Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Got some ideas for rules? Maybe a skill change or something completely different!!! Tell us here.

Moderator: TFF Mods

Post Reply
Necro10c
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by Necro10c »

Shteve0 wrote:Unfortunately I think the NTBB has become something of a victim of its own success and is in danger of badly losing its way. The response of 'we don't know it's too powerful until it's tested' (to the SG + Babes discussion) jars massively both with your argument that you only want fully tested rules adopted into your league, and the suggestion that NTBB wasn't looking for a radical rules rewrite but just gentle tweaks to narrow the tiers. The statement made several times that "my hands are tied" or "these rules are fixed for another year" doesn't chime well with me from a perspective that league feedback will be taken into account - we're still halfway through our second 2012 league down here, so if 2013 is locked in, how exactly will our feedback be incorporated?
Yeah, I can see your point here. First of all, I see NTBB as being developed still, and I find the SG discussion interesting as I too see a lot of possible consequences, not all of them good, and I hope that if it is possible that the Gobbos get too good that any league will show that.

But I can't see how exactly we can create an informed opinion about SG (and the lonerless Trolls), if it isn't tested in leagues and thoroughly debated at the same time. In my opinion there is no rules or house-rules that could be said to be fully tested, but there is better and worse arguments for a house rule, as well as better and worse reasons for house rules, all of them subjective towards different desires about how the game should be.

Oh, and still: Martin, are the NTBB only intended for league play or also tournament play?

Cheerio,
Necro10c

Edit: Heh! Forgot my own name :o

Reason: ''
User avatar
harroguk
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 208
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 9:35 pm

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by harroguk »

plasmoid wrote:To expand on the SG-thing:

In the Daventry League, some coaches were concerned about SG prior to their 1st season.
Now, with the season at an end, feedback on SG has been excellent!
Meaning so far I've had no problems, and positive feedback, from the general application of SG.
That's what pertains to the "8 rules".
Although there are still concerns on the power of SG stacking with Babes. ;)

Reason: ''
Commisioner (Retired) of - DBBL in Daventry
User avatar
spubbbba
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2271
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: York

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by spubbbba »

Necro10c wrote: Yeah, I can see your point here. First of all, I see NTBB as being developed still, and I find the SG discussion interesting as I too see a lot of possible consequences, not all of them good, and I hope that if it is possible that the Gobbos get too good that any league will show that.

But I can't see how exactly we can create an informed opinion about SG (and the lonerless Trolls), if it isn't tested in leagues and thoroughly debated at the same time. In my opinion there is no rules or house-rules that could be said to be fully tested, but there is better and worse arguments for a house rule, as well as better and worse reasons for house rules, all of them subjective towards different desires about how the game should be.
My concern with the testing is that conclusions seem to be drawn from a very small sample of games. Just take the Undead as an example, mummies losing MB for grab is a pretty big low TV nerf as they now have a much harder time gaining skills. But saying that I think they’d still be a solid tier 1 team.

To get any kind of real feel for a team you’d need to play them for several seasons in a league against teams of varying TV. Particularly if everyone starts with rookie teams then the teams that do well at low TV (dwarfs, orc, zons, undead) will still seem strong even with minor nerfs. You’d also need several coaches across different leagues to use them and those coaches to have at least some experience of the normal crp undead to use as a comparison.

But Undead being a hybrid team have always struggled at higher TV since they don’t have the power to beat up agile teams or the speed and agility to run away from stronger bash teams. Losing MB really hurts when trying to skill up a new mummy on an experienced team.

Reason: ''
My past and current modelling projects showcased on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

Hi Harroguk,
yep - duly noted.
And I hope someone will try to abuse it in your next season.
Either you'll realize that it is useful, but not overpowered.
Or you (as a group) will realize that it is overpowered.

Edit: That said, I hope you'll try to keep an open mind, and not just "get the games in, so we can reach the conclusion we had already decided on". Then I'll try to keep an open mind as well :D

And I'd be very happy to take that into account.
Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

Hi Spubbbba,
you're absolutely right, but there is only so much I can do to remedy this, (except make it a 30 year plan).
I try to maintain a steady hand and not do anything rash.
I look for feedback rather than statistics - because the sample is so small. So, soft data over hard data - but I try to compare comments to actual data.

With the specific case of the Undead, it was brought up by 2 of the 3 playtest venues.
Furthermore, G-on-mummies is probably the most unpopular change in NTBB to non-testers.
I've had a lot comments ranging from "broken" to "insane".
I think the opponents outnumber the proponents 10 to 1.
So when it was brought up that the gaming experienced matched the theory, I felt it made sense to pull the trigger.

Cheers
Martin

(PS, I think the undead will benefit from SG/BWB-fouling. Prior to CRP, they used to be a fouling side)

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

Hi Necro10c,
NTBB is intended for league play.
But the NTBB roster tweaks do have a slant towards short term play - and by extension tournament play.

Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

Interesting news: having previously been critizised for only discussing NTBB with Galak and Doubleskulls, I've recently reached out to the remaining BBRC members Babs and Geggster, and Babs has stated that he too approves of the CRP+ list. Geggster likes some things but not all, but is mainly worried about NTBB threatening the solid rules foundation that we're currently standing on. (I think Geggsters is overestimating the appeal of NTBB, but be that as it may).
Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
User avatar
Shteve0
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2479
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 10:15 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by Shteve0 »

Stay classy, San Diego

Reason: ''
League and tournament hosting, blogging and individual forums - all totally free. For the most immersive tabletop sports community experience around, check out theendzone.co
MattDakka
Super Star
Super Star
Posts: 835
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 4:36 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by MattDakka »

plasmoid wrote: Geggster likes some things but not all, but is mainly worried about NTBB threatening the solid rules foundation that we're currently standing on.
"Solid rules foundations that we're currently standing on?" :o
Is he aware of Clawpomb?

Reason: ''
Image
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by Darkson »

MattDakka wrote:"Solid rules foundations that we're currently standing on?" :o
Is he aware of Clawpomb?
Probably doesn't see it as a problem, like lots/many/most BB coaches.

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

I believe he meant solid as in 'general and widespread agreement' on what the rules are.

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

NTBB 2013 has been finalized, and is up on the site: http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
The pdf can be found here (as always): http://www.plasmoids.dk/NTBB2013.pdf

The changes are since 2012 are:
1. Bank rule changed and simplified: Any cash in treasury above 100K adds to TV. If this money is used as Petty Cash no further TV is added for it.
2. SG: Roll a d6 after each drive if the player has been sent off. He returns to play on a 4+. Injuries may prevent him from playing as normal.
3. Slann Team: Blitzer reduced to 100K.
4. Undead Team: Mummies lose access to G-skills.
5. Wood Elf Team: Wardancers become 8347, Dodge, Leap, Fend
6. Halfling Team: Rerolls back to 60K. Catchers cut to 0-4.
7. Gobbo Team: Rerolls back to 60K. Trolls back to 0-2, but lose Loner. The Secret Weapons gain SG for +10K each.

I've you've been following the development then please note that the SG+Babe combo has been disallowed at the last minute to "err on the side of caution".

Enjoy
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
Hitonagashi
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:11 pm

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by Hitonagashi »

Interesting Martin.

I think we'll still see them minmaxed heavily if those rules ever make it to FUMBBL...the linewomen are amazing now.

For example: 11 Linewomen, all with Block/Dodge/Sidestep + 2 rrs + 10 FF = 1100k.

Would you really want to meet that team at that TV?

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by garion »

plasmoid wrote:NTBB 2013 has been finalized, and is up on the site: http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
The pdf can be found here (as always): http://www.plasmoids.dk/NTBB2013.pdf

The changes are since 2012 are:
1. Bank rule changed and simplified: Any cash in treasury above 100K adds to TV. If this money is used as Petty Cash no further TV is added for it.
2. SG: Roll a d6 after each drive if the player has been sent off. He returns to play on a 4+. Injuries may prevent him from playing as normal.
3. Slann Team: Blitzer reduced to 100K.
4. Undead Team: Mummies lose access to G-skills.
5. Wood Elf Team: Wardancers become 8347, Dodge, Leap, Fend
6. Halfling Team: Rerolls back to 60K. Catchers cut to 0-4.
7. Gobbo Team: Rerolls back to 60K. Trolls back to 0-2, but lose Loner. The Secret Weapons gain SG for +10K each.

I've you've been following the development then please note that the SG+Babe combo has been disallowed at the last minute to "err on the side of caution".

Enjoy
Martin
you sent me this in an email, and I replied this below. Just sticking it here too ;)

1, I personally don't like bank rules, thought i would but now i have played them a lot i can say - it works fine in short leagues but it isn't needed then anyway really. In long perpetual leagues and open match maker environments it punishes teams with expensive players too much (like Ogres or Vamps), and also leads to dumping of cash which is stupid as it is so unrealistic and counter intuitive to every other rpg ever made. Absolutely no point in it. You should drop it in your next review. I cant help but get the feeling that this is only in because Galak and DS wanted it in CRP but got vetoed. It really brings nothing good to the game.

2, SG meh, not a fan of this really but its not offensive either so i could live with it. Still think SW roll and igeomy were far far better.

3, Yes, always should have been that price.

4, Yeah probably sensible, Undead are stupidly good at low to mid tv, even with the removal of MB that is probably still the case, though I'd rather they had just kept MB anyway really.

5, Hate the wood elf change. yeah WDs are good but I really don't like this change, a simple price increase to RRs would have been better imo. In Lrb4 one of the main things that kept Woodies in check (lack of journeymen aside) and made them pretty tough to use was that you had to start with a FF of 7 or more to be a competitive team. Without the need for FF you can get 2 Wds and catcher in a rookie roster. Increase the RR cost would make this impossible and balance the teams better with the other which i believe is your goal, why all the elves have 50k rrs is beyond me, Dark elves could do with 60k rrs for that matter too if you want to weaken the best tier 1 teams in the game.

6, flings, fair enough

7, yeah trolls should never have had loner anyway, agree there, but starting with SG on SW players is daft. it makes some of them as good or better than the star player SW guys which they should not be.

A far simpler buff to the SW guys is give the chainsaw Dodge as a starter skill, he should have it anyway.

Also agree with Hito, zons change doesnt address any of the problems with zons.

this is what i am currently using. It is Doubleskulls roster with a couple of tiny changes, like removing HMP for Strong Arm and Jump Up on the Catcher.

16 Linewoman 50 6337 Fend AG-PS
4 Catcher 80 8237 Jump Up, Dodge, Catch AG-PS
2 Thrower 70 6337 Sure Hands, Pass, Strong Arm AGP-S
4 Blitzer 90 7338 Wrestle GAS-P


Now I do understand you are trying to show restraint and change as little as possible, but zons just need a massive overhaul, there is nothing small you can do to their roster without their being huge flaws in their design. They need the norse and nurgle treatment. If you are going to make one big change this should be it, as zons are just soooo dull and their current design is so broken against some teams.

Reason: ''
plasmoid
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5334
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

Re: Thinking ahead: NTBB 2013

Post by plasmoid »

Hi Hito and Garion - thanks for contributing :D

Hitonagashi said:
I think we'll still see them minmaxed heavily if those rules ever make it to FUMBBL...the linewomen are amazing now.
You're probably right. But I think in order to prevent sweetspotting and minmaxing we'd have to do a monster overhaul of the TV-system. And that's not something I want to get into. Amazons are hardly the only team able to abuse the system as it stands.
For example: 11 Linewomen, all with Block/Dodge/Sidestep + 2 rrs + 10 FF = 1100k.
Would you really want to meet that team at that TV?
With a league team - no.
With my own hardcore minmaxed team - probably yeah.
Either way, I do believe that a large portion of the problem with minmaxing stems from TV-matching:
IMO there are 2 opposed incentives in team building: The incentive to stay lean/minmax (i.e. TV-efficiency) and the incentitive to grow (fear of running into big TV-overdogs). If you remove the latter, then all you have left is minmaxing.

@Garion:
You're not exactly a fan of these rules anyway, so I don't expect these latest changes to win you ever.

#1: I do think that the Bank serves a purpose, because the game uses cash (via SE) as the growth cap - and big treasuries allows teams to ignore that cap. So if removed it would have to be replaced with something else. You mention cash dumping, but at least with the new wording it makes it much easier to dump your excess cash into Petty Cash/inducements. As for the few expensive players I don't think playing a game at +1 or +2 TV is very harsh - but I also know that both Galak and Ian would be willing to set the Bank to 150K instead of 100K.
In my old league we had a different rule: For every full 50K in your treasury beyond the first, you suffer a -1 modifier to winnings. But the effect is similar.

#2: Fair enough. Given how upset you were about the SG/Babe combo, I thought this would be a good thing for you.

#5: With a team as expensive as wood elfs, I don't think that upping any prices is the answer.

#7: Duly noted, though personally I look forward to seeing how these changes pan out.
Also agree with Hito, zons change doesnt address any of the problems with zons.
Hmmm... I don't think that's what he said.

I know that the amazon team is seen by many as boring. But there is no way I'd do a big overhaul. I know you like your team, just like Shteve0 loves his, Ian loves his, and I don't know how many others love theirs. There's nothing to be gained from going there, IMO, unless working with some sort of authority that could cut away all the inevitable complaints.

Cheers
Martin

Reason: ''
Narrow Tier BB? http://www.plasmoids.dk/bbowl/NTBB.htm
Or just visit http://www.plasmoids.dk instead
Post Reply