Vampires

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 3:55 pm

Pariah wrote:I can see both sides of the coin here. I'd say in a scheduled league it's definitely not fair

Why? We have closed schedules here and don't see any problem with it. You're shooting yourself in the foot enough as it is by starting the race back at zero points when the other teams have already collected some.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:00 pm

Because in a scheduled league your win/loss record stays with you. It's not fair to keep the 2-0 status when you had 3 bliters die to get those wins. In an open format your whole organization is reset, not just your players. In a scheduled league it's not uncommon for the first season finalists to have a TR or 120-130. A team could make it to the finals, suffer a death or two in the semi finals and simply reset and go into the finals with a fresh team. That is lame. The 100 TR team is not the one who made it to the final match.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:39 pm

wesleytj wrote:hehehe can you tell yet that nobody plays vamp teams around here?

After all this, that's all you've gotta say for yourself? Not even an apology?

Galak was right, it was very bad mannered of you.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:45 pm

Pariah wrote:Because in a scheduled league your win/loss record stays with you. It's not fair to keep the 2-0 status when you had 3 bliters die to get those wins. In an open format your whole organization is reset, not just your players. In a scheduled league it's not uncommon for the first season finalists to have a TR or 120-130. A team could make it to the finals, suffer a death or two in the semi finals and simply reset and go into the finals with a fresh team. That is lame. The 100 TR team is not the one who made it to the final match.

When you restart, the new team has a 0-0 record. It's not the same team anymore! Like i said, you've got fewer games to play total, and no points collected, while others have already won a game or two. Plus, you're starting without any SPPs. Really, you're at a big disadvantage when you do that.

MickeX · Post by **MickeX** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:05 pm

Cervidal wrote:It seems like there is a real hang up, though, when it comes to giving up that Vampire Lord.

I'll hang up any day on that one

Remove some of the other vampires instead. Who wants OFAB/COFAB vampires anyway? (Says the guy who right from the start has advocated a vampire roster with only one vampire and thralls...)

To me, the import fluff is a) vampires are superbeings, b) vampire teams suck. While OFAB is plain boring, COFAB simply doesn't fit into any description of vampires I've seen. Vampires lust for blood just isn't that sudden and uncontrollable - these are impressive types, not clowns.

And I'm generally against teams whose tactics all revolve around a special rule. I draw the line at Amazons and Norse.

Micke

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 9:07 am

That isn't a truly a scheduled league then. What would stop a coach from playing a halfling team for 3 games, getting beat down and then flipping to a chaos team mid-season. That should not be possible in a scheduled league.

I think you aren't thinking of the same league I am. I consider a league on a schedule as a league where everyone plays a certain number of games in a certain amount of time. There are usually rules about playing each team in the league etc. If you are able to change your team at any time then you have broken those rules and that is what I would call an open format. If the league rules state that each team must play every other team twice, and you retire your halflings for a chaos team halfway through the season, then your chaos team hasn't played every team twice. The last few teams have not played a crippled a halfling team like the rules say they should...hence my comment that is unfair.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 4:29 pm

We have a closed schedule league exactly lke you describe, and we allow for restarting teams. Nobody has found it unfair and it's been going on for years.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 10:53 pm

Zombie wrote:
wesleytj wrote:hehehe can you tell yet that nobody plays vamp teams around here?
After all this, that's all you've gotta say for yourself? Not even an apology?

Galak was right, it was very bad mannered of you.

yah man everybody knows you're the master of manners around here.

i apologize, miss etiquette!

boy, i've just been pissing off EVERYONE this week.

Joshua Dyal · Post by **Joshua Dyal** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 3:03 pm

I have a big hang-up about the vamp team that has nothing to do with the rules whatsoever. Maybe it's a bit complicated to explain, though...

First off, what's wrong with the old undead team? I suppose the old undead team kinda matched the 5th (or was it 6th) edition of WHFB undead, but under the newer incarnations of WHFB there isn't an undead army anymore per se. This isn't necessarily a problem, after all, WHFB and BB aren't the same game and don't have to match up perfectly.

However, BB has already created a Khemri team, nominally based on the fact that WHFB did the same thing. Ergo, following that same logic, there should also be a Vampire Counts team that matches the Vampire Counts army to some extent. The Vamp team with lesser vamps and thralls does not do that. So we've got Khemri that are based on WHFB and Vampires that are not. What the heck? Can't they get the logic right behind that?

It seems to me that the Vampire team with thralls is just a relic of of the old 3e house edition days that has been ported and given a semi-official stamp of approval when what was really needed was an entire re-write of the team.

I'd have preferred they do one of the following: 1) keep Undead as they were, we don't need to keep up with WHFB, or 2) write both Khemri and Vampire Counts teams to replace Undead, but where both of them match the WHFB armies more.

What they've done now is halfway, and completely unsatisfactory.

So, what I'd really have preferred to see (assuming for a minute that leaving Undead alone and as is isn't what is being done) is a Khemri team with a little more variety (that throw-ra and blitz-ra stuff is pretty inane and insipid, IMO -- I have no interest in playing anything like that. Maybe it needs more troop types -- a bone giant or ushabti big guy, or something?) and a vampire counts team that maybe replaces the mummies with lesser vampires (who needs a lord anyway?) or something like that.

Anyway, those ideas are just off the top of my head, but they seem to match the army books much better. If the goal isn't to match the army books, then I don't see the point in doing either team; just leave Undead the way they are and have done with it.

Post by **Dave** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 3:18 pm

JJ has said he will stop following the army books with the teams.

Joshua Dyal · Post by **Joshua Dyal** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 3:29 pm

Yeah, so what was the point of the Khemri team at all, then? It's not an interesting team -- the only reason to create it at all was to match the army books.

I know he's said that, but I don't see any evidence of it anywhere.

Post by **Dave** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 5:05 pm

JJ said it at the recent BB.

Khemri is little older.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 9:42 pm

So then he is not going to erase the Undead team? That hasn't happened yet but I suspect it still will.

I'm sure when it does happen anyone who asks why, or brings up JJ's statement at BB, will be labeled an unappreciative instigator and get no answer.

Post by **Dave** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 10:30 pm

I wasnt' there, just picked this up on this site. I guess he was talking about future changes.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Sat Mar 22, 2003 12:13 am

I like the Vampire suggestions on this thread, I was looking at the team list recently and the Vampire Lord was the thing I least liked.

It is basically incongruous with the way the rest of Blood Bowl works:

- He is the only position on a team (except for kickers and big guy allies) where only one player is available.

- I dislike the concept of one special player who is automatically replaced by another team member on his death.

- If I had a well developed vamp on my team and my (inexperienced) Lord dies my team may well improve as the new Lord has better skills than the old one did.

- If I run a WE team and a Wardancer dies I have to buy a new one not just replace a promoted lineman, why should the vamps be any different.

I have no play experience of the team so cannot comment about the balance of his stats but from looking at the team the Lord is the thing that most puts me off of the Roster as a whole, to me it just feels wrong.