| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 09:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
OZjesting wrote: and waiting for us to catch up with the rest of the tournement world
What, are the Aussies going to start playing Resurrection tourneys?  |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
Chunky |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 01:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
Posts: 165
Status: Offline
|
|
We started that a couple years back, they just failed to spread.
Oz, I am hardly uninformed as to LRB5. I've also said all along that when the switch inevitably happens, I will quite happily do other things, of which there are plenty of good options (some of which your board game addicted self has introduced me to - did you see Milsims 20% off sale?) |
_________________
Come to Eucalyptus Bowl!
http://eucalyptus-bowl.doubleskulls.net/
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 01:30 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
Babs
Here's a suggestion -
All team's may have a free single use reset-to-the-previous-round. They can use this at their own discretion at any time during the tournament.
This treats it like a free Wizard or Apothecary, except that it's once per event rather than once per game and every team gets it for free. It treats all teams the same and we all know where we are. It helps the unfortunate coaches who play Ogres or Khemri at any time other than round 1 or 7 (statistics show that almost all teams play at a lower team rating after these matches). And it satisfies the aim that that no coach will have their weekend was ruined by a single match. (Note that they could have it ruined by two or more trashings, but that's OK).
Any coach who thinks carefully about this will save the partial reset for the last round, if possible. All SI in round 6 are as good as dead, so any casualties in round 6 tend to have a greater effect than other rounds. I don't see any problem in teams using the same team setup for round 6 and 7. (Resurrection events do this all the time). |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Chunky |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 04:10 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
Posts: 165
Status: Offline
|
|
How about this, give everyone at the start of the tournament a one use only automatic apothecary that works at the end of a match.
In order to use it, you have to rip the card up in front of your opponent. Apart from that, have the normal TR100 reset in place. This should make it pretty clear and manageable, with minimal administration and oversight required. |
_________________
Come to Eucalyptus Bowl!
http://eucalyptus-bowl.doubleskulls.net/
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
OZjesting |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 05:16 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 14, 2003
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
Chunky wrote:
Oz, I am hardly uninformed as to LRB5. I've also said all along that when the switch inevitably happens, I will quite happily do other things, of which there are plenty of good options (some of which your board game addicted self has introduced me to - did you see Milsims 20% off sale?)
I meant no disrespect to Sir Chunks...but I am yet to grasp why you see LRB 5 as the death of Blood Bowl. I myself see the death in the constant attempts to house rule a balance to a game that simply will not allow it to happen. I would even think it cool to have a random tourny where you didn't know what team you would be...just have them assigned...or even a system where you played all 6 games with a different team each time! THAT would be a lovely test of coaching...but as it is there seems to be much too much wasted talk and stress over what is just a fun fun game. In fact, as you mention, given my move into even more board games I am even tempted to only play one day at CanCon and spend the other with the EuroFest section playing some of these new excellent games!
I will have some in tow of course for the inevitable downtime regardless |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Virral |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 05:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 15, 2006
Australia
Posts: 92
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
I could get behind that, avoids the brokenness of the other reset rule but should also stop complaints if someone loses a player they feel is critical to their team and "ruining" their experience.
My only suggestion would be that they have to submit their Apoth card to Babs when they submit results, so that he can witness that it has been used and on what player.
Also allows for the strategic use bevan mentioned, if saved for the final round to bring back a MNG. Was that dead two skill lineman really worth saving in round four, or should you hold on to it just in case your +str wardancer gets a MNG in the second last game? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 06:49 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
Virral wrote: I could get behind that, avoids the brokenness of the other reset rule but should also stop complaints if someone loses a player they feel is critical to their team and "ruining" their experience.
My only suggestion would be that they have to submit their Apoth card to Babs when they submit results, so that he can witness that it has been used and on what player.
Although I suggested something along these lines earlier, I've decided since that it probably can't be enforced. It doesn't work at all for Undead teams that can't use apos or regenerate on some players and I think it does need to be equally available to all teams. It would also require cross-checking of the commish with the opponent, which gets away from the aim of a system that is easy to administer.
Virral wrote: Also allows for the strategic use Bevan mentioned, if saved for the final round to bring back a MNG. Was that dead two skill lineman really worth saving in round four, or should you hold on to it just in case your +str wardancer gets a MNG in the second last game?
I quite like this aspect too. It's similar to the decision on whether to use an apothecary early in the game on a lineman SI that is just miss game, when you might get a worse injury on a position player later. I invariably find that I have no need for my apothecary in the game when I decide not to heal the player.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Virral |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 07, 2006 - 10:21 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 15, 2006
Australia
Posts: 92
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
Bevan wrote: Virral wrote: I could get behind that, avoids the brokenness of the other reset rule but should also stop complaints if someone loses a player they feel is critical to their team and "ruining" their experience.
My only suggestion would be that they have to submit their Apoth card to Babs when they submit results, so that he can witness that it has been used and on what player.
Although I suggested something along these lines earlier, I've decided since that it probably can't be enforced. It doesn't work at all for Undead teams that can't use apos or regenerate on some players and I think it does need to be equally available to all teams. It would also require cross-checking of the commish with the opponent, which gets away from the aim of a system that is easy to administer.
Well there is no reason the commish would need to cross check with the opponent, as the player using their Apoth card can do it when they submit their match report. Or as an alternative, there can be a space on the match report for both players to indicate if someone has used their special apoth card, which will leave it in the hands of the players while also allowing the commish to double check that noone uses it more than once.
Regarding it not working on undead teams, I think that you couldn't introduce something like this and not allow all teams to use it. Just because they don't have in-game apoths doesn't mean they should be denied an out-game apoth that is introduced solely to reduce the disappointment that comes with your team getting trashed. After all, in the normal rules noone gets an out of game apoth, so how could you possibly justify giving it to some teams and not others?
No matter what reset rule or anything else is used, it should be the same for everyone no matter what race they are playing. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 12:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
Virral wrote: Well there is no reason the commish would need to cross check with the opponent, as the player using their Apoth card can do it when they submit their match report. Or as an alternative, there can be a space on the match report for both players to indicate if someone has used their special apoth card, which will leave it in the hands of the players while also allowing the commish to double check that noone uses it more than once.
Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant by Apoth card. I thought you meant that a team could only use the special reset if they had at least tried to help themselves by using their regular apothecary. But you meant that we need to check off each team as they use their 'Special, whole team apothecary' (Team Phyiostherapist?).
Yes, we do need some way to check off each team as they use it make sure it only happens once. So it should be noted when the result sheets are in, to make sure teams don't wait until they see their next opponent before deciding what to do. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Bevan |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 01:12 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
|
|
I hate complicating simple rules with extra provisions but we probably need to add the following to the rule about a single reset to previous round.
(a) A team can reset to to the starting lineup (TR100) as often as necessary without affecting the ability to reset to a previous round.
(b) If a reset is used after a game in which any cash was used for freebooting players, wizards, chef, ingredients, etc, then that cash has been used and is not regained by the reset, except when the reset team would have less than 11 active players, in which case they can keep the minimum cash needed to freeboot an 11th player.
Section (b) is needed to avoid a situation I discussed way back in another thread, where in round 6 a coach has enough cash to freeboot a Wizard or several position players and splurges the lot, with the intention of resetting and using it all again in the last round.
The final section allows for the case of a coach who has struggled on while losing players, but without resetting, and starts round 6 having to freeboot an 11th player, hoping to earn enough cash to do it again in round 7, (or have a missing player recover), only to suffer more losses in round 6. This allows them to freeboot an 11th lineman again just to keep a viable team. This is not intended to give them money they never had (like inducements), just avoid taking away the last hope of a team that did not intend to reset. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Virral |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 03:20 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 15, 2006
Australia
Posts: 92
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
| Or we could just play by the tried and tested rules of the game and take defeats in our stride... just a thought |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
OZjesting |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 07:28 PM
|
|
Joined: Jul 14, 2003
Posts: 44
Status: Offline
|
|
Hear Hear!
If ever there was a game where the maxim "shit happens!" is in play...Blood Bowl is it! There is much fun to be had regardless. I agree with a reset to TR100 whenever it seems necessary...but this time warp rule is just plain ridiculous!
But if you WANT to keep making up rules..make it so no injury can be worse than BH...or perhaps assign a cost payable in SPPs to reduce an injury (hospital insurance). So a SI would demand the team pony up 3 points from anywhere they have them...a SI (N) costs 5..and a RIP costs 7...or maybe make it that if you win the painting comp you get a free coke which can be used as a Lineman ST 4....or maybe we can have it that for every die that falls off the table requires the offender to do a chicken dance while he picks it up...or maybe......... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Virral |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 07:47 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 15, 2006
Australia
Posts: 92
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
Awww Oz, I could hug you  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Babs |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 08:04 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 17, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 742
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Do you really think it's fair? Imagine a coach whose record is 2-2 - and enters their round 5 game. Six players are killed. Do you think there is any joy whatsoever for them to play round 6 and 7?
Remember, I have the right and power to veto. It would only be used in exceptional circumstances - and be more lenient towards coaches with not chance of the top three places (and by corollary more harsh to those in the running for top spot).
Is it really such a ridiculous rule Oz? |
_________________
=-) Babs
Washed up old has been.
Ex-official GW Blood Bowl Rules Committee member
Ex-NAF Tournament Organiser, Australasia
Co-Author of the Feudball first novel.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Virral |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 08, 2006 - 09:32 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 15, 2006
Australia
Posts: 92
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
How is a game that is 90% dice rolls ever going to be fair? Was the old format really so horrible that it needed changing? Does everyone playing Bloodbowl suddenly think that casualties shouldn't be part of the game?
If you get to round five and have a shocker, that's blood bowl for you. There is no provision in the rules for this kind of thing, there is a perfectly good reset rule already in place, and you have already seen this new version abused first hand. Why is this even still being discussed? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
