Taking Back Blood Bowl

[Wulfyn]

Galak - what is the story behind ClawPOMB? Was it discussed at all and seen to be ok, or did it just not appear on anyone's radar?

[GalakStarscraper]

Galak - what is the story behind ClawPOMB? Was it discussed at all and seen to be ok, or did it just not appear on anyone's radar?

It was discussed and seen as okay. Reasons:

1) Jervis specifically wanted a tabletop ruleset. ClawPOMB is a creature of almost entirely online leagues. We tried to make sure that the rules would work with online leagues but we were told to not focus on that. We had many tabletop leagues playtesting and they did not see it come up as an issue.

2) When I talked with the FUMBBL folks ... the software was not in a position at that time to be able to test the rule changes. I went to FUMBBL to get data but all they could offer was theory and discussion. I took that on board as much as I could which did contain a concern for ClawPOMB but without any data to show it was an issue and no tabletop league reporting it an issue ... per the rules Jervis gave me ... had no legs to stand on to say it was an issue.

3) We were already having many many many people scream at us that we were completely taking the blood out of Blood Bowl with the new rules. Constant barrage of accusations of making Pansy Bowl. ClawPOMB for all that it is ... it is still not RSC+RSF level of deadly as per the rules that came before it. So when you looked at the possible level of injury before compared to ClawPOMB ... it was actually lower odds for injury. Because of this ... ClawPOMB was discussed and felt like making it less of a thing would be making the possible blood level even less. The CRP process was to remove roster attrition from the off the pitch from the game and make it all on pitch so ClawPOMB was felt to be appropriate for that goal.

And those 3 pretty much fully cover why it is as it currently is in the rules.

[Steam Ball]

Galak - what is the story behind ClawPOMB? Was it discussed at all and seen to be ok, or did it just not appear on anyone's radar?

I keep on wondering how the money handling last minute change affects the CPOMBing issue. IMHO it contributes, as bash teams can replace loses quickly while enemies have to play with less, so foul (to the POer) or counterbash (stars, mercenaries, etc) aren't so fruitful or possible; or CPOMBers don't have to think twice and just hit over and over. All due to getting free PUM, Piled Up Money.

It would be worth a note for the "takers": don't test something and later just ignore it and go with something else.

[Wulfyn]

Thanks - appreciate you taking the time to reply.

[plasmoid]

Hi Wulfyn,
just wanted to add that there are still very serious people that don't consider CPOMB to be an issue at all. And that's after seeing all of the data that the BBRC didn't have at the time.
Cheers
Martin

[Wulfyn]

Hi Wulfyn,
just wanted to add that there are still very serious people that don't consider CPOMB to be an issue at all. And that's after seeing all of the data that the BBRC didn't have at the time.
Cheers
Martin

Yes, and they are wrong.

[frogboy]

There's a big difference between league play and tournament play, that must have been a massive hurdle to overcome when re-thin the rules changes for the CRP. Fair play. I mean Wood Elves are good but expensive so I guess...

[plasmoid]

Hi Wulfyn,
don't let them hear you say that

[Glowworm]

Only 4 pages to mutate "taking back Blood Bowl" to the CPOMB debate.... A new record!!

Most of the people who moan about CPOMB are the ones who play these so called "overpowered wood elves" I play neither, and luckily in nearly 200 tournament games with goblins I've only been told they where broken once...... By an undead player!! ( who then beat me, go figure) everyone has one or two aspects they think they could change for the better, only changing something changes other things....

"Taking Blood Bowl back" great idea!! Who's going to do it?? You? ( if your reading this) me? Nope, I just want to play and chill, and if you are stepping up will it be 'democratic"? ( also a derailment discussion) will you have an agenda? Let's hear it, theoretically of course

I've been playing a long time ( first tourney was '96) and I have to say the community I see is in great shape, maybe GW will support it, maybe it will ruin it, who knows? but before we rush off to grab the anti GW pitchforks let's see what they are planning.

Hi Wulfyn,
just wanted to add that there are still very serious people that don't consider CPOMB to be an issue at all. And that's after seeing all of the data that the BBRC didn't have at the time.
Cheers
Martin

Yes, and they are wrong.

Not if Martin agrees with them they're not..........

[VoodooMike]

Hi Wulfyn,
just wanted to add that there are still very serious people that don't consider CPOMB to be an issue at all. And that's after seeing all of the data that the BBRC didn't have at the time.
Cheers
Martin

Yes, and they are wrong.

That's a very compelling argument, Wulfyn. Have you ever considered politics?

[Wulfyn]

Hi Wulfyn,
just wanted to add that there are still very serious people that don't consider CPOMB to be an issue at all. And that's after seeing all of the data that the BBRC didn't have at the time.
Cheers
Martin

Yes, and they are wrong.

That's a very compelling argument, Wulfyn. Have you ever considered politics?

It's not an argument, it's a statement. Ohhh, you were doing sarcasm.

[VoodooMike]

It's not an argument, it's a statement. Ohhh, you were doing sarcasm.

You mean there's more to that argument than just that statement? That would be novel... and this time I'm not (well.. only) being sarcastic!

[Wulfyn]

Why would it be novel?

[VoodooMike]

Why would it be novel?

Because "CPOMB is broken" almost never has much logic behind it - it typically boils down to people saying "well.. I don't like it, and I know bob and stu don't like it... so like... consensus and stuff, dude". You not liking something doesn't make it an objective problem, and something being a demonstrable problem only in one environment doesn't make it an objective problem... it makes it a problem that should be dealt with in the environment itself.

In dungeonbowl the game was played until someone scored... so the entire match was a single drive. Unsurprisingly, this made the dwarf deathroller something of a beast... that doesn't mean that the deathroller needed to be changed, if we felt it was an issue in dungeonbowl then it was something that needed to be addressed in the rules of dungeonbowl. Rocket science it ain't.

[Greshvakk]

Because "CPOMB is broken" almost never has much logic behind it - it typically boils down to people saying "well.. I don't like it,

In my experience the exact opposite is true. I think Claw Pom is broken very simply cause of its effect on the probability of people going off - I think the numbers are very clearly outside what you might call 'normal tolerances'. And ive never seen anyone who defends it actually use the numbers instead they use arguments like 'I like it' or 'you are just crying wood elves'. I'd be really interested in someone defending claw Pom who demonstrates a clear understanding of its effect - in pure unemotive terms - ie the numbers. If anyone has such a thread pls link it.