I think Blood Bowl is broken in a number of aspects...

[Jerhod]

I don't think that an aging system should be tied to SPP's. Just because player A scores more TD's than player B he/she shouldn't age faster than player B with the same number of games.

I've been thinking about this one...

Me, thought provoking? I'm flattered!

A team's power is based on SPP's for the most part, therefore it makes sense tying aging to these.

If aging is instead tied to arbitrary values (eg. no of games played) then we run the risk of players aging who have gained very few if any skills.

Seeing as a major moan of aging is the 1st skill aging failure this seems like it would not be popular.

I agree that aging is intended to be a counter balance to SPP's, a check against any one team maxing out a roster of 16 players who all have as many skills as they can possibly get. If the intention of aging is to be a safeguard against too much power in any one team or player, then it definitely makes sense to tie aging to SPP's. I agree with you there.

I also agree with your second statement, that connecting aging to games played (or anyother arbitrary value) would result in some players aging without having any skills. Aging players without skills isn't a very big check against power accumulation.

However, I do contest your last point, that given people's current feelings of aging a player with one skill this implies that people would be unhappy with aging a player without any skills. On one level you're completely correct: if the complaint is that weak players age too often then my system will definitely cause an upset in that weak players age. On another level, though, it's not the same. My complaint against aging is that it doesn't act like aging! Age doesn't discriminate between good Blood Bowl players and bad ones. (Well, I guess that the bad ones die faster and don't get the chance to age, but that's different. ) I expect games to take liberties with how the world works, but this is a bit too much for me.

Also, I think that aging against the number of games a player has been in would be a better check against power. Coaches would know that, eventually, all of their players are going to be retired. In the current aging system this isn't the case - if you get all your skills without aging you're in the clear forever. In a system with aging tied to games played all players would be continuously aging and, eventually, luck would catch up with everyone. This would keep coaches continuously hiring new players to stagger the rate of retirement. Since higher powered teams get less money it's harder for them to cycle in new players, meaning that when their high powered players eventually succumb to old age they won't be as prepared for it.

I'm not saying that this would be the best system, but I think that it would appeal to the critics of the realism of the aging system (like me) and players who feel that rookies getting aged after their first two games is bad.

Best,
-Jerhod-

[Grumbledook]

well i did come up with a system that i think covered all the bases

[wesleytj]

i haven't been following this thread at all, and i haven't read thru much of the responses thus far, but I may say I agree with a LOT of what toby is saying. I'll post a more thorough reply shortly...lot going on right now and I'd like to catch up on the rest of the board first.

[Darkson]

i haven't been following this thread at all, and i haven't read thru much of the responses thus far, but I may say I agree with a LOT of what toby is saying. I'll post a more thorough reply shortly...lot going on right now and I'd like to catch up on the rest of the board first.

Please, dont encourage him.

[Dafrenchcoach is Back !]

Back on a Galak's suggestion...

I'm not sure I'd like a trait named "toughness", if it would be a strength trait... I'd rather like it as a general trait... Unless skavens, which are one of the teams which should use it, would loose something (think about my gutter runners )

[Grumbledook]

yer deffo gen trait over str trait

[wesleytj]

1. Ageing
Let me first say I absoulutely support the Idea of players developing in a career-curve, that takes them up, reaches a ceiling and then starts to drop.
However linking the handicap aspect to the positive action of collecting starplayer points is a huge fun spoiler and must be changed asap.

I agree...I'm toying with taking ageing out of our league completely, and have been BEGGED to do so by many of the coaches anyway. We also have another who refuses to play unless I do, a coach who used to play a lot under other league rules.

2. Casualties
Fouling needs to earn SPP and so does pushed into the crowd casualties. Blocking players need these starplayer points. If coaches are supposed to retire players from time to time, then there must be enough starplayer points to collect even for non scoring players and teams.

We're outnumbered bad on this one...but I agree with you there too.

3. Apothecary
They should be allowed at any time to bring back any player from the dead and injured box. Including Niggling Injury missing players. It should be a tactical choice what player to bring back, not a poker game.

I disagree. It IS a strategy decision as is. Should I use it to save this catcher in turn 2, or should I save it for a more important player and possibly waste it when nobody else dies? Should I use it on this BH'd guy, because I need him for this game? Etc etc Don't take that away.

3. Handicap Table
Right now ther is absolutely no reason to play powerful opponents with a weaker team. On the contrary your team is likely to be irradiated. This is a major, major flaw of LRB.

I think the handicap table needs re-worked too, but I think you're overstating the case a bit. It's a known issue and being worked on already, no need to get fanatical about it.

4. Magic Helmet.
Spikes needs to be renamed to "Magic Helmet" and made a General Trait. There must be a way to improve AV7 Linemen. Else we will be stuck in the current situation of Agility Teams avoiding Strength teams at all cost.

I don't think it is "needed" but I would support it. I think it'd be nice. I also don't see the problem of ag teams avoiding st teams especially. must be different in your league.

5. Bashing Teams.
All Agility Teams especially Wood Elves need to be significantly cheaper.

disagree completely, and I play wood elves. they are among the best teams in the game. if you can't handle their frailty play another team.

6. Money.
There needs to be more money in the game to replace players. this goes with the "Agility Teams do not Play Bashing Teams Argumentation". More money and more starplayer points, and on the other hand, more retired players due to injuries and ageing.

I think there needs to be SOME more money but not that much. I think doing away with the 1/6 ff rule would be a good start. I also think that you should always at least get 0K from playing a game, after all mods, and the +10k for winning should always be AFTER that. That way you never lose money for playing, and you always get at least 10k if you win. There are too few in-game rewards for winning anyway, esp with the 1/6 ff rule.

I like what the lrb winnings table was going for, I just think they went a LITTLE too far with it. Small tweaks like that would fix it right up.

7. Fouling.
I get sick when i read topics on fumble that go like "fouling is unsportsmanlike" or "i play to have fun not to damage my opponent". U whiners go play chess. It's blood bowl, and chaos teams should win BECAUSE they can level the playing field LITERALY. Nobody wants a dead player on any foul, but that has been adressed verry well with the skill rules and the casualty roll. I say: get rid of "got my eye on you", and make players being sent of on a 5 or 6. That allows you 3 fouls before your dirty player is banned in average.

You're preaching to the choir on that one pal...up to the last bit. I think leave the rules alone except bringing back the spps for fouling and letting all the skills work for it again. That's plenty. I like the IGMEOY feature that actually rewards you for not retaliating in a foulwar. Adds a level of strategy that wasn't there before.

8. Big Guy.
I simply do not like the "no team reroll thing". This takes the decision to use or not to use a reroll away from the coaches and thus reduces tactic which is a bad thing. In my oppinion Big Guy Players should use team rerolls, and use them a lot. They should suck up all of your team rerolls! That should be the handicap. Rerolls wasted for Bone Head, Always Hungry, Take Root, Of for a Bite. (refering to possibly new versions)..

I don't really have an opinion on this either way...I think leaving it as is is fine.

9. Big Guy Balance.
Then make them ST4. Instead of first designing them to be intentionally to powerful and then trying to make them crap by force, soften them basically. )..

That's lame...I can't buy into the idea that a black orc is the same ST as an ogre, or about 10 other examples. They're BIG guys, they should be BIG and STRONG.

The Neg-traits have been revised more times than I care to count, and are still being changed relatively often. It will eventually be ironed out. In the meantime, we're all just along for the ride.

10. The Cards.
They were fun. There need to be new cards, and fewer cards, but cards. Random Events should be there, Dirty Tricks could be purcased much the same way as Team Rerolls, at double their cost. Magic Items should be part of the "new secret weapons system".)

I've said several times before that a LIMITED re-introduction of cards would be cool...I like Galak's ideas about tying them into wizard purchase and asstcoach/cheerleader usage. I also like just the idea of condensing all the cards into a single deck of about 30, and giving each coach 1 before every game. They didn't work as a handicap tool, but I think in that limited degree they could make a positive impact on gameplay.

11. New Secret Weapons.
The poisioned dagger has the potential of being way to powerful."

I wish they'd throw them all out, or at least keep them 'experimental', meaning I don't have to use them. the gobbo star players is all the secret weapons i wanna see in bb.

12. Starplayers.
There should be new Starplayers that are based on LRB, with racial characteristics and without secret weapons.

Why? Nobody takes the ones that do exist now! I know your ideas for stars that can improve but they don't appeal to me either, I'd rather make my own players.

Finally let me say that the on pitch LRB blood bowl rules are absolutely great. As long as teams of hardly the same rating play, its way more fun to play than 3rd has ever been. However the fact that it is impossible to play a TR 100 Wood Elf team against a TR150 dwarf team needs to be adressed.

Well, as I said, they're working on a better handicap table. Also I don't entirely agree with you. A tr150 dwarf team should beat a tr 100 elf team, but I don't think it has to be as bad as you are making it out to be.

Most people I have been talking to recently dislike LRB. However if you query more it turns out that almost no one plays pure LRB. Most use a LRB/3rd House Rule mix. This proves my point that there are some aspects from 3rd that got lost along the way to LRB, and should be re-introduced in the future. Thanks for reading.

Ours does. I took the parts of LRB I liked (which was a LOT), and tossed the stuff I didn't (which was some)

btw Diving Catch and Hail Marry worked fantastic, won both of my games tonight.

weirdo. your opponents must be suckers...or you're just lucky. i never use it and i've never seen anybody but rookies do it, and they quickly learn what a crapshoot it is, and toss it too.

[Dave]

I read through most of the posts and don't think I agree with much.

Take ageing. I can see (and have seen) the pain that is caused by your star player / one turner / master blocker / best blitzer getting a nig or -1 St or whatever.

As grumble wrote (I think) the quality of a team sits / comes out of it's SPP's. These give skills to players that use the skills to make the team better (at least they should)

I feel thge Exp system as much more natural but it will hurt all teams equal, and not just the teams that are hurt by ageing now.

Ageing works quite well (though I don't like it when it happens to me) for what it was meant to do. Keep it that way.

I do agree on the HAndicap table though, that one sucks these days

[Darkson]

6. Money.
There needs to be more money in the game to replace players. this goes with the "Agility Teams do not Play Bashing Teams Argumentation". More money and more starplayer points, and on the other hand, more retired players due to injuries and ageing.

I think there needs to be SOME more money but not that much. I think doing away with the 1/6 ff rule would be a good start. I also think that you should always at least get 0K from playing a game, after all mods, and the +10k for winning should always be AFTER that. That way you never lose money for playing, and you always get at least 10k if you win. There are too few in-game rewards for winning anyway, esp with the 1/6 ff rule.

I like what the lrb winnings table was going for, I just think they went a LITTLE too far with it. Small tweaks like that would fix it right up.

You can't lose money for playing.

POST MATCH SEQUENCE
The table includes negative modifiers that will reduce
the dice roll. Treat modified scores of less than 0 as 0
(ie, the team gets no money at all, but doesn’t have to
pay out any money from the treasury).

[Dave]

and another thing. If yo give SPP\s for crowd cas. Why not give them for passes onto the crowd?

[Artificial Penguin]

Make Elf teams cheaper???

Is this a joke?

Their price and lower armor is what keeps them in check...they do not need to be any cheaper.

[Sixpack595]

Wes has it about right by me.

The Magic Helmet issue is a tough call. I was thinking it should be:

Thick Skinned: The player loses 1 point of agility and 1 point of movement because of the constant beatings they recieve.... but because they have gotten tougher they gain 1 point of armor.

IIRC you may only take a skill once.

4. Magic Helmet.
Spikes needs to be renamed to "Magic Helmet" and made a General Trait. There must be a way to improve AV7 Linemen. Else we will be stuck in the current situation of Agility Teams avoiding Strength teams at all cost.

I don't think it is "needed" but I would support it. I think it'd be nice. I also don't see the problem of ag teams avoiding st teams especially. must be different in your league.

As for SPPs for pushing them into the crowd, we used to allow you to chose after the block if you or the crowd took over. You slam them down on the sidelines...roll armor etc. or push them into the actual crowd...roll injury. SPPs if youy hurt them, nothing for the crowd.

[Relborn]

I think it would be more fitting if Toughness would give an bonus on the injury roll and not to the armour roll (like -1 on every injury roll).

The rest seems okay to me (I think strength trait would be more fitting, otherwise we see too many elves with this trait)

[Sixpack595]

Agreed, but there is a history of increasing AV. I'm all for it beeing a Str trait, or better allowing the choice of Str or AV on boxcars.

I think it would be more fitting if Toughness would give an bonus on the injury roll and not to the armour roll (like -1 on every injury roll).

The rest seems okay to me (I think strength trait would be more fitting, otherwise we see too many elves with this trait)

[Dave]

sorry but I am very against...

This will also be taken by Strenght based teams.... AV10 Black Orcs anyone ???

I'd really hate those.