Talk Fantasy Football

There is no way JT-Y will let us in on this one!

Anyway, I am not really to concerned, I think there is room for a few tweeks to improve the game, some minor revisions to some rosters, addition of some new rosters. A lot of the sky falling in I have heard over the last few years before people actually played with it turned out to not be so problematic, either it was not as powerful as everyone thought (Horatio) or was just ignored (special play cards). So everytime I hear how they have destroyed the game pre actual use I just sit back and wait to see how it really works out. As we have some Halfling pre release info there is a lot of these star players are broken, imagine all this on the field, but you can only field two of them at a time so....

I remember playing Warhammer, every edition there would be complaining about stuff being wrong, and then when a new one came along it was some how even worse and then people recalling some golden age in an earlier edition where I distinctly remember all the same complaints. Then they AoS'ed it, I have never played it I can comment on its quality, but for me it caused me just to draw a line under it, because I did not want to invest (time/money) in something new. I picked up Xwing for a while because the buy in was less and comitment lower. Until I came back to BB as my time to paint things increased and got burnt out on the constant release schedule of Xwing, and the fleet game was actually the game I had really wanted to play all along(and if it had been released sooner would never have touched Xwing) but the price point was so high.

IF they make some drastic change which renders everything I have unusable I will walk away, not in any fit of picque but for meerily the practical I dont want to have to start over. If they evolve it I am still in.

Pluisje wrote:The French text reads "la nouvelle édition papier qui fera peau neuve en 2020"...

Which litterally means it will shed its skin. After shedding what do you have; maybe only a slightly different snake? But possibly a totally different animal (like insects going through the nymph stage of life etc). As a native french speaker "Faire peau neuve" involves major changes. It sounds like a whole new version of BB is coming up.

W

Christy42 wrote: ...I have never used them but have little issue in them being there. The pitch rules especially seem like doubly optional and doubt they really saw much use.

My point. Why change to add extra (uneccessary if you asl me) complexity which most of the time will not be used anyway? Leave that for houserules and fanboys...
Steamline the game, yes. Look to profit from the interest and go e-sports route, maybe. But please GW don't add a layer of crap just for giggles, or dont go Codex/army books and power creep on this.
(my 2 cents)
W

Strange...I kind of started with Blood Bowl BECAUSE of the giggles...

The only way that i could play this game again is if is apart from CRP.
For me no more Block dice shit, alternative rounds, yes AOS double turns, at least players in death zone of other player alternative activation.
Yes definetily i would play a BB that no one would like to play and the crazyness of the fluff in rules terms.

Never understood what was the point in releasing BB2, had to buy it as everyone on my online league were swapping to it and really made no sense, less teams, heavier animations for what?

Highly off-topic for this thread but:

1. Most, if not all, of the development team for BB1 had left, and the code was to much of a mess to overhaul.
2. Money

I'll let you decide which order of importance they were.

Darkson wrote:2. Money

Dio you guys remember their plans on selling each team separately for around 7 €?
And the shitstorm that went down so they changed plans?

Yeah, definitely because of the code mess, what reason else?

But I also remember how proudly they announced a system, that could easily make rule changes.
Anyone any idea when that happened?
So instead of BB3, shouldn't there be a rules update?

To be fair though (and I appreciate this is getting further off topic, sorry Mods!) if you bought BB2 on release and played 1, 2 hour, game a week you've had 386 hours of entertainment. That's a pretty good return and is it really so unreasonable to pay every few years for a graphics upgrade and rules tweak?

What do you guys think of the Superbowl scenario?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp- ... 26c960.pdf

I would leave League/Tournament play as it is, but a third way to play the game as a series of scenarios where, on top of winning the match, you have secondary objectives that rank points (and thus, might win the scenario even if you lose the match) seems like a great idea.

Probably ideal for Beer&Pretzel Blood Bowl, using cards, etc. and just having a one-off fun, fluff friendly match. Maybe part of BB2020?

MacHurto wrote:What do you guys think of the Superbowl scenario?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp- ... 26c960.pdf

I would leave League/Tournament play as it is, but a third way to play the game as a series of scenarios where, on top of winning the match, you have secondary objectives that rank points (and thus, might win the scenario even if you lose the match) seems like a great idea.

Probably ideal for Beer&Pretzel Blood Bowl, using cards, etc. and just having a one-off fun, fluff friendly match. Maybe part of BB2020?

I think Blitz Bowl has some of these elements. I haven’t played it, but I’ve heard several people mention having to complete different objectives or something similar.

What do you guys think of the Superbowl scenario?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp- ... 26c960.pdf

I would leave League/Tournament play as it is, but a third way to play the game as a series of scenarios where, on top of winning the match, you have secondary objectives that rank points (and thus, might win the scenario even if you lose the match) seems like a great idea.

Probably ideal for Beer&Pretzel Blood Bowl, using cards, etc. and just having a one-off fun, fluff friendly match. Maybe part of BB2020?

I have suggested this approach for several years and times in this and various other forums and play a similiar style in an ongoing solo league. So I can only say that I'm satisfied with this. Heading down the narrative approach does the game good.

MacHurto wrote:I would leave League/Tournament play as it is

Interesting thing you mention tournies, because many do use these kind of secondary objectives to provide bonus pts and use as effective tiebreakers.
I really like the idea, not least because it means there is something for players to aim for and keep them interested regardless of the general outcome of the game.

For league play would be interesting if these were factored into the SPP or cash system somehow as an enhanced method of linking game activity to team development.

Interesting thing you mention tournies, because many do use these kind of secondary objectives to provide bonus pts and use as effective tiebreakers.

Oh, ok. I wasn't aware of that. So, even if you lose the match, you get more points? Never seen one.

For league play would be interesting if these were factored into the SPP or cash system somehow as an enhanced method of linking game activity to team development.

That's a good point. More sponsor money or a bonus to FF or whatever. I just meant that leagues should continue being run by winning matches and not secondary objectives. But I can imagine a Chaos team only concerned with hitting things and getting a huge fan base, for example, even if they lose most their matches.

MacHurto wrote: Oh, ok. I wasn't aware of that. So, even if you lose the match, you get more points? Never seen one.

Yeah so you might get a number of different objectives equal to the number of games at the tourney. Things like: cause a cas by fouling, score three TD's, score a one-turner, etc. and then depending on the rules you might have to state in advance of each game which one you're going for, or just pick which one you tick off from any you've accomplished each game. And then if the tourney gives 20pts for a win and 10 pts for a draw, achieved objectives might be 1 pt each, so that they function as tiebreakers but don't otherwise affect the rankings

There were at least three London tourneys that used a variation on this system last year. I'm not sure how you could integrate that into league or if it works so well in that format but it's good for tourneys as long as the objectives are varied enough to not favour any one style of play.