Talk Fantasy Football

Hi Aliboon,
thanks a lot for reviving this. I had conveniently forgotten

Dwarves: I've gotta agree about wrestle for block on the dwarves would be a nerf too far, MA4 and wrestle don't mix. My problem for dwarves is the linos having the block/tackle combo which destroys stunty teams.

OK - I have to admit that I'm fairly alone on this, and that it isn't just the dwarf coaches complaining.
That being said, I still think ya'all are just pussies ... Nah, no offense meant - and none taken, I hope. What I mean is that, IMO, dwarfs are still very good.

I was just about to write that I had caved - but then I read the rest of what you wrote about destroying stunty teams.
See, that is my problem too.
I hate that they have blackle.
But I do think, like Matt, that it is a nice thing to have some tackle rosters that can put the fear of a beating into all those dodge players that are on the starting rosters.
So I'm back to screwing with their block skill.
And much as wrestle is unpopular, I think losing block would be even worse, and even less dwarf-like.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

I'd like to see the blitzers have tackle too for 90k if the blockers lost tackle (as it is, the only point of them is their AG3 and to a lesser extent MA5).

I worry that the team would become stronger/more focused if this would come with a price cut for the blockers. Less TV, and still 2 tackle players to cover opposing dodgers.

Hmmm...
Honestly - snatching away the longbeards tackle, at no price reduction, and giving it to the blitzers for 90K could work.
Wait... I hear dwarven whining at the thought of lost gold... Too expensive you say?
Compare to a zombie.
I think dwarf linemen and zombies got too much of a price discount. MA4 and AG2 is a total discount of -40K - but they have too much reverse-synergy. Zombies have been price hiked. Tackle-less longbeards could be 70K!

Halflings: AV8 doesn't feel right.... AV7 @ 30k would be fine though.
What about 3 trees? I'd also add NoS to the trees for 10k to help the Halflings, but slightly nerf the Woodelves.

I could get behind the AV7 halflings.
I even like the NoS suggestion - but it wouldn't be enough, IMO.
And I don't want a third thing.
So maybe I should just suck it up and go with a rostered master chef (can still induce 1, just like any other team).
So AV7 and a rostered master chef... How does that sound?

Wood Elfs

As for wood elfs, I took a poll on the wardancers elsewhere, whether to cut the block or the dodge.
And while I see your point with the catchers, this is something I'd rather just leave alone, to make the list of changes as short as possible.

The other buffs/nerfs you suggest look ok, but I would ask on what criteria you've decided on the changes, aren't Necro's the best team according to your stats!? (I would also think that Slann need a slight buff-probably just reducing the blitzer's price by 10k, possibly Underworld too).

My criteria were simple.
Don't change more than half of the teams - meaning that if the team is in the current tier 1, leave it alone. Even if it is tempting to fiddle with the weaker tier 1 teams.
Humans are the exception to this rule, as (IMO) humans ought to be a staple team.

As for Necro's, their sample size is just too small.

Oh, I'd also let stunty teams have Star Players to bring the team over 16 players. The Gobbo's biggest problem is running out of players due to running a team of 14 so they can hire stars and then sustaining injuries/sending offs which make them undermanned.

Agreed - but I reeeeally don't want to create special rules that don't fit on the rosters.
IMO, stunty teams have to either run with 15 players, or use blank mercs to get there.

Thanks for your feedback
Cheers
Martin

Hi Matt,

Leaving Wood Elves out of the equation (I think that's the exception to the rule), have you thought about running with buffs only and then seeing if you end up with a few teams that just feel superior?

Well, I'd never in any way have the resources to run large scale testing of this - so I could never find out whether something had been over-buffed. That's why I'm going with the "better safe than sorry" approach.

Part of this is that I suspect you'll see a ripple effect from nerfed Dwarfs, and no net W/L effect from Orcs (just a less fun team). Part of this is that I see the concept of a "power spectrum" as rather unavoidable in this game.

I don't fear a ripple effect from the dwarfs.
And I've seen orc throwers saving enough bacon to know that they do have an impact. I'm also running an orc team with these rules, and I can honestly say that my gobbos aren't always an advantage. They get targetted a lot. I think the orc team doesn't deserve the extra fun. I play khemri too. I think some AG3 would be fun. My opponents would no doubt disagree

But far be it from me to accuse others of Quixotism.

Dwarfs I like
0-16 Blocker: 4/3/2/9 Block, Thick Skull GS 70k
0-2 Runner: 6/3/3/8 Sure Hands, Thick Skull, GP 70k
0-2 Blitzer: 5/3/3/9 Block, Tackle, Thick Skull GS 90k
0-2 Slayer: no change
50k TRR
Net change: no cash, -3x Tackle. And Runners no longer have to be overpriced, because Blockers are no longer a superior value.

For Khemri, you could give all players Thick Skull, add 10k to the TG cost, and buy a little "breathing room" to buff the Thro-Ra or replace him with a quality AG3 P-access type.

I agree that Orc Throwers add value to the team, but a) I think they're only a little better than replacement value, b) I don't think Orcs are broken (very good, yes). I don't think you're making a terrible mistake there, but you are telling people they can't use some of their more thoughtful conversions. Have you thought about going for Gorky and Morky rosters? Give the Gorky ones no Throwers and only 0-2 Goblins, and Morky ones Throwers and a full complement of Gobs, but only 0-2 Blitzers. I'd go Morky just to use my cool model.

Gorky builds would probably mostly revolve around 4/4 positionals with 3 linos, 3 TRRs, 30k bank, or maybe 2 linos, 2 Gobs and no bank. My Morky build would be 4x BOB, 2x Blitzer, 2x Thrower, 3x Lineman, 3x TRR, Apothecary.

The other two seem okay. One way you can mitigate the nerf on the Ghoul Runner, should you so desire, is to let any team take an Apoth. This could also be your buff on the Khemri, though I'll admit it's kind of a lame buff. The real beneficiaries would be Nurgle, with Decay and expensive SPP-hog positionals, and Necro, with Ghouls and 120k AV8 pieces.

Ooh... maybe replace Thro-Ras with Ghoul Runners (okay, Tomb Robbers)... not sure on fluff, but I am sure it's a buff.

Yup, that's what I said. 10k for a skill is an excellent deal in my book, since a skill normally costs 20k TV-wise.

Umm only when you're picking skills, starting skills (depending on what they are) come in at 10k (catch certainly does anyway), as do most stat increases/decreases, so it could be argued that the MA9 woody catcher is valued right at +20k compared to the human catcher, +10k MA, +10k AG (I am being facetious btw) But I would say the human catcher is overcosted tbh and here is a thread about it viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28966

I'm not denying that the woody catcher was a great player (but I'd prefer either of the other elf catchers), but they didn't break the team and I can't agree with your analysis about making the Pro, High and Wood Elves too similar if he was still MA9 and the 'dancer nerfed. Woodies did and still do (to an even greater extent relatively) perform at their best at low TVs and that is because of the wardancer.

The catcher received a nerf because woodies were too good, why the LRB comittee chose to nerf the wrong player, I couldn't say (but you're right, it may have something to do with cutting the number of easy MA10 1-turners, hence also the change to VLL)

I agree that the woody roster is still a good one, even with the nerfed catcher, but if you run one to high TVs they are pretty ordinary and are only one bad game away from being retired as once you've lost a positionals, S.E. means you'll really struggle to replace them. Universal AV7 really doesn't help either, because of that, I'd rate the woody lino the same as the high/dark one.

As for skaven v human, humans are bashier, skaven more agile. The strength components of the human team are better (Ogre, blitzer and linos) whilst the throwing elements of the skaven are better (throwers, grunners). Skaven perform better imo as they have a reasonable bit of strength to complement their agility, whereas humans don't have any enough AG to complement their stength.

I also can't agree that mutations are useless on throwers and linos, I'd take extra arms on a skaven thrower over Strong Arm and possibly claw over guard/MB too on the linos (depending on league set up). The options are nice to have.

Aliboon wrote: Umm only when you're picking skills, starting skills (depending on what they are) come in at 10k (catch certainly does anyway), as do most stat increases/decreases, so it could be argued that the MA9 woody catcher is valued right at +20k compared to the human catcher, +10k MA, +10k AG (I am being facetious btw) But I would say the human catcher is overcosted tbh and here is a thread about it viewtopic.php?f=16&t=28966

Most skills come at 20k, and Catch is one of them. +AG is priced at 20k as well (which is an incredible deal when going from AG3 to AG4). I agree that the Human Catcher is overcosted by at least 10k, since he pays 20k for Catch, whereas IMHO Catch should be 10k for AG3 players (Pass is priced that way). To be honest, I am not even sure the skill is worth the whole 20k on a AG4 player either.

Of course those costs are indicative and many positional players get rebates. The LRB6 WE Catcher only gets Sprint for free, a skill that is worth less than +MA, therefore less than 10k, so he gets a slight rebate compared to the theoretical cost. With the excellent synergy of AG4/Dodge, I think he is still above average. As a team player, his added value is not that good to be honest, because of universal AG4 for Elves.

The Human Catcher is overcosted because his stats produce a significant negative synergy (After Stunties, he is maybe the most vulnerable player) and he pays 40k for two skills (Dodge and Catch) that lose some of their value on an AG3 player. Despite that, he still brings a significant added value to his team because of A skill access and Blodge at 6 SPP, but that is not enough to make the Humans a true Tier 1 team.

I am quite happy with the nerfing of one-turning in LRB6. The only team that can realistically develop a natural one-turner is Skaven, and the roster has significant disadvantages to overcome. WEs used to have everything, universal AG4/Blodge, cheap rerolls and easy access to one-turning.

That debate is silly. Things are costed according to balance in context. It's the context that matters.

Agreed, hence overcosted Khemri Blitzras and Throwras etc, no way is catch worth 20k on an AG4 player, I'd certainly never pick it as a skill-up.

plasmoid wrote: (...)

I'd like to see the blitzers have tackle too for 90k if the blockers lost tackle (as it is, the only point of them is their AG3 and to a lesser extent MA5).

I worry that the team would become stronger/more focused if this would come with a price cut for the blockers. Less TV, and still 2 tackle players to cover opposing dodgers.

Hmmm...
Honestly - snatching away the longbeards tackle, at no price reduction, and giving it to the blitzers for 90K could work.
Wait... I hear dwarven whining at the thought of lost gold... Too expensive you say?
Compare to a zombie.
I think dwarf linemen and zombies got too much of a price discount. MA4 and AG2 is a total discount of -40K - but they have too much reverse-synergy. Zombies have been price hiked. Tackle-less longbeards could be 70K!

(...)

Cheers
Martin

This idea could work, but something is bugging me : Dwarves Linemen* (without Tackle) at 70k seems unfair, especially compared to Chaos Dwarves Blockers.


So what about :
_ Linemen* (without Tackle) : -10 k
_ Blitzers (with Tackle) : + 20 k
_ Troll Slayers : + 10 k (or even + 20 k )


*in this situation, i don't think they deserve to be called Blockers anymore...

Hi Rhyoth,
I've just replied to this in another thread.
And as you said, I'd be quite happy to call them Linemen. Heck - every team should have linemen

Matt - I also somewhat replied to you in the same post.
Cheers
Martin

plasmoid wrote:Heck - every team should have linemen

There are about half a million Redskins fans who have been screaming the same thing ever since Dan Snyder took over.

Hello,

Like you, I'm not right with the different Tiers, but I think it's necessary to have a fun game and because it's not possible to have a real equality between teams (The only solution is to play a human league to have this ). In fact differences between teams are good and necessary for different things: Challenging, people who want playing only poor team, people who want only kill player and so on...

Before, I would like to change everything, because I was young, impulsive... Now I think minor changes could be enough.

I'm only speaking for long term leagues (this game was built for this) with standard inducements.

In my opinion the only problem is 3 or 4 powerfull (Broken?) teams (orcs, dwarf, woodies) and claws effects (in long term leagues). Other things/teams are balanced to have a very interesting game.


In our league we have this:

- Amazons are not allowed
- Orc team is splitted in two teams: Orcs (without Troll & Goblins) and Greenskins (Without Throwers & 0-2 blitzers)
- Dwarf: Troll Slayers have Juggernaught instead of Block and reroll cost 60000.
- Wood Elfs have only two catchers
- Undead zombies are 0-6
- Human catcher has AV+1
- Claws cannot stack with Mighty Blow (but Mighty blow can be used to damage roll)

and it's running quite well...

Why are Amazons not allowed in your league?

No girls allowed

Treehouse rules.

(my guess would be because they are a wee bit wrong. Mind you, in a league format, they do get beated down quite a bit.)

Because we think this team is a nonsense.

Rochambeau is not a good idea for a bloodbowl team...

We have tried to change it (We have watched all topics, doubleskulls one for exemple: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=27169) but no-one wants to play the new one... So We have chosen to discard it (it was probably not the best idea, but...).

This year I will try Doubleskulls one in our secondship, to test :

0-16 Linewomen 6337 Fend GA-SP 50k
0-4 Catchers 8237 Diving Catch, Dodge GA-SP 70k
0-2 Throwers 6337 Hail Mary Pass, Safe Throw, Pass GAP-S 70k
0-4 Blitzers 7338 Wrestle GAS/P 90k
Rerolls 50k.

Not allowing amazons does seem rather sexist. It's the only full female team, something which may attract female players too, again something this hobby drastically lacks.

Amazons ain't so tough, sure they can get a lot of blodgers... hello Dwarves, hello chaos dwarves means not much in the way of dodge for Amazons.

Other teams, like faster moving than Amazons, could go with a tackle shadowing combo and really slow the Amazon pace down.

Sounds to me that the anti amazon league lacks imagination of using skills to upset your opponent.