sooner or later someone will show up with a bad clone...

[Toby]

A bit off-topic, do you play much SC/D2/WC3 on battle.net Toby? I'm pretty bad at the RTS games, but I do enjoy Diablo 2 much. Even though it has become an itemhunt game now, but I hope the 1.10 patch with the separate ladder economy will fix that.

I looked at Diablo but i was "feed up" when completing the 5 Chapters on a local network with 4 friends; the battle.net play was to "straight" for me, the RPG elements to few; i was missing co-operative play... so i will have a look at Never Winter Nights as soon as my new Graphicscard arrives

I still play Starcraft a lot, because its the best competitive RTS game out there; plaing "to win" on battlenet was an eye opener, especially the introduction of "replays" where you can learn the tricks of the grand masters; the game is 4 years old and there are still people who come up with never seen before tactics and succed... I play 2:2 most of the time, if you want we can meet in b-net and kill some zerg
I will propably switch to Warcraft 3 in the future, but right now servers are not working really good because of the masses of users, so ill wait for the next patch or so and learn some basics on the local network before i get burned online

[Pink Horror]

Toby, it's all ready been asked by a moderator not to turn this into another thread about how Blood Bowl should be an online game.

I'm going to make a last, simple statement about this and then not participate in the argument any more.

I don't want Blood Bowl made into a game the PC gamer would enjoy. I don't like the PC gamer. I wouldn't invite him to my house. I wouldn't want to meet his spouse. I don't want to sit and talk. I wouldn't greet him when I walk. I wouldn't play him in a game. I wouldn't ask to know his name. I don't like him, that's who I am. Or maybe I don't give a damn.



Pink Horror

[Toby]

In case you noticed, this whole thread is about an Bloody Bowl Online Game...

[GalakStarscraper]

I program from my lap not a desk so since I have a 2 and 5 year old I nearly dropped my laptop from laughing so hard at PH's last post. Ya, did Seuss proud PH ... ya did him proud.

Galak

[GalakStarscraper]

Also Toby,

While I agree that the thread is about someone trying to create an online version of BB, I think you've seen that 99% of the board doesn't subscribe to your beliefs that A) BB must be made online to survive or B) that BB requires re-balancing. Now that said, what I was hoping is that the thread could be reopened without returning to your Quixhote quest against the TalkBB windmills.

I don't mind the conversation about the mertis of online BB. Just remember that few share your view of the computer ... this coming from the chap running the largest PBeM league in the world right now.

As I said I don't mind if this thread is about Bloody Bowl or online gaming merits in general. Since Andy's said he's not going to give us a play-by-play which is why I reopened the thread, I'll gladly re-lock the thread if this turns back into Toby against the world.

Galak

[Marcus]

I played tournament level quake for 3 years.
I played online bloodbowl extensively for 3 years
I've played tournament level boardgame bloodbowl for 3 years.

During my time playing tournament level quake I met a few nice people and a hell of a lot of complete and utter cheating, clueless, unsportsmanlike, rude obnoxious morons. I eventually quit.

During my time playing online bloodbowl I met a few nice people and a hell of a lot of complete and utter cheating, clueless, unsportsmanlike, rude obnoxious morons. I eventually quit.

During my time playing tournament level boardgame bloodbowl I've met almost exclusively skilled, intelligent, sporting, friendly and funny people. I don't plan to quit any time soon.

Marcus

[christer]

I'm not a fan of playing RTSs online. I've never been good at them and I consider them too reliant on the ability to quickly build up your army.

Although if GW/Fanatic licensed the concept of Blood Bowl to some game studio and they produced a turn-based online version with cool 3d-graphics, servers keeping rankings, running tournaments etc etc, I'd gladly buy the game and probably love it.

I would most likely buy an "rts" version as well, but I believe Blood Bowl works just fine as a turn-based game. Although I would expect time-limits on turns to prevent some people from just leaving the computer when facing defeat.

I agree with Toby's guess that a game like this would be successful, but I also believe it should stay as true as possible to the current ruleset (LRB). There is no need to modify the balance of things from the start.

But a server like this would be the perfect place to see what things needs changing. Online gamers have a tendency to abuse just about everything to gain advantage. The good thing is that if some teams/skills are better, they will quickly bubble up in the rankings and it will become obvious that something will need to be changed.

-- Christer

[Sputnik]

Christer,

that's an interesting point about abusing tendencies of online-gamers.

But if you play BB as aboard game in a league big enough for some "creative input" of people who can read the rules to "their advantage" or, to be more polite, to "just find out by try and error", don't you think that even there you could notice in short terms whether things come up which should be changed?

Is it more obvious when playing online games??

Sputnik

[christer]

Is it more obvious when playing online games??

Well not in itself. It's just a matter of statistics.

Create an online game with stunning graphics and an easy interface and people will start playing it. When the joy of the graphics have gone, some players will drop off while others stay because of the gameplay.

My point here is that a comercial game will draw more players than the various online leagues running the current clients which lack either graphics, easy interface or both.

With a large number of players (let's say 100) playing under the same ruleset unbalanced things will become evident.

Finding unbalanced things isn't a consequence of being online. It's a consequence of having lots of coaches and matches being played "under the same umbrella".

One thing that an online client could do, which I'm sure noone would even consider in a large tournament, is to keep track of a whole range of statistics such as time used per turn, number of blocks compared to what skills the player has, average pass-length for the players, success rates for various rolls, probability of reroll use etc etc. This in itself could aid in finding things that need to be changed.

-- Christer

[Marcus]

Galak: on the subject of intellectual property, you might want to check out http://www.wipo.org. I've dealt with them in the past regarding domain poaching issues. In GWs case they appear to have them bang to rights and I'd be surprised if a C&D didn't cover it. Mind you, I Am Not A Lawyer [tm] and have an exaggerated opinion of people's capacity to admit they've been busted.

On the subject of board games vs computer games the 80's and early 90's really saw the peak of this war. Many great games companies collapsed under the competition (alas Avalon Hill) as many boardgaming geeks moved to the PC.

IMO GW has survived because it has maintained focus on the hobby aspect of the game. Collecting and painting miniatures remains at the heart of the tabletop wargaming hobby and it's something that really can't be reproduced on a computer.

I've played both tabletop and PC based games extensively for over 15 years and I have to say there is a world of difference between the two. There is no real need to translate something like BB to PC and I have to say I would not be all that keen to purchase it if it was released. This is simply because I find them to be two very different hobbies.

The internet has already made its mark in rounding out the hobby of BB. This board is a perfect example. League websites are another. Galak's PBEM league and the Online Bloodbowl League using a play-by-irc client are two more highly successful examples. All these methods serve to broaden and unite the community of bloodbowl players while never really replacing the visual and social experience you get from setting up your minis on a board and facing off against another flesh and blood opponent.

Marcus

[Toby]

Online Blood Bowl should be turnbased, and not differ from the boardgame in therms of "Pitch rules" (team mangement can be diffrent in some aspects like ladder, league)

Its important to visualiza that when playing a board game and rolling dice, you visualize the rules. In a computer game, the rules are hidden behind the interface;

For example, go for it on a pass block - in the PC programm, this is either possible or not possible. On the board, if you play someone you have never seen before, you would propaby say: hey we should look this up in the rulebook...
So if you play to win - you dont know your opponent, you just play the game against some intelligence - you take advantage of everything possible.

Christer is right about balancing changes - exept teams. Because, if it quickly turned out that (lets say) Halflings are the best Team, the game would loose a lot of appeal very very quickly.

Look at this that way: wo Halflink and Goblins there are 13 official team Teams; that means there are 13+12+11+10+9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1 = 91 Matchups; Thats impossible to balance - but blood bowl is unique because theres the team development factor.

Chaos Team =/= Chaos Team. So its not automatically Halfling > Chaos because it depends on some factors like fortunate die rolls...

So what would have to be done is, create the best possible while realistic Team with a given Team Rating lets say 300 - and try to balance these teams. Therefore i would really like to see the number of official teams reduced to 8 or maximum 12.

[GalakStarscraper]

I would like to add that there are a lot of leagues cranking through the LRB rules currently .. so while online might produce more data ... I'm not sure there are abuses to be found .... Toby the only person I've met who believes that the LRB rules would be completely broken as a starting point for an online BB version.

So far the problems identified have been very few from a LOT of testing since the BB2k1/LRB came out. The MBBL is about a little over a month away from the end of its first season. From the data so far, my conclusions have been:

Aging isn't severe enough (note this is the only major item I've concluded and the MBBL2 also factors into this statement)
The Amazons are a d*mn good team
Halfling still s*ck
Martyn has trouble playing elves ... (sorry Martyn had to dig him as he's currently burying the halflings)
The LRB rules are very very well thought out and balanced

Galak

[Sputnik]

Trademarks are complicated matter...

and those guys making the PC game are in Hong Kong, right?

it's getting more and more complicated...

I know a Chinese attorney. He demonstrates the difference between law and Chinese Reality to me from time to time...

So I guess let's wait and see.

And I have to admit that I think Toby got a point in saying there will be a product if there is a market. At least in China on the streets where you can go and sit in front of a computer for low money and play a game in a kind of network . Noone there cares about trademarks really.

No offense meant, all you out there!

Sputnik

[christer]

Christer is right about balancing changes - exept teams. Because, if it quickly turned out that (lets say) Halflings are the best Team, the game would loose a lot of appeal very very quickly.

First off, I seriously doubt it would quickly turn out that some team is "the best". There has been enough games all over the world to prove that this just isn't the case.

Also, a lot of computer game studios use (possibly public) beta tests to find out if they missed something that shifts the balance. In addition to this, they keep releasing patches that modify the balance of the game (for example, see the changes in the various Diablo 2 patches. I'm sure there are similar lists for the *craft series). These changes hasn't scared off the players of these games as they've been open about what they did and most of all, I believe the "community" understands that they are trying to create an even playingfield.

a given Team Rating lets say 300 - and try to balance these teams

I truly believe this isn't necessary, for the reasons explained above.

Anyway. I'm rambling...

-- Christer

[Toby]

Galak, you are missing some realy important factors here:

Player Trades
Star Players
Allied Players
Secret Weapons
Magic items

I think the living rulebook is really really good as far as the "play Blood Bowl rules" are.

If it comes down to the team lists, the basic units (players) are balanced.

Availiability of secret Weapons is really limited
Star Players are almost banned
Allied Players are not existent
Player Trades are imposible
Buying Magic Items or equipment for players is impossible

The there are topics like "One Turn Scoring"
I mean, you have no idea man (no offence
If the online game wasnt absolutely waterproove to hacks and balancing abuse, you will have 500 Skaven Teams with 4 One Turn Scoring Gutter Runners in 5 Minutes after booting the server.