyauraon>
LOL and this is the same attitude that allows GW to continually make these "Rules upgrades" accross board that allow mini's to become redundant hunks of metal taking up shevling space. Personally I would rather buy updated rules til the cows come home to allow a company to thrive. I do not agree that every company does as GW does. I play many games that have used the same rule sets since the mid 80's and have just added source books and done reprints of the same base rules... I have no problem with rule changes, but as for being out hundreds of dollars, maybe you've won the lottery, and can just laugh this off, but us mere mortals actually have to work for a living and 100 bucks is alot more then most people want to spend on something that will be obsolete at the next rule change . As for game balance, I believe you can achieve rules balance without totally destroying the teams. hell make the ogres str 4 instead of str 5 and say that they have become soft because of the lush bloodbowl lifestyle <compared to living in the wild fighting eachother every day.> I'm just saying the tedious once a year or once ever other year changes <not only in BB but in every game [Hell in Omaha if you can find people that even bother to play a GW game it's rare, and they are usually uising older rule sets]> it's just a bit much after a while. While I can't say that the ogre team was too powerful I can see how the team would be intimidating. I also understand that there seems to be a trend toward making the game less bashy and more prancy, which IMHO is where alot of the we need to look at high TR team tone downs comes from. More deaths = less tr = problem solved. |
_________________
Touch my Mini's and Pull Back A Stump!!!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 08:00 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 408
|
|
Paul wrote:
Geze, its only 1 team thats effected.
I can post pics of my Rotters if you'd like.  |
_________________
Snew
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 09:10 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Khaine wrote: More deaths = less tr = problem solved. Point of reference and I already PM'd Khaine on this once.
Consistent feedback from all the playtesters has been that PBBL plays much more bloody than LRB 4.0. Why?
1) Apothecary is MUCH worse.
2) Each Niggle injury are +1 to injury rolls
3) AV and INJ modifiers stack
4) Piling On is much better
5) Underdog teams can compete in any given game meaning that the overdog suffer many more casualties than they ever did in LRB 4.0.
So there is definitely no less bashyness with this edition. Everything I've heard from the playtesters says it is more bashy which was a desired goal since PBBL deleted aging.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 09:20 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
Also I'd like to point out that GW had nothing ... absolutely nothing to do with the changes to the Ogre or Nurgle teams.
These changes were driven by the PBBL playtesters and approved by Ian and I (for the Ogre team) and JJ and I (for the Nurgle team). GW had no hand in changing the rules and profit motives where never a part of the equation.
Also I have to agree with Deathwing ... getting a 16 man Ogre team now will only cost half to get for PBBL as it did for LRB 4.0.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khaine |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 11, 2005 - 09:55 PM
|
|
Joined: Sep 06, 2003
Posts: 193
Status: Offline
|
|
GalakStarscraper wrote: Also I'd like to point out that GW had nothing ... absolutely nothing to do with the changes to the Ogre or Nurgle teams.
These changes were driven by the PBBL playtesters and approved by Ian and I (for the Ogre team) and JJ and I (for the Nurgle team). GW had no hand in changing the rules and profit motives where never a part of the equation.
Also I have to agree with Deathwing ... getting a 16 man Ogre team now will only cost half to get for PBBL as it did for LRB 4.0.
Galak
Sorry Galak I forgot to say that the last post was nostalgia for the OLDER pre LRB bloodbowl editions. |
_________________
Touch my Mini's and Pull Back A Stump!!!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 12, 2005 - 05:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
It is also worth pointing out that yearly changes have been dropped in favour of only making changes when an entirely new edition is released. So there should be fairly long term stability with BB under PBBL, certainly more so than under the previous LRB system.
Also I don't think that it is fair to ask GW to avoid changing armies in favour of releasing new supplements when they make all their money on mini sales. For example I've heard it said by several people within GW that they don't actually make much profit, if any, on codexes and army books. (I don't know whether to believe it, but I've heard it said.) Plus there is a limit to the number of armies you can fit in the game. And how do you persuade people to buy a new version of an army book if nothing has changed? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khaine |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 12, 2005 - 07:50 AM
|
|
Joined: Sep 06, 2003
Posts: 193
Status: Offline
|
|
Mordredd wrote: It is also worth pointing out that yearly changes have been dropped in favour of only making changes when an entirely new edition is released. So there should be fairly long term stability with BB under PBBL, certainly more so than under the previous LRB system.
Also I don't think that it is fair to ask GW to avoid changing armies in favour of releasing new supplements when they make all their money on mini sales. For example I've heard it said by several people within GW that they don't actually make much profit, if any, on codexes and army books. (I don't know whether to believe it, but I've heard it said.) Plus there is a limit to the number of armies you can fit in the game. And how do you persuade people to buy a new version of an army book if nothing has changed?
I truly have no problem with GW making money. Seriously I don't. I have been a supporter of GW games since I was in jr high. I truly like most of the specialist game systems and all of the wargames. What I don't like is having to refinance my home every few years to buy a new "current" army that is within the rule set. I don't mean to sound down on them but it's not a very effective business model. Hell they could be raking it in hand over fist if they signed some development deals with a studio to develop some of their IP into mutlimedia/movies. Some of the books written would translate perfectly into a dozen different media, and that would take pressure off of the mini's to be the "Only Source of Income" which is BS anyway. The easiest thing in the world to make profit on is a book. The costs can be kept very low per volume. Heck there are still people making money self publishing from basements for god sake. Making millions. Like I said I truly do not mind GW making money, but with all of the other less expensive more stable game systems coming out on the market are going to kill GW if their marketing and or policies don't change... Nobody is so big that mismanagement won't kill them. Several companies jump to mind.
On a side not I realized I was probably being harsher then I intended to be throughout this thread including this post. If I am burning bridges this was truly not my intention. I feel that the BBRC has a terrible job that I wouldnt wish on my worst enemy. In any online community that also has basis in RL it is incredibly hard to make anyone happy, let alone keep a majority happy. So far I haven't left the game due to rule changes, and have even come to like one or two rules I thought I would have hated. So if I have seemed harsh believe it is for the love of a game I have played on and off for nearly 20 years now.... It's close to my heart and like anything if you love something you want the best for it. |
_________________
Touch my Mini's and Pull Back A Stump!!!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
biggy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 12, 2005 - 06:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 57
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
OK Paul you've obviously not learnt how to read. So we'll ignore your posts from now on.
Quote:
These changes were driven by the PBBL playtesters and approved by Ian and I (for the Ogre team) and JJ and I (for the Nurgle team). GW had no hand in changing the rules and profit motives where never a part of the equation.
Again please READ what I said. You've stated this several times. It doesn't matter what the process was. GW has a history of screwing over its customers and it APPEAR that they are doing it again. It doesn't matter that Ian and Galak are the ones that did it. People will assume GW has transferred their 'screw our customer' policy onto bloodbowl and the people that have stuck with BB because it is not perceived as one of those games with become disheartened and leave. BB will lose players.
I'll now sit back and wait for Paul to misinterpret this message and tell me to again stop whining about money.
Andrew |
_________________
"Crush your enemies. See them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women!"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Paul |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 12, 2005 - 06:42 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 18, 2005
Canada
Posts: 423
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote: I'll now sit back and wait for Paul to misinterpret this message and tell me to again stop whining about money.
Actually, I believe I said to try them out before you declare them to be broken, my last post didn't have a thing to do with finances, which is what you keep telling me not to bring up. But what do I know, I can't read. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
