Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements.

[mattgslater]

POMB vs AV9
Current: 155/324 to break AV (47.8%), 13/18 to use
@ +1: 5/12 to break AV (41.7%), 5/36 to use
No mod on RR: 43/108 to break AV (39.8%), 13/18 to use (or might just use on stuns)

POMB vs AV8
Current: 109/144 to break AV (75.7%), 7/12 to use
@ +1: 7/12 to break AV (58.3%), 1/6 to use
No mod on RR: 125/216 to break AV (57.8%), 7/12 to use

POMB vs AV7
Current: 119/144 to break AV (82.6%), 5/12 to use
@ +1: 13/18 to break AV (72.2%), 5/36 to use
No mod on RR: 109/144 to break AV (75.7%), 5/12 to use

Claw, no mod on RR
Vs AV9: 47/72 to break AV (65.3%), 5/12 to use
Vs AV8: 151/216 to break AV (69.9%), 5/12 to use

So not allowing modifiers on RR is comparatively balanced to favor heavy teams, and changing PO to +1 is nicer to light teams.

[garion]

Yup agree with Mat here, if you take Galaks suggested house rule, then it just means the lower Av teams get punished more. Who will pile on an Av9 opponent if av wasnt broken the first time and you cant use claw on the RR? No one will. But against av7 you will just as often as people do now, and av8 somewhere in between. The +1 from Plasmoid is the better of those two suggestions. Because Pilling On on its own wouldnt be a good skill, it would be the same as MB except it makes you go prone, this doesnt sound good. But if you break av with the first roll then you can choose to use pilling On for the Injury roll with a +1 to injury (or +2 with MB). This way you can choose to use it before the injury has been rolled if you want a higher chance of removing that player from the pitch. This adds a tactical element to Pilling On which is a good thing. Because at the moment it is pretty much just mindless.

However I'm still not a massive fan of Plasmoids either, Pilling On is an amazing skill at the moment the best in the game in some respects. The reason it is so powerful is to help player turn over after ageing was removed, this combined with the useless apothecaries (apos - I think was a good piece of game design).

The answer for me always has been and always will be bringing back traits and improving fouling.

the rationale - Fouling needs to be improved so there is a good weapon against kill stack players, but if you leave everything else alone and improve fouling it is just going to be another weapon in the arsenal of hyperbash teams... they get a 3 player advantage early on then can foul every turn until the opponent's numbers are even lower. When you lose a few players early on it kills your chances to foul back as a tactic because you cant risk losing even more players.

Fouling shouldn't only be viable when you are outnumbering your opponent already. This is why bringing back "the eye" in some form is important... it stops teams fouling every turn once they already have a numerical advantage. Instead making them wait for a good foul.

However even with "the eye" fouling would still be more beneficial for hyperbash teams than anyone else this is because fouling sucks at the moment and the risk reward ratio is well off. So bring back the +1av for the fouler and use the old DP (which made it 2+) except split that 2+ into two skills so players do not just need 1 skill to be effective killers.

Again this alone still makes fouling best for kill stack teams, so how do you get away from this - by making Pilling On a trait.This means St players can only take Pilling On on a double.

This hurts them in a few ways -
-They cannot choose when to add Pilling On to the kill stack, they will take it when they can, this means some players will have Piling On before MB or Claw or before any other skills.
-It means that most teams they play against will likely have a player that is good or great at fouling by the time a team has a couple of Pilling On players. This will make chosing when to Pile On a far harder choice and when you do you will need to defend those prone players properly, sticking bodies all around them to stop the foul. This makes positioning and time of use for Pilling On something you really need to think about, which you currently do not.
- it also means players that get Pilling On early on, before Mb and Claw will have to try and use Pilling On to get their Spp quickly which again leaves them vulenrable to fouls.

I believe all of this will make Pilling On a lot less popular because there will be a counter to it and a counter that every team will have. At the moment the only teams that can really hurt CPOMB teams are other CPOMB teams, which is just stupid.

[Hitonagashi]

At the moment the only teams that can really hurt CPOMB teams are other CPOMB teams, which is just stupid.

This isn't true. I've seen dwarves, orcs and norse all outbash clawmbpo teams in the Box. It's no coincidence that all the teams who can take claw are also those who have relatively squishy linemen. Hobs die if you sneeze at them, and beastmen, pestigors and marauders are all av 8 st 3 pieces that can be mbpo'ed. If you assume skill parity, then at 3 skills, the chaos have clawmbpo (and no block etc). Orcs/Dwarves have block, guard, mb po (block from natural skill). Unless the chaos get lucky early on, which can happen, then the guard will help prevent them getting 2d blocks in.

For reference Dode and Matt, you can actually play those rules on FUMBBL. When you create a league, you get an option to enable +1 to av for fouls and sneaky git to act as guard for fouls. (as well as Right Stuff cancelling tackle on blocks). I think the DBBL (german league) actually use those settings. I'm not sure how it's really affected them though, they've only been using those rules a year.

[garion]

At the moment the only teams that can really hurt CPOMB teams are other CPOMB teams, which is just stupid.

This isn't true. I've seen dwarves, orcs and norse all outbash clawmbpo teams in the Box. It's no coincidence that all the teams who can take claw are also those who have relatively squishy linemen. Hobs die if you sneeze at them, and beastmen, pestigors and marauders are all av 8 st 3 pieces that can be mbpo'ed. If you assume skill parity, then at 3 skills, the chaos have clawmbpo (and no block etc). Orcs/Dwarves have block, guard, mb po (block from natural skill). Unless the chaos get lucky early on, which can happen, then the guard will help prevent them getting 2d blocks in.

yes and I have seen flings beat up chaos before, crazy stuff does happen, such is the nature of dice games, but the majority of the time in most cases CPOMB teams wipe the floor with Orcs etc... I am generalising and sometimes it doesnt happen but more often than not it does.

For instance in the fumbbl cup Orcs have played Chaos 3 times, and lost all 3, losing the bash battle and the game. I'm not denying there are not tactics to get round this - as you mention, there is guard locking these teams and targetting them av8 player etc...

Just looking at 2 chaos teams, WMD and Chuck vs bloodbowl (because they are the only two chaos teams i can think of off the top of my head)
-WMD
1st game orcs - 4/2/1 Casualties 2/0/0
2nd games dwarves - 3/4/0 Casualties 0/0/0


-Chuck vs Bloodbowl
1st game lizardmen - 5/1/2 Casualties 0/2/0
2nd game Khemri - 3/1/1 Casualties 3/0/0
3rd game dark elf - 4/3/0 Casualties 1/1/0
4th game Lizardmen - 8/3/0 Casualties 1/2/0

1 nurgle team i know of -
team greifers gonna grief
1st game necro - 3/1/3 Casualties 0/1/0
2nd game undead - 4/4/0 Casualties 1/0/1

A Chaos Dwarf team I know of -
Colourful Characters
1st game 6/0/0 Casualties 0/0/0 against pro elf so no suprise there really
2nd game humans 3/3/1 Casualties 1/0/0
3rd game CD 3/2/0 Casualties 1/1/0

thats all the CPOMB teams I know in the tourney and the only race that has really caused a similar amout of cas to that which they received is Khemri who are arguably the best team in the game for dealing with CPOMb teams imo.

[mattgslater]

Hito, I've outbashed ClawPOMB teams lots of times with Orcs. If the AV rolls aren't going, ClawMB is useless and PO is a liability, while Orcs have the same ST and better Guard. That's not the problem. The problem is the incremental-but-dramatic increase in attrition on mid-level, slow-skilling players who used to be spared the worst ravages of Ageing, but now take the brunt of the "AV-independent balancing maneuver" (so it's called, but it's AV-hostile in practice because it doesn't get used evenly) that was supposed to supplant Ageing, but instead targets different elements of the team, the cogs rather than the stars, who tend to get protected.

[dode74]

However I'm still not a massive fan of Plasmoids either, Pilling On is an amazing skill at the moment the best in the game in some respects. The reason it is so powerful is to help player turn over after ageing was removed, this combined with the useless apothecaries (apos - I think was a good piece of game design).

With plasmoid's version it would, under all circumstances, be worse than MB. I disagree that it is the best skill at the moment, but how could it possibly be so under plasmoid's version when it is basically MB with the penalty of going prone?

The answer for me always has been and always will be bringing back traits and improving fouling.

Why would traits help at all? I can see the fouling thing (to spread the love regarding attrition), but why traits. If it's to limit the amount of certain skills all that does is reward lucky level-up rolls.

PS - No response from Cyanide regarding my request for a server dump including player details as yet

[mattgslater]

Martin's PO would make me spam it, TBH. It never leads to the one thing I hate about using PO: wasting Tackle Zones. With +1, I don't use it unless I roll one less than I need. Then I PO and I know I got what I want. It would be better than it is now against Orcs and Dwarfs, except in conjunction with Claw, and Orcs and Dwarfs themselves would be more strongly encouraged to spam it, after Guard/MB because the disjoint with Guard isn't such a big deal. I liked the idea at first, but now that I see the math, it's too good.

Here's a way that might work: "If the AV or injury roll is no more than 4, he may use Piling On, place himself prone, and add 2d6 to the roll." Game it out, you'll see it tracks the +1 closely, but doesn't reveal its success in advance.

[dode74]

Fair point, but I really don't like how limiting your suggestion is.

Another option would be to require that it is declared before the AV or injury roll.

[Hitonagashi]

thats all the CPOMB teams I know in the tourney and the only race that has really caused a similar amout of cas to that which they received is Khemri who are arguably the best team in the game for dealing with CPOMb teams imo.

Go back to the first page. There's been a heck of a lot of clawmbpo teams dropping out early....you've just picked the ones that won, so it's not surprising that they are the ones that did a lot of damage.

There were Azure, Battlelore, Phoenixx, Smashak, Nekross...all very good coaches, and all knocked out early in games where their claw didn't fire. I would add Carnis, but that was more a freak result where the opposing DP was godlike.

Matt, you are correct, but to me that just says that you can't take a LRB 4 teambuilding style and apply it to LRB 6. LRB 6 is the world of superstars and support staff, not the world of an equally skilled team. Some like it, some don't. I personally love that far more. I strongly suspect that the time of multiple 76 spp BoBs as the core of the team is gone, and that the new future for high TV orcs is 4x superstar blitzers with a load of block/guard BoB and a guard troll.

Can we talk about the original topic again? I thought that was quite an interesting idea

[Darkson]

I haven't bothered to read the last 6 pages (when I get told I need to produce evidence to prove the way I feel, I despair ), but it has got me thinking that the new concepts/house rules forums could/should be merged...

[dode74]

when I get told I need to produce evidence to prove the way I feel, I despair

Must be nice to live in a world where your assumptions aren't challenged

[garion]

I haven't bothered to read the last 6 pages (when I get told I need to produce evidence to prove the way I feel, I despair ), but it has got me thinking that the new concepts/house rules forums could/should be merged...

I agree and I also agree there is no point in two threads now since they are all house rules because the BBRC is no more.

@ Dode - I wasn't saying Plasmoids was the best in the game. I was just talking about the current version of PO. Just badly worded. Dyslexic

Why would traits help - For the reason I have posted. It means you cannot spam the skill on all the players you want. You might be developing a Guard block type player then roll a double, so if you take Pilling On it is a longer slog to get your player to where you want him to be. Also most people just go MB, Claw, then Pilling On or even block then Pilling On. This is seemingly the best order to stack the skills. If you are relient on a double it may come first - Pilling on, then take the others. This will make skilling that player up slower and harder and while you are trying to do this people will keep fouling this player if fouling is improved.

Can we talk about the original topic again? I thought that was quite an interesting idea

apparently we are not allowed unless we get evidence prooving there is an issue

[dode74]

@ garion
Traits merely reward lucky level-up rolls. In an online MM environment I suspect you would see even more of what we see ayway - people recycling players until they get what they want. This in turn rewards those able to play large volumes of games. Is that what we want?

apparently we are not allowed unless we get evidence prooving there is an issue

You owe me an apology. I have tried, several times, to keep this on track only for others to bring it back to cpomb.
viewtopic.php?p=623201#p623201
viewtopic.php?p=623363#p623363
viewtopic.php?p=623500#p623500
viewtopic.php?p=623505#p623505
As I said, "Skill variation may be a reason though, and I am happy (and have been trying) to continue this on the basis that lack of skill variation will prove to be a catalyst for change. I'm agnostic as to whether it will or not, but it is better to be prepared "

[Darkson]

@ garion
Traits merely reward lucky level-up rolls. In an online MM environment I suspect you would see even more of what we see ayway - people recycling players until they get what they want. This in turn rewards those able to play large volumes of games. Is that what we want?

I couldn't care less about online MM leagues with Traits, no more than I care about ClawPOMB in online MM leagues now. It's not how the game was designed to play, so butt out (the online MM crowd, not you ).

I do care that from my own personal experience, that team-building is more boring than it was in older versions. This idea may, or may not be on the right lines to "correct" that. Same goes for traits.

[garion]

@ garion
Traits merely reward lucky level-up rolls. In an online MM environment I suspect you would see even more of what we see ayway - people recycling players until they get what they want. This in turn rewards those able to play large volumes of games. Is that what we want?

That will not happen. At the moment FF punishes teams that try and do this. You cannot keep recycling players or you will end up having a team that has a 120 TV or more that is spent on nothing other than FF which would help mitigate this to a point.

I get what you are saying but this is not something that happened in LRB4 so why would it suddenly happen now?

Also if a player tries to do this and they finally get their double just to have him killed in his first game would be pretty hard to take for anyone. Also for Pilling On as a trait people will not want to get this skill until they have MB on a player at the least, preferably MB and Claw. Pilling On as a first skill is not something people will strive to get. I really can't see this happening.

And yes luck in team development. There is nothing wrong with that, there isn't enough luck in team development at the moment this is why it is so 1 dimensional now and also why skilling up is no longer as exciting as it was previously.