 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
SBG |
|
Post subject: Anybody feels that the October 2006 rules are boring?
 Posted: Nov 27, 2005 - 05:46 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 787
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
I want to know if I really am alone feeling that the inducements and new apo and all those teams and all those star players with Block are plainly not fun to play.
I really hate those rules and if they really become the official table top rules, I'm thinking of not playing anymore. Don't get me wrong: I don't want to whine about it, but I feel I might not be alone not liking them! I know the game will continue even if stop playing it... That wasn't my point! 
THe rules I'm talking about are those used in Galak's (Tom ANders') test league, MBBL and can be downloaded at http://www.blood-bowl.net/MBBL/PBBL_1_10_MBBL_version3.pdf.
I don't recognize the game anymore and I really think that all those cahnges are crappy, none less.
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Xeterog |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 27, 2005 - 07:13 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Texas
Posts: 73
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
|
|
In the games I've played in MBBL with the PBBL rules, I've not felt that I was playing an unreconizable game. Things have changed, slightly, but not substantially--IMO.
The Stars can be an issue, and alreay several of those problems have been addressed in some way (remember, we are still in the playtesting stage at this point). Personally, I think it's the High Strength combined with block that is the problem on alot of stars. But it's only a real problem when playing large TV difference games.
Inducements seem to even up the game quite a bit. A new team has a chance of beating an established team--and definitely shouldn't get completely demolished.
The New apoth is worse, but we don't have that horrible, horrible aging. Also, you can hire healer and/or Chirurgeon to help out if you have the cash and/or inducement money to spare.
I don't really understand why you (and some others) don't claim to recognize the game anymore. So far, with about 16 games played with PBBL rules, the game plays very much the same as it always has for me. Is it exactly the same? no. Is it bloodbowl? Definitely yes. Dwarves still have trouble scoring fast, Skaven (gutter) runners still run rings around just about everyone, Mummies still bash everythign in site, etc.
IMO, the changes have only been for the better--either making the games more competitive with inducements or by cleaning up alot of the rules--things just seem to work better so far. |
_________________
-Xeterog
(formerly Gortex)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
alternat |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 12:40 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 02, 2004
Posts: 39
Status: Offline
|
|
don't forget that stars, inducements and so on can be ruled out by league commissioners, that can also go on with handicaps, if they wish.
I play "vaultish" since two years now, and I will not miss the LRB rules. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 04:54 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 1146
|
|
It's not worth the time SBG  No one wants to listen. No matter what you say you'll just be branded as "afraid of change" or somethng like that. The league rules are lost. It's sad but in 2007 we will not all be playing by more ore less the same rules anymore. Heck it's already begun.
The only hope we have left is the tournament scene. Don't worry, Death Bowl will always be true to the game. Hopefully other tournament organizers will see the PBBL for the trouble that it is and stick with the LRB. I've got enough electronic copies of the LRB 4.0 to last me and the rest of the net until the end of time. |
_________________
Brian St.James
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 28, 2005 - 11:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
| Exercise my right not to comment on the one forum I've not vented. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
TuernRedvenom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 01:39 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 142
Status: Offline
|
|
Before I start let me just say that I think the vault rules have come a loooooooooooong way since vault 1.1 (which I hated with every cell in my body), and I think many people that don't like the vault are either focussing on details (removal of argue the call for example) or haven't actually played in a vault league.
I really don't understand why the Vault is being called "more boring" here, if you want cards are back (we don't use them though), secret weapons are back (and the goblins in our league are loving them, even if they don't win any games with them) and there are more skills to choose from.
I for one are really enjoying our vault league mainly because my players have more good skill combo's to choose from where it used to be pretty much dry cut and set in stone.
The game itself has hardly changed, I really don't understand some people when they say the vault is ruining the game. Tactics are still the same (they are not dumbed down, it does not encourage excessive fouling,...), even a little more varied as the new skills give you some extra options.
League rules are waaay better, there are some that say that a TR 200 team should always downright crush a TR 100 team but I'd rather play a game in which I know I have at least some chance of winning (when I'm coaching the TR 100 team) instead of just worrying the whole game about how to survive.
There are some small things I don't like but on the overall I'm very happy with our vault league and I think the rules are better then current LRB.
And to those that say it ruins tourney play (see thread on TBB), I don't believe that either. The mentality problem will solve itself after a while.
It seems to me many of the biggest critics of the vault haven't actually got round to playing a vault league or tourney, and before you do that all criticism is conjecture at most IMHO. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 02:08 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 787
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Well, I'm playing a league now, and I think those rules are the crappiest rules around! An apo that doesn't heal you??? Gimmick cards that can change the game from end to end??? Bank, treasury?? For christ sake, you got the money or you don't! And the inducements are the worst thing I've ever seen! IMO, these rules are total crap and I think that NAF sanctionned tourneys should stick with LRB.
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
TuernRedvenom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 02:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 142
Status: Offline
|
|
| Ok, but how is that more boring then? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 03:13 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 787
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Well, if the rules you play aren't fun, they're boring, no? It might honestly be that I don't get the meaning right, being French speaking. But I don't like those rules, hence, I think they're boring, as in not fun to play. Not being sarcastic, just making sure I'm clear!
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 03:38 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 1146
|
|
TuernRedvenom wrote: And to those that say it ruins tourney play (see thread on TBB), I don't believe that either. The mentality problem will solve itself after a while.
Yup. Probably by the tournament scene diminishing to the point where there are a few hard core people left like myself. Problem solved right 
TuernRedvenom wrote: It seems to me many of the biggest critics of the vault haven't actually got round to playing a vault league or tourney, and before you do that all criticism is conjecture at most IMHO.
Oh for the love of pete please don't drag up that tired "if you havn't tried it...." rhetoric. Most of us don't need to step in it to know what it is
I'll stop there because this discussion is better had over on TBB. |
_________________
Brian St.James
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
TuernRedvenom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 04:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 142
Status: Offline
|
|
CyberHare wrote: TuernRedvenom wrote: And to those that say it ruins tourney play (see thread on TBB), I don't believe that either. The mentality problem will solve itself after a while.
Yup. Probably by the tournament scene diminishing to the point where there are a few hard core people left like myself. Problem solved right
I don't want the tourney scene to disappear as I enjoy it very much. But I think you're being pessimistic and sticking to lrb 4.0 will get you to the situation you just described (splintered rulesets and all that).
Quote: TuernRedvenom wrote: It seems to me many of the biggest critics of the vault haven't actually got round to playing a vault league or tourney, and before you do that all criticism is conjecture at most IMHO.
Oh for the love of pete please don't drag up that tired "if you havn't tried it...." rhetoric. Most of us don't need to step in it to know what it is
Most of you must be a geniuses then. If you can predict what changes to the tourney scene will happen in a complex game like BB with just reading the changes made I take my hat off to you. (sarcasm on) In fact, why does anyone bother playtesting games any longer, apparently most of the gamers don't have to play it to predict the actual overall change. (sarcasm off) 
Sorry, I've played this game for a long time now and while some things can be predicted by just looking at the rules individually it's very hard to predict how it's gonna work with all the new rules taken together. In any case, instead of slagging the vault with theoretical rethorics you'd have more people listening to your cause if you actually proved it by playing games and providing data. If your theories are right that's not so unreasonable is it?
And that's just the problem isn't it, because we know LRB 4.0 is fine for tourneys but Vault could be unbalanced for maybe a year (or a few). But I think the impact of that would be less serious then a splintered community, especially if there will be a new boxed set with a version of the vault rules in it.
Quote: I'll stop there because this discussion is better had over on TBB.
Agreed. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Xeterog |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 09:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Texas
Posts: 73
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
|
|
It is impossible to please everyone. People claim we have a nice, universally used Ruleset in LRB 4, but that isn't really true, is it? Every league I've ever encounted has added house rules..no tournament that I've been to has used exactly the same rules as others (granted, I don't get to alot of them).
People say that they aren't listened too, yet Galak (and others) seem to go out of their way to address issues that are brought up. In the year and a half of the playtesting of the PBBL rules, many, many things have changed due to feed back--not just from the yes men like myself, but from the ones that don't like the changes.
Yet the fact remains--not everyone will like the changes. The official rules are going to change--but the old rules won't disappear...you can still play that (people still play 3rd or 2nd or even 1st edition). It is your choice.
I've chosen to go with the flow and play the new rules, others won't. I find I like the changes that have been made--by playing the games I know for sure that I like them and it still feels like Bloodbowl. But then, I always liked the 3rd edition cards...never quite understood why others did not like the wackyness they brought to the game--so what if it caused your well planned game into a disaster..it was fun. (and I'm one of those apparent stick in the mud guys that thinks that trying to Win every game is the #1 thing that makes this game fun).
Oh well, I should give up trying to convince others...apparently no one is listening to anyone on either side of the issues anymore..it's all just yelling and screaming now (And I'm just as guilty as anyone on that front--I tend to get all worked up about little things too often it seems). |
_________________
-Xeterog
(formerly Gortex)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 30, 2005 - 04:14 PM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
SBG wrote: Well, I'm playing a league now, and I think those rules are the crappiest rules around! An apo that doesn't heal you??? Gimmick cards that can change the game from end to end??? Bank, treasury?? For christ sake, you got the money or you don't! And the inducements are the worst thing I've ever seen! IMO, these rules are total crap and I think that NAF sanctionned tourneys should stick with LRB.
Fred The apothecary does heal you, just not as well as the LRB one. This is because aging was moved from an off the pitch post match bolt on effect (that a lot of people hated because it made learning skills a bad thing) to an in game effect.
The "gimmick cards" are genuinely optional, unlike the 'optional' rules in the LRB that everyone considered mandatory. You don't have to use them at all if you don't want to.
The bank/treasury thing is about making the handicap system as accurate as possible. The idea was that a team shouldn't be punished by giving away or losing up to 100k worth of handicap to another team just because they are saving money for a reroll. The money being saved up isn't going to have any impact on the match so why should it be represented in the team's rating?
Why are inducements the worst thing you've ever seen? What specifically is wrong with them? If it's the star players that is the problem, for example, then the league can play without them. That is an official option.
TalkBloodBowl or SpecialistGames.com are both more appropriate places for this discussion, but if this is the only place you can or want to go to talk about it then I'm sure we can all discuss it further with you if you want to. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Dec 01, 2005 - 12:24 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 787
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
I understand all you just said Mordredd, I think those changes are lame and are not getting the game any better.
As for the Inducements, I think the whole system is absolutely lame and it brings the teams with very low team ratings to the status of overdogs when benefitting 500K+ inducements. It's been that way in all the games I've played. If you remove the star players, then the whole point of this system is useless. I've played many games (close to a 100) with LRB 4.0, and I can assure you that this handicap table works perfectly.
I think that in the long run, people will see that the deadly combos will be back, since all skills are now available to every player in the game, and that inducements bring too much benefits. I'm sorry, but if a 100 TR faces a 300TR, that team is supposed to loose. Compare this to USC playing the Colts...
I really hope that NAF tourneys will still use LRB as a ruleset.
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Xeterog |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Dec 01, 2005 - 08:00 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 11, 2004
Texas
Posts: 73
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
|
|
seems that there is about a 50/50 split between those who think that a developed team deserives to beat a new team 100% of the time and those that want any game to actually be competitive.
I just don't agree that by playing a team alot gives that team the 'right' to win these big TV difference games. I want games that are fun and competitive..no matter who plays. |
_________________
-Xeterog
(formerly Gortex)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
