| Author |
Message |
Indigo |
|
Post subject: Skill progression at Major tournaments
 Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 03:39 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| Similar to my post about Stars, this was also brought up at the tourny, but the general consensus there was to keep it as it is (1 skill per game) |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
TiMuN |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 03:47 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 136
Status: Offline
|
|
I guess allowing two skills each match, could have diferent team progression, and some skill combos that the 1 skill each round does.
But there should be some kind of limitation, so the same player cannot be given a second skill untill game 4 (in a 6 game tourney like the Bloodbowl)
How about that? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Redfang |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 03:54 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 195
Status: Offline
|
|
I like the 2 skills OR 1 trait idea, gives you some choice
I would rule out more than 1 skill/trait per player, though, or at least rule it out until after X games (4 or so)
R |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khankill |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 06:13 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 105
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
| I really like JKL's cup of dice rolls system. He made slips of paper with dice rolls printed on them. At the end of each round you drew your dice roll out of the cup and applied the result for either a skill, trait or stat increase. It gave us something to look forward to at the end of each round. It also gave you the proof of what the roll was, so that any accusation of cheating could be dealt with. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Redfang |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 06:41 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 195
Status: Offline
|
|
but this way people who are lucky to draw some traits/Str increases will get a big advantage on people who only draw skills
I think the only luck-factor in a tournament should be the luck during the match |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khankill |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 08:19 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 105
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
| True, it does throw in some luck into it. If you are only making one advance per round, I don't believe the difference is so great that it has any great effect. So what my opponent got a str 4 on his blitzer, I used my skill to get a guard or maybe a ball stripper. With only one advance per round, its just not a game breaker. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Khankill |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 08:23 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 105
Location: United States of America
Status: Offline
|
|
| I will concede that this may not be the best system for a tourney as large as the Bloodbowl, but for the 20 to 40 team tourney, I really like it. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 01:45 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
| 2 Skills or 1 trait - no Mutations though (this from someone who played skaven) |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject: Mutations
Posted: Mar 04, 2003 - 02:46 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: 2 Skills or 1 trait - no Mutations though (this from someone who played skaven)
Hey! the fun part of Chaos and Skaven is the ability to get mutations. 
It seems too artificial to disallow all traits (and mutations), although skipping stat increases is OK.
How about 2 skills, 2 skills, 1 trait in successive games, repeated through another cycle if there are enough games. No player can gain another skill or trait until every player on the team has at least one.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 05, 2003 - 03:01 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| I personally think it worked fine as it was, and see no reason for making it more complicated. Then again, as has been quite rightly pointed out, it was a big tournament, so smaller ones could well get away with more elaborate systems... |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
skummy |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 05, 2003 - 07:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 506
Status: Offline
|
|
| Big tourneys could run into large problems with giving two skills per game. After 4 games, an entire Amazon roster could have block/dodge. |
_________________
The only thing to do with good advice is pass it on. It is never any use to oneself.
-Oscar Wilde
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 05, 2003 - 02:26 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
skummy wrote: Big tourneys could run into large problems with giving two skills per game. After 4 games, an entire Amazon roster could have block/dodge.
This raises the issue of whether to allow the normal SPP progession rules.
It's not just that every Amazon has Blodge, but every Saurus, Black Orc and Big Guy has Block, every Dwarf has Guard etc. 
The real trouble with the system is that it does not represent the normal team progression. Players usually have to do something to get a skill. Even with MVPs you have to get a player to get a casualty, completion or TD to advance.
The system strongly disadvantages the teams that are able to get skills on the right players and disadvantages coaches who are able to spread their SPPs rather than give every TD to the same Gutter Runner.
To some extent this is compensated by the complete recoevery after every game so that teams that lose key low armour players are not affected. But this distortion of the normal team development compounded with the distorted skill advancement means the current tournament rules bear no resemblance to normal team development.
I would prefer a system that used normal team SPP progression and normal injury effects.
For tournaments this needs two extra fixes.
(1) All teams should get the same set of skill advance rolls. So the torunament organisers roll 2D 3 or 4 times and list or announce the results. All players gaining skill advancements get these rolls working down the sheet in player number order. This avoids teams becoming too good because they were lucky with all those 6/6 rolls.
(2) Another fix is needed to avoid teams being beaten up in one game and the next coach they play gains the benefit. I'm not sure of the best way to fix this. Possibly all injuries count as Badly Hurt, unless a player gets injured a second time later in the tournament. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 05, 2003 - 06:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
tbh the current system of 1 skill a match has been fine at all the 3 tournaments
the one thing i would maybe change is to allow one trait after the third match, though maybe nerves of steel stand firm are rather powerful in this format, it would just be nice to get dauntless ;] |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lowsman |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 07, 2003 - 10:31 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 07, 2003
Posts: 7
Status: Offline
|
|
Giving two skills per game makes far too skilled teams. It also benefits 'elite' teams that do not have many players, as it is likely to make the players that they have more survivable. A minotaur with block and pro would be a formidable prospect.
The same issue applies to issuing traits. This will make more killer players, especially when put on killer players. It also makes Leader far too accessible.
Using skill progression means the first game is absolutely vital. If you get a 'victim' player and slaughter them in game one, you are then building a killer team for the rest of the tournament. However if you get drawn against a good player using a strength team your whole tournament could be ruined. To keep it balanced you would have to also carry casualties across, and your tournament could be ruined in one game if you lose two or three players. Using the current rules would make it too luck based on who wins the tournament.
I'd agree with Grumbledook. Allow one trait after the third game, and other than that one skill per game, and only allow one thing to be given to each player.
Richard |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dave |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Mar 07, 2003 - 12:14 PM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 895
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
I think it should stay with one skill per round. The 'two skills or a trait' option looks nice, but would make some teams really unbalanced(RSClaws anyone??) in the competition.
One skill just gives everybody the chance to model the team to his way of playing.
Keep it as it is |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
