Taking Back Blood Bowl

[Regash]

In my opinion CRP+ is LRB7

In my opinion it most certainly is not.

+1

[VoodooMike]

I know I should not bite on this one but ... huh? What more do you want me to do VM? I show up regularly and answer questions. I've repeatedly cut time out of my schedule and profits to help BB events. I've assisted GW with rule advice even after the treatment I got at the end of the CRP process. So not sure what your idea of involved is?

I'm not saying you don't do enough in the community or are disinterested in being part of the online community, I'm saying I've never seen any interest in you, or any other former BBRC members, in any sort of "what's next for Blood Bowl?" endeavors, which is what the OP seems to be talking about, much less any interest in leadership positions in that sort of thing.

In the years since the dissolution of the BBRC the only things I've seen you get genuinely excited about have been your Impact minis and Elfball... and I can totally understand that - those are things that are entirely your own, can be changed as you wish, and don't require fighting an insane amount of inertia to gain any ground in.

So, it's not a matter of me wanting you to do anything in particular, Galak - my point was simply that outside of GW, Cyanide, NAF and to a lesser extent FUMBBL, the former BBRC would be the people most likely to be able to shift the general BB community toward changes in the ruleset and rosters.. but have never shown any interest in that sort of thing (much like GW, NAF, and FUMBBL).

[Digger Goreman]

In my opinion CRP+ is LRB7

In my opinion it most certainly is not.

+1

+*infinity*

[GalakStarscraper]

I know I should not bite on this one but ... huh? What more do you want me to do VM? I show up regularly and answer questions. I've repeatedly cut time out of my schedule and profits to help BB events. I've assisted GW with rule advice even after the treatment I got at the end of the CRP process. So not sure what your idea of involved is?

I'm not saying you don't do enough in the community or are disinterested in being part of the online community, I'm saying I've never seen any interest in you, or any other former BBRC members, in any sort of "what's next for Blood Bowl?" endeavors, which is what the OP seems to be talking about, much less any interest in leadership positions in that sort of thing.

Fair enough. I have tried. When Cyanide wanted to work on the Khorne roster and asked for my help ... I volunteered to help with that despite my previous GW treatment. I would have tried to help with BB2 but I didn't have the time and the massive handcuffs I had on me with the Khorne roster from GW had left some bitter taste to be honest.

In the years since the dissolution of the BBRC the only things I've seen you get genuinely excited about have been your Impact minis and Elfball... and I can totally understand that - those are things that are entirely your own, can be changed as you wish, and don't require fighting an insane amount of inertia to gain any ground in.

All true. Combined with the fact that this stuff is now how I pay for all my bills ... it really needs to be a high focus point. I really do like what we came up with in Elfball ... and I hope some day to make that a more real product than it is (we sold our 400th copy of the game late last year) But I still love Blood Bowl and if I thought there was a real chance to do something I would.

So, it's not a matter of me wanting you to do anything in particular, Galak - my point was simply that outside of GW, Cyanide, NAF and to a lesser extent FUMBBL, the former BBRC would be the people most likely to be able to shift the general BB community toward changes in the ruleset and rosters.. but have never shown any interest in that sort of thing (much like GW, NAF, and FUMBBL).

VM ... thanks for a really well written response ... totally get where you are coming from.

To expand ... I have not pursued anything on my end for 2 major reasons.
1) Impact! creates a conflict of interest. Even though Fantasy Football is now only about 20% of my business ... anything I would do would be seen as trying to make myself a profit even if not. Just recently found a thread on another forum about how I manipulated the NAF to make the Ape team officially recognized so I could make more money selling Impact!'s Ape team. Which was amazing to me to read since I didn't even know the NAF was looking at it because I don't read the NAF forums that often. I don't want to taint working on Blood Bowl with the folks that will assuming no matter what that the reasons for my work were nefarious.
2) Splitting the community. I know if I pushed to have the NAF create a BBRC and publish a LRB 7 (CRP 2) that such a ruleset would immediately divide the community between GW rules vs NAF rules. I don't think that is a good thing ... so I've made no effort to encourage such a movement. Had GW come to though and said ... we'd like to show you some rule changes we are considering for Blood Bowl for 2017 ... can we get your thoughts ... I would have gladly looked it over under NDA and given as much advice as I could.

So I guess the answer in summary is ... I didn't think the game needed a revolution so I didn't grab a sword to start the charge.

[Bakunin]

In my opinion CRP+ is LRB7 (and without a doubt more fun than LRB6)

In my opinion it most certainly is not.

It is so.

[GalakStarscraper]

It is so.

Got to say the full CRP+ is not really my set of rules I would like to see either.

[Bakunin]

democratize the NAF.

Err, what?

You know, create a organization where the majority has the power and certainly makes all the big decisions. I dont think voting for a president once in a while makes a organization democratic. I think that the naf needs more transparency and direct member influence to be considered democratic. To put it in simpler terms, then I agree with the Pitch Invasion's guys criticism of the naf. That it functions as an old boys club.
My initial suggestion would be for example, to let us members decide whether we want the Daemons of khorne, Bretonnia etc to be ranked team, through a referendum. It must be more democratic than what we have now, if a democratic organization is an ideal at all?
If one would like to 'take blood bowl back' making the NAF 'more' democratic, would give it the legitimacy to make community edition rules (lrb7), in my opinion (or what 'taking it back' means).

[Regash]

let us members decide whether we want the Daemons of khorne, Bretonnia etc to be ranked team, through a referendum.

But wouldn't that mean that, from all of the fan created rosters out there, the NAF would have to choose one to use?
Wouldn't that mean another poll, this time for the roster?

In my opinion, the NAF should not take any action in terms of rules and changing them.
Sanctioning teams that aren't in the rule book (Like they already did with Slann, Underworld and Pact.) would be altering the rules in my opinion.
They should follow the rules as they were given, so CRP it is at the moment.

The NAF shouldn't be anything more than just a players organisation who provide statistics and other services to the community.
And that's the reason for me not being a NAF member anymore as I don't need their service. (Even the two years I've been a NAF member were only for the benefit of OTHER players who'd have shed tears about games not rated.)

[Bakunin]

let us members decide whether we want the Daemons of khorne, Bretonnia etc to be ranked team, through a referendum.

But wouldn't that mean that, from all of the fan created rosters out there, the NAF would have to choose one to use?
Wouldn't that mean another poll, this time for the roster?

If the people want it, why stop it.

[Wifflebat]

let us members decide whether we want the Daemons of khorne, Bretonnia etc to be ranked team, through a referendum.

But wouldn't that mean that, from all of the fan created rosters out there, the NAF would have to choose one to use?
Wouldn't that mean another poll, this time for the roster?

If the people want it, why stop it.

Some possible reasons:

1) Because people are not all game designers.
2) Because many people have dumb ideas.
3) Because making creative things by committee is how they invented beige.
4) Because people can have self-interest, prejudices, or be open to manipulation.

I'm not saying that I disagree that perhaps it's time for a vote on, say, whether to include Khorne, I'm just suggesting that the will of the majority may not necessarily be the best way to get a good game.

[Darkson]

Given on how few people bother to vote it would be an awful idea.

[GalakStarscraper]

If the people want it, why stop it.

Some possible reasons:

1) Because people are not all game designers.
2) Because many people have dumb ideas.
3) Because making creative things by committee is how they invented beige.
4) Because people can have self-interest, prejudices, or be open to manipulation.

I'm not saying that I disagree that perhaps it's time for a vote on, say, whether to include Khorne, I'm just suggesting that the will of the majority may not necessarily be the best way to get a good game.

There are days I really wish we had a like button for posts.

[El Hombre]

If the people want it, why stop it.

Then give 'em Trump

[rolo]

Then give 'em Trump

"A lot of people ask me, Donald, how are you so great at game design? I could make the best fantasy football game ever, believe me! This ruleset, what a joke, the people at Elfball are laughing at us, the Dreadball crew are making fun of us. I'll add some new teams, you won't believe what you're seeing. Believe me. And I can tell you this, I won't have any of these joke teams added to our game, what a disaster. I'll give us the ruleset that everybody wants. And GW is going to pay for it, believe me!"

(Hoping this isn't crossing the line on TFF's "no politics" rule)

[Deus Magi]

Ooooh some interesting stuff here.

Xenomech, I wrote a separate thread that touched on this. This has occurred with the gamer community with Epic (another game coming back Yaaayyyy!) So it can be done. "Taking it back!?" Well who's is it? I ca seea tussle going on! I see what you say, and that's why I thought to ask this community about rules, changes, amendments, thoughts, how the game could be improved, new teams and stuff. I wanted, and still do, to contact someone in GW with a letter with ideas for them Perhaps only for their inspiration. Remarks from the hardened fans, of what they'd like to see. This is ongoing at this time, although I don't have a contact at GW as yet, but you have to start somewhere. If GW didn't listen (and I understand if they don't), and they also brought out a ball ache of a rules fumble, then what you say could well be possible. I'd like to see what they do first, but it is an option for the future. Especially as I see some really great ideas, that I'd like to see come to fruition in the game.

Frogboy makes a good point about 9th Age. It could be done.

Nonumber, i'm fully with you "Honestly I just don't agree with the GW hate and I don't think that makes me a "corporate slave"- " Me neither.

DinoTitanedition has good points. Very good points, in a well thought out posting, but his question "I actually want to return this as a question - after all this time of hatred and negativity reflecting towards GW, they are even rereleasing the game again. What reason should the owner. of. their. own. product. have to be supportive towards the community?"

My answer would be, money. A successful business needs to survive, and it makes the world go around. Pound to a penny though I see what you are saying, and it would not surprise me if a few people at GW were thinking, "we've created this and they're moanin! Some people are never happy!" There are two sides of course, I understand that.

GalakStarscraper. You clearly know your stuff, it would be great if GW did approach you for your advice and thoughts.

Wifflebat. Hilarious. "3) Because making creative things by committee is how they invented beige." But unfortunately true.

Rolo, ref Trump post PMPL