Talk Fantasy Football

JT-Y wrote:The cards remain optional though.

The step of drawing the cards in pre-match phase is under "New official rules" section in DZ1. Doesn't this make them mandatory?

In general, I like the cards and the way they may de-rail usual flow of events. Yet, I'm very skeptical about the fact that all 3 methods allow coaches to select deck to draw them from.. Unless they'll re-balance decks to be more equal, this most likely will result in a some of decks being neglected, meaning waste of game material and less variety.

They're optional. Use them or don't. Sometimes they are fun, other times you might not want to be bothered. It really is your call. Not using them doesn't set off alarms at HQ and we don't actually employ rapid response hobby enforcers. Not for BB at any rate. Not yet.

But my preference is for variant 1 or 3, I think they're the best. They also specify values. Decks of the same value do balance out, apart from the times when luck rears its head and you get the perfect card for the situation. That can't be costed for.
If you're using them then you kinda have to accept that they do bring a deliberate element of chaos to the game. Which is exactly what some players don't want. Like I say, whatever you prefers fine.

Do you use IP or timed turns?

JT-Y wrote: But my preference is for variant 1 or 3, I think they're the best. They also specify values. Decks of the same value do balance out, apart from the times when luck rears its head and you get the perfect card for the situation. That can't be costed for.

My only concern with both of those variants is that coaches are allowed to choose decks in the first place. The very fact that decks are priced differently (1-4 points) signifies that cards in them are not equally powerful. So, let's suppose both coaches are granted with 4 points to buy cards. I wonder whether they'll see any benefits in buying two 2-points cards, or four 1-point cards? Or there will always be only one most reasonable choice: one 4-point card? Same question goes for case when they have 2 points each. I believe this kind of meta - which decks are the most cost-effective ones - exists for CRP's cards already. So, if it's the same for cards in new rules as well, this will lead to less variety of possible in-game situations created by cards' usage (as coaches will almost always try to pursue most effective strategy by choosing the powerful/cost effective decks), what (imo) means less fun - as you said it yourself, the cards are needed to add more variety and randomness to the play, that's their purpose, and such approach to the way they are drawn may not be consistent with this purpose.

One way to prevent this could be making approach of choosing the decks to draw from randomly the recommended one (example: roll 2D6, check a table to see what deck corresponds to result, draw from it 1 card each, [possibly] discard it and try to draw one more again, roll 2D6 again, and so on). That probably is the easiest way to address the issue. A more complex approach would be balancing all decks in such way that there wouldn't be an easy answer to what is better: two 2-points card, one 4-points card, or four 1-point cards.

JT-Y wrote: Do you use IP or timed turns?

I rarely play TT I come from a digital world of BB. Even at Fumbbl, where Special Cards are at least implemented (unlike Cyanide's BB), they are still rarely actually used, as they are inducement's only. So I have high hopes for the new ruleset, where they are now sort of part of the any regular match, expecting their usage will become a common occasion, at least at Fumbbl (when they'll transition to new rules).

Good luck waiting for special play cards to hit digital game. I would love to get team specific ball rules, additional weather tables, kick-off table, (In)Famous Coaching Staff, Match Events, 24 stadiums, referees and all the rest into the pc game. I've just come to the conclusion that the pc game will always be a demo compared to the actually miniatures tabletop game.

The Cyanide game was, and is, based off LRB6, not BB2016, so most of the stuff you mentioned was never planned to be in the game (in fact, most of it didn't exist when the Cyanide version was released).

Mori-mori have you used the new decks? Have you read thru all cards?

Random Events 1pt
- Some nice one time use and some nice bonus for the whole game. All cards are equal according to me.

Dirty Tricks 1pt
- Half the cards are great, the rest is worse.

Magical Memorabilia 2pt
- Most cards are protective. Some gives skills. Some have both positive and negative effects. For 2pts they are worst deck according to me.

Heroic Feats 2pt
- Mostly one time use. One card can give a MVP extra. One card gives +2 Fame. Boosts for ballhandling and move actions.

Benefits of Training 2pt
- This deck helps the whole team. Promo Tour for 3d6 fans and d3 extra winnings. Kingmaker card - best in the game!!! Off-Colour Chant can make opponent loose a reroll every drive. Half of the deck is Awesome!!!

Miscellaneous Mayhem 4pt
- Easily the best deck, because there is only one card that is bad and its Kid Gloves - the rest is great.

So the diffrences according to me is that it also depends on who many of the cards that are great in a deck. Benefits of Training have some great cards, but there is 16 diffrent to get from.

Miscellaneous Mayhem is 90% a great card.

BUT if you get 4 pts in the variants some will get a safe Miscellaneous Mayhem card, but maybe someone hopes for Kingmaker and draw 2 benefits of training. An elf team will probably draw from Heroic Feats.

According to me the Magical Memorabilia should be 1pt and maybe tweak the Dirty Tricks to 2pts (because you have 50% to get a good card)

Random Events are good but dont wreck havoc on your opponent.

JT-Y wrote:They're optional. Use them or don't.

While I agree with that sentiment, I also agree with Mori-Mori insofar as the rules seem to read as if they are not optional at all.

Darkson wrote:The Cyanide game was, and is, based off LRB6, not BB2016, so most of the stuff you mentioned was never planned to be in the game (in fact, most of it didn't exist when the Cyanide version was released).

I wasn't there back in the time, but I believe in their first game they actually did transition from LRB5 to CRP (though, of course, differences between those can't be compared to CRP vs BB2016/DZ). Yet, I doubt we'll see BB2016 from Cyanide till BB3.

@Baxx, Fumbbl has already started transition to new rules, so may be we'll see it on PC, in a couple of years.

stashman wrote: Mori-mori have you used the new decks? Have you read thru all cards?

Where can I do this? So far, this is the only place I've found which tries to put them all together, and it doesn't look like official source at all. And AFAIK GW hasn't yet finished their work on cards, and more changes are on the way. Here is also a bunch of new cards reviewed.

Ok. I have bought the two packs. Love the cards.

Halfling Hotpot. Wizard or not?

Do the rules say it's a Wizard?

No idea. I don't own the Spike magazine.