Taking Back Blood Bowl

[Kafre es Ispurio]

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.

Sorry for keeping the off topic going on, but - and forgive my ignorance - What makes CPOMB a problem in BB online gaming that doesn't make it an issue in tabletop gaming? It is power gaming? The possibility of jumping accross the table with righteous anger and the fist full of blocking dice?

[Darkson]

Just search for the Clawpomb thread here or on the Cyanide forum - iirc they're both about 100 pages long, and yet in all those pages (plus the 400+ pages from the two defunct Cyanide forums) no-one ever managed to prove that there was an issue with clawpomb (if you think there's a problem, it's up to YOU to prove it, not for those that don't to show otherwise).
There may be an issue in open MM (not proven) but if so, that's a fault of the environment, not the set of skills.

[VoodooMike]

I think the numbers are very clearly outside what you might call 'normal tolerances'.

Ohhh, and what are "normal tolerances" exactly? I mean, to say something is clearly outside of them, and to refer to them as normal, it sounds like we're talking about something objective yet I'm not sure where we find such objective measures...

....I'm kidding, we both know the idea of "normal tolerances" is bullshit handwaving on your part. You think the chance of removing a piece is "too high", and that's fine, but there's nothing objective about that - it is pure subjective preference... meaning it's nothing more than lipstick on the "I don't like it" pig.

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'.

Nobody has to defend it until someone gives a compelling reason why it needs to be changed. You're essentially implying that you can shout "Pigeons are a menace and must be exterminated" and the onus is on other people to prove you wrong. It isn't.

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.

You want someone to demonstrate that the numbers DON'T show CPOMB being a problem? I'm not sure you have a firm grasp on how logical argument works, my friend. If you say "some cats have three eyes" then it's on you to produce a three-eyed cat, not on everyone else to somehow produce a LACK of three-eyed cats - there being none present makes that the default position.

I will point out, however, that CPOMB-capable teams in CPOMB-heavy environments still fail to have overwhelming win rates compared to their less bashy, more agile counterparts.

Sorry for keeping the off topic going on, but - and forgive my ignorance - What makes CPOMB a problem in BB online gaming that doesn't make it an issue in tabletop gaming? It is power gaming? The possibility of jumping accross the table with righteous anger and the fist full of blocking dice?

Open play environments like matchmaking (eg, BB2's COL or FUMBBL's B) is an environment where you can play literally hundreds of games with a team, and face teams with dramatically different levels of development. Your team that has played 4 games might face a team that has played 50 games. That's very different from the usual environments BB is played in.

So, on a long enough timeline its possible CPOMB would be an attrition problem in any environment with persistent attrition (meaning, you keep deaths and injuries inflicted on the pitch) but pragmatically it just doesn't happen. It's like saying that if we lived to be 500 years old the retirement age of 65 would be a major issue... that's true, but since nobody lives that long, it just isn't a serious consideration.

[Bakunin]

Clawpomb is a problem in tabletop. Any noob can win with it.

[ddancer]

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.

Oddly, CPOMB would only really be detrimental to a Treeman for Wood Elves. You know, the strength 6 dudes that everyone rushes to fight, as opposed to outrunning their amazing MA of 2.

The rest of the Wood Elves don't give a rip about Claw. As for Mighty Blow and Piling on... why are you standing next to people as Wood Elves?

[Wulfyn]

In order to not derail the revolution that is going on in this thread, I have posted my explanation of why ClawPOMB is broken in a separate thread.

http://talkfantasyfootball.org/viewtopi ... 10&t=42777

[mikeyc222]

not to fan the flames, because honestly, i don't care one way or the other about Claw POMB, but i DID take it for the first time ever at a tourney on the 9th. 4 games, and my Claw POMB player only did 2 casualties total. i think he also did a couple of KO's, but he hardly did enough damage to call it broken in my opinion. and i have faced Claw POMB a number of times. i think the biggest thing that giving a player Claw POMB does is paint a gigantic target on them. in all 4 of my games, my opponents immediately went after that player... sometimes to their own detriment as my other players were able to do more damage due to them being ignored.

anyways, like i said, i really don't care one way or the other about the combo. change it, leave it alone... whatever, i'll keep playing the game.
now, please continue flinging poo at one another.

[Greshvakk]

Oddly, CPOMB would only really be detrimental to a Treeman for Wood Elves. You know, the strength 6 dudes that everyone rushes to fight, as opposed to outrunning their amazing MA of 2.

The rest of the Wood Elves don't give a rip about Claw. As for Mighty Blow and Piling on... why are you standing next to people as Wood Elves?

Quite. I wasn't saying it was a good argument only that I'd heard it!

[DinoTitanedition]

please continue flinging poo at one another

I take the whole thread was created solely for this purpose, since Xenomech didn`t response at all to any comment yet

[Darkson]

I'm more and more convinced of this:

The tone of the OP makes it sound like it was written 3-4 years ago, and has sat in the draft folder since then.

[Steam Ball]

I'm more and more convinced of this:

The tone of the OP makes it sound like it was written 3-4 years ago, and has sat in the draft folder since then.

Can anybody see the (c) year in the sprue? If you know what I mean...

[Kafre es Ispurio]

I'm more and more convinced of this:

The tone of the OP makes it sound like it was written 3-4 years ago, and has sat in the draft folder since then.

Can anybody see the (c) year in the sprue? If you know what I mean...

This is quite a wanton attack, isn't it?

[GalakStarscraper]

I'm more and more convinced of this:

The tone of the OP makes it sound like it was written 3-4 years ago, and has sat in the draft folder since then.

I just looked ... I think you are right Darkson (had not checked until now).

His last previous post was December 2006. Does suggest it has been in the draft folder for maybe even around a decade.

[Greshvakk]

Sorry is that not one but two moderators on here attacking the OP with speculation about when it was conceived? Nice job.

[GalakStarscraper]

Sorry is that not one but two moderators on here attacking the OP with speculation about when it was conceived? Nice job.

Attack? Really? The timing does seem off due to GW getting involved with BB. His last post date matched up to a time period when this type of post would have been very very relevant. And the fact that he has not responded to his own thread. Sorry ... that is not an attack ... that is speculation about the weird stuff that happens on the internet at times.