VoodooMike wrote:This topic is pointless blather-bait. The NAF absolutely has to decide to rigidly enforce adherence to a NAF-approved ruleset (including rosters) before any discussion of a new BBRC is anything more than large-scale masturbation.
I am interested. What kind of non standard rules are the NAF allowing now?
What power does the NAF have other than not accepting your results for the rankings?
VoodooMike wrote:... people are not resistant to change, they are resistant to everyone else's changes. Everyone and their brother has a vision of how the game should be, but they'd rather it not change at all than change the way you want it to.
Hell yeah! Everyone else's changes are crap!
VoodooMike wrote:
Cyanide is the perfect example. ...
Yeah but Khorne & Bretonnians are only rosters. 'New' rosters at that. For all the moaning they were never really a big deal.
Rules changes are a different matter.
I don't play vanilla CRP. And you can't make me.
That basically means that I don't play Cyanide and I don't play Fumbbl public divisions.
I do play Fumbbl League division which has multiple rule options and custom rosters are in the works. "The commissioner's word is law". As far as the code allows.
Table top is not is not constrained by anything at all.
VoodooMike wrote:
if Cyanide offered to give everyone free access to BB2, you'd likely give it a serious try... and that chance would increase the more people you saw declaring they were giving it a chance.
That depends what you mean by "serious".
A bigger factor will be how bug ridden the software is. How the public leagues are run. How many many games appear to be against total knob heads etc.
If it turns out that Cyanides ruleset is closer to what I play than the CRP then that would increase my chances of buying it. If I don't like it's rules and it doesn't offer options then no. I wouldn't give it a 'serious' try even if it was free.
VoodooMike wrote:
The NAF is a weak organization - it seems primarily focused on not making anybody unhappy, and in the process, makes nobody completely happy. The policies it has chosen thus far have put it in the servile role - it attempts to shape itself around the various house rules and home-made rosters people decide to use in tournaments by simply side-stepping the things it doesn't "officially" support, while still giving its big rubber stamp of approval to such events. Until that changes, the NAF has no teeth... and without teeth, it is squarely unqualified to field a new BBRC. If it were possible to play Cyanide's CE, in every way, without Khorne then it would have fizzled out... but it wasn't... you couldn't avoid it in public leagues or single player. The unavoidable part was key to its eventual acceptance, and subsequent support.
So... this discussion of a BBRC is totally premature. Teeth first, then we worry about who's gonna be the alpha dog.
I don't know who really wants NAF BBRC rules. Cyanide would still end up doing what they want. It makes sense for them to continue adding rosters to continue making money. Also to continue tweaking the game to suit their platform.
Is there much appetite for changing low TV res tournaments? That is the only place where the NAF can have any teeth. Anyone else can follow if they wish.
As the higher TV, big, public/private leagues are where the main perceived issues are, who is really going to care what the NAF say unless they testing in that kind of environment?
Testing over a
lot of games.