| Author |
Message |
KarlLagerbottom |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: May 30, 2006 - 08:28 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Clan-Skaven wrote: As far as I can remember the Vamp Lord was
6 movement, 5 strength, 4 agility, & 8 armour, not sure what his skills were, but he did not suffer from off for a bite like the other vamps did.
to me 5 strength, 4 agility player blows away a Wardancer (not even in the same book)
Rod
Well lets just put it this way...the WEs can have 2 WarDancers that can skill-up and become effectively better than the 50% more expensive single player who is "capped". Let's not forget that mith MA 8 they can cover alot more ground than the Vamp...play solid positional defense and you can minimize his production. Stop him entirely, no...marganilize him yes....then what to the rest of the bleeding thralls do? |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
 
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 30, 2006 - 09:36 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: Clan-Skaven wrote: As far as I can remember the Vamp Lord was
6 movement, 5 strength, 4 agility, & 8 armour, not sure what his skills were, but he did not suffer from off for a bite like the other vamps did.
to me 5 strength, 4 agility player blows away a Wardancer (not even in the same book)
Rod
Well lets just put it this way...the WEs can have 2 WarDancers that can skill-up and become effectively better than the 50% more expensive single player who is "capped". Let's not forget that mith MA 8 they can cover alot more ground than the Vamp...play solid positional defense and you can minimize his production. Stop him entirely, no...marganilize him yes....then what to the rest of the bleeding thralls do?
Man your starting to sound like an opponent I had at a tourney who whined by saying that Gutter Runners are wrong because they should only be 8 MA from 2nd. Eddition convertated to 3rd eddittion.... C'mon Rob don't put yerself in his class yer better than that.
Wooden Spoons or not or above that man!
Rod. |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 31, 2006 - 04:39 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: Clan-Skaven wrote: As far as I can remember the Vamp Lord was
6 movement, 5 strength, 4 agility, & 8 armour, not sure what his skills were, but he did not suffer from off for a bite like the other vamps did.
to me 5 strength, 4 agility player blows away a Wardancer (not even in the same book)
Rod
Well lets just put it this way...the WEs can have 2 WarDancers that can skill-up and become effectively better than the 50% more expensive single player who is "capped". Let's not forget that mith MA 8 they can cover alot more ground than the Vamp...play solid positional defense and you can minimize his production. Stop him entirely, no...marganilize him yes....then what to the rest of the bleeding thralls do?
But the original Lord wasn't capped, he could happily earn SPP like any other player. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 31, 2006 - 06:59 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Clan-Skaven wrote:
Man your starting to sound like an opponent I had at a tourney who whined by saying that Gutter Runners are wrong because they should only be 8 MA from 2nd. Eddition convertated to 3rd eddittion.... C'mon Rob don't put yerself in his class yer better than that.
Wooden Spoons or not or above that man!
Rod.
Rod-
You should stick with the "Late Night Drunken Poster" style...it really suits you better than the "Pompus, I think I know something because I won the Special Olympics of Blood Bowl Tournies" style. The latter doesn't really suit you. 
To use your example, Gutter Runners are sweet...there are four of them...and the Skaven are competitive with them. Imagine the team without them and you would likely have a team as nerfed as the Vamp team. Imagine then complaining about the removal of the Gutter Runners from the Skaven roster and having someone respond with something like..."Oh come on man...they're rats...should they really be a competitive team? Just have fun with the Wacky RatOgre. Grrr....shouldn't that be enough? Just play with Orcs if you really just want to win. Oh, and buy the way...we are increasing the prices of the Blitzers and Black Orcs to 500,000 GC because this game is about the linemen."
The Vampire Lord was this teams one reliable player and was a target. Given the fact that they have changed the way that OFAB works, that is enough of a nerf to that team...but I'm sure somone will reference some scribbling of fluff in some obscure Citadel Journal that explains why a given team SHOULD lose more often than other...anywayit's just my opinion.
-Rob |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 31, 2006 - 07:00 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote:
But the original Lord wasn't capped, he could happily earn SPP like any other player.
You're right...but didn't they grow at the slower "big guy" rate? |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Clan_Skaven |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 31, 2006 - 07:51 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 19, 2003
Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Posts: 2604
Location: Niagara Falls ON, Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Rob I'm not being pompos, but honestly man the Vamp Lord was broken!
Comeone how can you compare 2 Wardancers to one Vamp Lord?
IMO Wardancers are not the tuff to deal with (with the help of Tackle that is), & everyone knows once they are on the ground that the Wardancer becomes huge FOULbate!
Wardancers still only have an AV of 7 & very expencive to replace.... (I love fouling the Wardancer they are right up there with Mummies , Bull Centaurs , & any Big Guy)
Wardancers are by far one of the best if not the best rookie player, but with only 7 AV & a huge cost they are not broken
The Vamp Lord on the other hand 5 strength, 4 agi with no negative traights is not broken? (WHAT???)
& the rest of the team had OFB sure , but still 4 strength 4 agility so much made up for it!.
IMO opinion Wardancer is not even close to the Vamp Lord, but thats just my opinion...
(I'm not drunk  )
Rod. |
_________________
"2006 SPIKE Champion!"
"Death-Bowl IV & V, Most Casualties!, Death-Bowl VI Best Team!"
"2008 Dagger Bowl Champion"
Host of the Warpstone Cup, Q'ermitt Bowl & the Hope Bowl
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: May 31, 2006 - 08:05 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Clan-Skaven wrote: Rob I'm not being pompos, but honestly man the Vamp Lord was broken!
Comeone how can you compare 2 Wardancers to one Vamp Lord?
IMO Wardancers are not the tuff to deal with (with the help of Tackle that is), & everyone knows once they are on the ground that the Wardancer becomes huge FOULbate!
Wardancers still only have an AV of 7 & very expencive to replace.... (I love fouling the Wardancer they are right up there with Mummies , Bull Centaurs , & any Big Guy)
Wardancers are by far one of the best if not the best rookie player, but with only 7 AV & a huge cost they are not broken
The Vamp Lord on the other hand 5 strength, 4 agi with no negative traights is not broken? ( WHAT???)
& the rest of the team had OFB sure , but still 4 strength 4 agility so much made up for it!.
IMO opinion Wardancer is not even close to the Vamp Lord, but thats just my opinion...
(I'm not drunk )
Rod.
That was better, tone-wise, but I am saying that each positional should be compared in the context of the team...not just one-to-one. Comparing The Vamp Lord directly to a Wardancer? Sure the VL blows him away...but in the context of what each means to the team and the value on the team they are close. The Vamps have multiple players on their team that can ravage their own team...and the rest are just fodder. Given that the large majority of opponent blocks are going to be against the Thralls...that AV 7 is not built to last.
The Woodies have the speed and agility to play keep away if/when they need to and still have the ability to score when they are down players. The vamps have none of that.
In terms of fouling a WD...the same can be said for the Vampire Lord...the extra 2 AV are not as big a deal as you think...you will need those assists to get him down in the first place so they will be in place for the follow-up foul. And he will get fouled evey time he is on the turf...and is alot more expensive to replace.
Finally, as Rune_Master asked earlier...if he was found to be unbalanced...why not tweak him to make him work...instead of eliminating him altogether? Even if he acted in the same way as a Big Guy and provided a detterent/distraction from pulping the thralls...he would be worth the cost.
Rod...this all comes down to maintaining them as a fluff team. Therefore any conversation we have in terms of what would or might work is moot since it'll fall on deaf ears.
P.S. Why aren't Treemen broken? Given that they are the strongest rookies in the game with a neg-trate that keeps them on the pitch and available to perform what is arguably their primary role. (In the offense) Its because the Flings are otherwise defenseless...the context of the team is what keeps the fact that you can have two of these guys from being broken. |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Rune_Master |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 10:12 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 02, 2005
Posts: 196
Status: Offline
|
|
Saying the Vamp Lord was too powerful as it previously existed is fine, can't really argue that one. But does removing him as an option leave the Vamp team as a viable team? I'm thinking no, as it seems everyone believes they are far too hard to win with. Esp. in tournaments as evident by the whopping 2 coaches (US/Canada) with a ranking using Vamps. I just believe that having a tweaked Lord makes them a more viable team.
two cents...
(ok, ok, so I'm up to four cents now...  ) |
_________________
Erik Grogswiller
"Ho! stand to your flagons steady!
'Tis all we have left to prize.
A drink to the dead already,--
Hurrah for the next that dies."
- ancient Dwarf toast
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 11:27 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: Darkson wrote:
But the original Lord wasn't capped, he could happily earn SPP like any other player.
You're right...but didn't they grow at the slower "big guy" rate?
There was no "slower big guy rate" when the Vampire Lord was on the Vampire team (2003 or there abouts). |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 11:39 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
Rune_Master wrote: Saying the Vamp Lord was too powerful as it previously existed is fine, can't really argue that one. But does removing him as an option leave the Vamp team as a viable team? I'm thinking no, as it seems everyone believes they are far too hard to win with. Esp. in tournaments as evident by the whopping 2 coaches (US/Canada) with a ranking using Vamps. I just believe that having a tweaked Lord makes them a more viable team.
Now you're treading on dangerous ground.
The Vampire team works fine for the enviorment it was designed for, Leagues. The team is meant to suck (sorry, pun intended), and to be as bad as the Halflings and Goblins, and before the removal of the Vampire Lord, it failed to do that. Remove the Lord, and it's right where it's meant to be, at the bottom. The only way a Lord character should be allowed back on the Vamp team was if it had a WORSE negatrait than te normal Vamps, in the same way a BG has a worse than his teammates (as in he has one).
Now, this does mean that unfortunately, Vampires aren't really a viable tournament team, certainly not for a player with any hope of winning whatever tourney they go to (the same could be leveled at Chaos). The only option then would be to make a set of rosters (and rules) that are specifically aimed at tournaments only. But that's missing the point. Why do people turn up at tornaments with Goblins and Halflings? They (normally) realise they've little chance of winning any awards, other than the wooden spoon, and yet they still show up.
Perhaps people need to stop focussing on winning so much, and just go for the social atmosphere. Personally, if I can ever get the bug to do some painting, I'm going to take a goblin team as a years tourney team. I'm at best an average coach, so to hell with those whisperings in my ear that I might just win it, let's go for a laugh.
Bottom line, if you want to play a competative team, don't take Vampires. If you want to take a Vampire team, don't complain because it's not competative. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 01:06 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: KarlLagerbottom wrote: Darkson wrote:
But the original Lord wasn't capped, he could happily earn SPP like any other player.
You're right...but didn't they grow at the slower "big guy" rate?
There was no "slower big guy rate" when the Vampire Lord was on the Vampire team (2003 or there abouts).
I think you're wrong about this...I'll have to pull my cr@p out tonight to confirm for myself. |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
KarlLagerbottom |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 01:25 PM
|
|
Joined: May 25, 2004
Undisclosed
Posts: 1148
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote:
Bottom line, if you want to play a competative team, don't take Vampires. If you want to take a Vampire team, don't complain because it's not competative.
Sorry but I just don't get this...the INSISTANCE that fluff has to make one team intrinsically better than another. Why not make all teams balanced and let the fluff define the strengths and weaknesses of each team and determine what they have available to them? To me this would be a better approach then purposely breaking teams as a patch for game design problems.
And for whatever it's worth...I suck, so this my point is not coming from a place where I MUST win...it's just the principle of the thing. I'll play the game regardless 'cause the concept is fun...but the idea (Jervis's or whoever) to design only 5-6 teams as "competitive" and the rest as "jokes" is silly. |
_________________
Karl Lagerbottom - Dwarf Blocker of Renown
NAF Member #5236
---
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 01:33 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: but the idea (Jervis's or whoever) to design only 5-6 teams as "competitive" and the rest as "jokes" is silly.
Well, it's actually 3 or 4 as "jokes" and the rest competative.
I've no problem with that. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 01:36 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
KarlLagerbottom wrote: Darkson wrote: KarlLagerbottom wrote: Darkson wrote:
But the original Lord wasn't capped, he could happily earn SPP like any other player.
You're right...but didn't they grow at the slower "big guy" rate?
There was no "slower big guy rate" when the Vampire Lord was on the Vampire team (2003 or there abouts).
I think you're wrong about this...I'll have to pull my cr@p out tonight to confirm for myself.
BB Annual 2003 p.12, so that's about LRB 2 or 3.
By this time (in fact, LRB 1) there was no difference to the rate that BGs earnt SPP compared to normal players. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Spazzfist |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 01, 2006 - 01:48 PM
|
|
Joined: Aug 16, 2004
Canada
Posts: 3954
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: KarlLagerbottom wrote: but the idea (Jervis's or whoever) to design only 5-6 teams as "competitive" and the rest as "jokes" is silly.
Well, it's actually 3 or 4 as "jokes" and the rest competative.
I've no problem with that.
Actually I kindof like this in a way as it can allow you to give yourself a "handicap". This mightbe because you want the extra challenge, or maybe you are playing against someone who is learning the rules and while you don't want to throw the game in their favour, you do want them to have a fighting chance.
But if you look at it from a fluff standpoint or whatever, what reason should the halflings have to be anywhere near as competitive as the other teams? Or goblins for that matter?
Sure, vampires could be a more competitive team, but they're not. It just makes the victories more sweet when you do win with them!  (Not to mention the fact that it is easier to be #1 in your country when there are only a couple of coaches - if any - who play the sucky teams! Just ask the #1 Nurgle's Rotters coach in Canada!) 
Spazz |
_________________
#1 Nurgle coach in Canada (formerly the world!)
#1 Snotling coach in Canada
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
