Poll: spps for crowd and fouling cas: USE THIS POLL!!

[sean newboy]

Poison Dagger

[Grumbledook]

ok i'll make my point clearer they shouldn't get a spp for an action they use the secret weapon for.

ie no cas spp with a dagger, chainsaw etc
no comp spp with a blunderbus etc

[sean newboy]

Ok i was just making sure.

[Ghost of Pariah]

I don't know what a PD is either. lol


What I do know, Sean, is that you are describing close to what i wrote up. I lost it when I reformatted my drive but it's on here somewhere.

Basically what i said was that all the weapons work with a penalty roll that only ranges from 7+ to 10+ You could incorporate that into IGMEOY. Just say that a weapon that was previously 7+ is now 0 penalty. (Same as fouling...since that's basically what the dagger is) The 8+ weapons give the ref roll a +1, the 9+ (if there is any) make it +2 and the 10+ weapons make it +3. I think for Deathrollers, since they only roll when they foul and after the drive they should just continue that and count the eye being on them all the time. (IMO Dirty Players should have the eye count as always on them too!)
I also said that if an injury was caused by fouling (or secret weapon) it was an automatic ejection and no arguing could change it. This stops Dirty players and Dagger chumps from reaping 10 SPP's a game from casualties.

[Zombie]

I agree with Grumbledook. Don't give SPPs for weapon use and voila, problem solved.

[Ghost of Pariah]

Not really cuz like I said. A gutter runner with a poison dagger and the ability to gain SPP's (whether from cas or not) is able to become a vicious star killer. And he can do it all without any fear of leaving the pitch. In fact, even if the worst happens and his dagger is removed he can buy it right back! Mark my words this will be the next complaint we hear about. Daggers are restricted to only 2 or 3 teams and that gives them a nasty edge over other teams.

[Icedman]

My position on the issue is this icedman:

Before the rule changed, I was not happy with fouling, after the rule changed, I was happy with fouling. I think the current rules are great as they are, I still get teams brutally fouled and I still use fouls myself. They are in their right place.

Saying "well how about reducing the SPPs" is pointless because I still disagree that you should get _any_ SPPs for fouls. If you give any SPP award at all it encourages it as a valid league tactic. Saying "but people won't get many points so they won't do it" misses the point also - these players are already unaware that attrition fouling is not a match winning tactic so why should they suddenly see the light now?

Changing the penalties for fouling just loads up both sides of the rule. I don't think it needs that, I think fouls have a balanced place in the game as it is.

Personally, you're not going to convince me because of the dozens upon dozens of games I've played against these coaches. I am not exaggerating when I said that they are the reason I quit playing bloodbowl. I simply couldn't get an enjoyable game anymore.

Please don't suggest that I am not listening, it's rather insulting. I am adamant in my position because I have not seen anything that would suggest there is a valid reason for bringing back foul SPPs. The closest to a good argument I've seen is team development for line players like Zombies. Well, you could always try the EXP rule.

Have a good one.

Thank you for providing your view Marcus. I am sorry that you felt as though I was not listening to your side; I did not mean to sound insulting.

However, I find it somewhat insulting to be ignored or told my views are trivial, simply because I do not have 5 bold skulls to my name.

Despite my feelings, to answer your post with my view...

I have always seen fouling as a valid tactic within the game, whether SPPs are awarded for gaining CAS or not. While I have never personally seen fouling get out of hand to the degree you have described, I can understand the possibility for it to do so.

Like you, I also believe that fouling has reached an appropriate level in the LRB. It is because I believe that fouling has reached the appropriate level that I believe we can re-introduce SPPs for gaining casualties through fouling.

I have tested my view with my tabletop BB group, using LRB 2.0. We have replaced the LRB's Handicap system with the one from 3rd Ed. Deathzone (bonus MVPs, and using cards), which many have said would lead to an increase in the likelihood of CAS in fouling, and my group has not encountered a problem. If it were to be straight LRB (which we are considering using for our next league), the cards would not exist, hence their effects regarding fouling would likewise disappear.

It is for these reasons that I believe fouling could receive SPPs once again. I am adamant in my position as I have seen no evidence of fouling getting out of hand within the current LRB rules; in fact, you all agree that fouling is at an appropriate level.

Why should we come up with solutions? We're perfectly happy with the way things work now! You're the one who has to come up with something better if you want to replace the current system.

The "we" I was referring to is the TBB community, Zombie. And, as has been established, the TBB community as a whole (even as an overwhelming majority) are not happy with the way things work now. I do not wnat to replace the current system, as I believe the current system is enough to ensure fouling will remain in it's rightful place. Westleytj, Sixpack595, and others (at least as I understand their views) agree.

[Ghost of Pariah]

However, I find it somewhat insulting to be ignored or told my views are trivial, simply because I do not have 5 bold skulls to my name.

Nobody is doing that. I think you are being a little defensive. Nobody here puts any connection to the merit of a post with the number of skulls by your name.

Like you, I also believe that fouling has reached an appropriate level in the LRB. It is because I believe that fouling has reached the appropriate level that I believe we can re-introduce SPPs for gaining casualties through fouling.[

But don't you see that would increase the number of fouls to an innappropriate level?

I have tested my view with my tabletop BB group, using LRB 2.0. We have replaced the LRB's Handicap system with the one from 3rd Ed. Deathzone (bonus MVPs, and using cards), which many have said would lead to an increase in the likelihood of CAS in fouling, and my group has not encountered a problem. If it were to be straight LRB (which we are considering using for our next league), the cards would not exist, hence their effects regarding fouling would likewise disappear.

You need to make this data available to us in someway. Simply pointing out that it exists is not enough to make us change our minds. Would it be enough for you?

It is for these reasons that I believe fouling could receive SPPs once again. I am adamant in my position as I have seen no evidence of fouling getting out of hand within the current LRB rules; in fact, you all agree that fouling is at an appropriate level.

Yes. Right now it is at a good level...you want to change that. I don't see your point.

The "we" I was referring to is the TBB community, Zombie. And, as has been established, the TBB community as a whole (even as an overwhelming majority) are not happy with the way things work now.

I think this is incorrect. I can't come up with anyone who is not satisfied with the LRB. Who are you talking about? Not this board.

I do not wnat to replace the current system, as I believe the current system is enough to ensure fouling will remain in it's rightful place. Westleytj, Sixpack595, and others (at least as I understand their views) agree.

If you don't want to replace the system or increase the number of fouls per game then why do you think that increasing the reward on fouling won't change things? You don't have a strong enough argument to simply say, "I have proof" and not show us. Most of us who are opposing you have been around this game for a very long time and know a thing or two about how things are going to work. If you want to see our prooof just ask the BBRC to show you playtest data. I'm sure you'll get plenty of info. We would like to see your proof that fouling will not increase.

[Icedman]

Nobody is doing that. I think you are being a little defensive. Nobody here puts any connection to the merit of a post with the number of skulls by your name.

At times, I have felt that some were doing just this; Mirascael earlier referred to "the TBB elite", and implicit in that inference was the concept that there are levels of respect. Now, what they are based on, I'm not sure; I'm just letting you know the feeling I get at times.

But don't you see that would increase the number of fouls to an innappropriate level?

Yes. Right now it is at a good level...you want to change that. I don't see your point.

I can see that it might increase the level of fouling to "innappropriate" levels, what I want to know is whether it will. The data I hope to post soon does not reflect the concept that fouling has approached "innappropriate levels". I am asking whether others have/would like to test, and discover such things themselves. As many have said, I'm apparently not the most foul-happy of coaches; perhaps some of the foul-happy coaches would like to try awarding SPPs to find out whether fouling would go too far.

You need to make this data available to us in someway. Simply pointing out that it exists is not enough to make us change our minds. Would it be enough for you?

I intend to do this; I must first find some webspace, and then input the team rosters into some form of HTML (I may be able to do this later tonight, or on the weekend; I've been waiting till the league was over, but it seems that may take too long)

I think this is incorrect. I can't come up with anyone who is not satisfied with the LRB. Who are you talking about? Not this board.

I cannot find such a person either; however, I can find many who do not like some aspect of the current or intended LRB rules (are you, for example, 100% ready and willing to toss aside Aging for EXP? All posts I have seen from you regarding this topic lead me to believe not).

Most of us who are opposing you have been around this game for a very long time and know a thing or two about how things are going to work.

This, Pariah, is exactly what I mean when I refer to "elitism" within the board. I have "been around" the game for some time (since the release of 3rd Ed in Australia, in fact), but I have not "been around" online. Does this mean that my voice should count for less, simply because I did not feel comfortable posting to forums and playing BB online?

[Indigo]

I'll be damned if I'm reading through 8 pages of arguments

Anyway - in the instances of a "Defender down" going into the crowd, why not give the attacking coach the option of trying to break armour, the roll for an injury to gain SPPs, or roll for crowd damage?

If the 1st option is taken, and armour isn't broken then the player goes into the stunned box as normal. If they DO break armour, resolve the injury and award SPPs if necessary.

I also toyed with the idea of forcing a follow up, to represent the player trying to do some damage before the crowd got their hands on his opponent.

[Mirascael]

Nobody is doing that. I think you are being a little defensive. Nobody here puts any connection to the merit of a post with the number of skulls by your name.

At times, I have felt that some were doing just this; Mirascael earlier referred to "the TBB elite", and implicit in that inference was the concept that there are levels of respect. Now, what they are based on, I'm not sure; I'm just letting you know the feeling I get at times.

Icedman, first of all: I do most certainly not belong to the 'elite' of tbb. Nevertheless, and this has absolutely nothing to do with any skull-numbers, there are some players on this site who continually produce exceptional high-standard postings. I have read this whole thread thoroughly, and forgive me for being blunt, but: Actually there is a very large discrepancy between the two factions on this subject as far as fas as the quality of arguments is concerned. It is obviously not a coincidence that the 'elite', as I put it casually, unaminously rejects your proposal so firmly, and they provide very good reasons for that.

The frenetic desire for those SPPs appears highly suspicious to me. I apologize if I'm doing somebody wrong, but the only logical explanation for this crusade I can think of is, that the true motive behind this campaign actually is to earn those cheap and easy SPPs again, I assume some people want to exploit the former ruling again.

I actually happen to play in a league, where these SPPs are still awarded (to my profit and to my regret), and I really try hard, not to exploit this rule too much, just out of sympathy for my opponents. My DPs amass lots of SPPs and casualities though I even try not to exaggerate it. And in this league a Sent-Off means that you have a 50% chance of missing the next game. If this is already the situation when a player consciously pulls himself together, then what - I ask you - can happen if a not that social-minded coach deliberately exploits this ruling? You blame coaches for using rules that further their team's progress? No, not those coaches, those rules are lame.

And with regard to that useless last-turn-completion:
Did you ever hear of a last-turn-completion which spoiled all the fun for the opposing coach after an exciting match? I don't think so. But loosing players to base senseless last-turn fouls can screw players up completely. The argument that fouls should grant SPPs since last turn completions can give one meager SPP is so unbelievably lame that I really wonder how anyone could seriously post that.

This must-have-spp-for-fouls zeal seems to make blind for valid arguments. The spp-supporters appear very much preoccupied to me, they compulsively try to prove something that simply is not true.

I think that 50% rejection of the former rule is actually a significant number, since humans are conservative by nature and don't like changes too much, especially if those changes mean that their dirty players can no longer harvest SPPs as easily as they used to do.

Just hypothetically: Had an analoguous proposal had been posted regarding RRs on armour and injuries shortly after those were disallowed, more than 50% would have favoured the former rule, I guess. So 50% rejection of Foul-Spps is actually very much here IMHO, even more so if you consider who belongs to that particular faction.

Again: If fouling has never been a problem in your group but in many others: Where is your problem? If you didn't get a significant amount of SPPs then why do you miss them so much? And if it has caused such problems in other groups, why don't you just make a house rule for your own league instead of trying to force that rule upon other leagues where those SPPs had caused such problems? I see players leave our league due excessive slaughter regularily, but, regrettably, my commish just won't listen.

[Grumbledook]

Pariah secret weaps are only going to be available to linepersons so no probs with a gutter runner with a dagger.

I also believe Jervis said that players being pushed into the crowd was going to stay as it is, so if you want to take the chance and roll for armour instead of an inj, just for the chance of 2 spp, you will have to house rule it.

[wesleytj]

Not really cuz like I said. A gutter runner with a poison dagger and the ability to gain SPP's (whether from cas or not) is able to become a vicious star killer. And he can do it all without any fear of leaving the pitch. In fact, even if the worst happens and his dagger is removed he can buy it right back! Mark my words this will be the next complaint we hear about. Daggers are restricted to only 2 or 3 teams and that gives them a nasty edge over other teams.

hehehe nasty edge....hehehe....

bah simple answer to that...ban the lame ass weapons. only goblins can have them since they suck anyway, and no more than 2 at a time. solved.

[wesleytj]

What I really do not understand:
If, as Foul-SPP-supporters declare, fouling has not been that problem in their leagues and the awarded SPPs have been neglectable, then why do they fight for their reintroduction so fiercly, especially if that rule caused such severe problems in other leagues? I see a large credibility gap with regard to their desire.
And, as far as I can see, Foul-SPP-opponents cover almost the entire elite of this board, and their arguments actually are significantly more convincing than those from the SPP-supporters.
BTW: One question to the SPP-faction:
Do you really think, that the current ruling has caused a deterioration of Blood Bowl? If so, it would be beyond me.

yes, i defend it fiercely and i'm not even a big fouler...the problem, as i've said AT LEAST 10 times, is one of player balance. how is a black orc supposed to get skills? zombies? longbeards? They aren't going to be scoring or throwing passes. meanwhile elf teams, where everybody is ag4, can get skills all around. they have a more balanced team after not too many games.

when the black orcs could get a few extra spp here and there by dropping fouls in that was less of a problem.

[wesleytj]

In case anyone's interested, the poll currently says regarding SPPs for fouling:

41 NO (60%)
27 YES (40%)

So i guess the verdict is clear!

60-40 is hardly clear...actually to me it's evidence that there's a lot of people who aren't happy with the current rule. what you want is more of a consensus, so that the poll is a lot more lopsided, or better yet, there's no need for the poll in the first place because there's no argument.

incidentally, the way i read the poll is that less than half the people are happy with the current situation regarding casualties and spps... clearly some sort of change is desirable.