Well, Hello! first of all...

Sputnik · Post by **Sputnik** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 7:33 am

Hi everybody!

I am also new to this forum (as an active participant

) and will try to shape up fighting the technical problems here-no picture yet, always more then ten fingers while writing, hopefully remembering my password tomorrow after a long night...

Enough of that. Now to Toby's topic which made me joining after all.

Toby: What I don't understand is your problem of generalisation- one rule package for everybody. I think we all know the problem of different versions like experimental rules, changes like from the third to the fourth edition etc...and BB is very dynamic lately with respect to the rules.

Now, if you start a league, you agree to certain rules which form a basis. Any "official" changes occuring after that agreement can be ignored or used. And I am sure some of the coaches will like the changes (cool, DE can have four blitzers now

) and others will try to stop them being "official" for the league (just my personal idea born in my mind: ally changes, no more whatever in your team, so please ask your player to take the next door to the right leading to back door...

). The result will be discussions, coaches leaving the league, others joining...

And here we are with the "house rules" for the ones who decide that their league should go without some changes or want to have some special additions. And as long as everybody agrees I see no reason why there should be "one rule package for all" (but maybe there is one ring to RULE them all. Official GW people please comment

).

So IMO there will always be some home-grown leagues here and there, unofficial teams and major changes. And this is pretty the same situation we have now.

How will you change this in your computer-leage? Respond to every new rule? Give them a "test" try? Make a poll? Only take official rules?

By the way, Toby: Do you also play board-games (league), or are just interested in an internet-based league??

So long for this time, now I try to get all my fingers sorted out after this reply (and I will think about an new keyboard for sure)

Sputnik

Acerak · Post by **Acerak** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:04 pm

ps. You have to keep one thing in mind: as soon as the game is an Online Game, Official rules are for EVERYBODY, there would be no more possibility to use or create "House" Rules, that cover things that are unclear or missing.

And what a sad world that would be. House rules allow the game to grow as the players want it to grow. They're a plus, not a minus.

I think what you're looking for on the application side has already been done by Ronald Lokers and Tom Anders.

-Chet

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:38 pm

When 10.000 People are going to play, purchase the PC Game Box, connect to the Internet, create a Team and participate in a ladder system (open league) there would not be the POSSIBILITY of including House Rules of any Kind.

of course, you can still setup and run your own clan server that features new teams or skills for example.

Same goes with an Big Blood Bowl Tournament, rules have to be "official" and agreed by every one starting in the tournament. Live Events of course have the Bonus of the Possibility to have an "referee" who can help solve rule disputes and speed up the time table of the Tournament.

Again to make it Clear using an Example:
Playing Counterstrike is not Possible with some folks using Beta 1.0, some Official 1.4 and some others beta 1.5 Patch.

I hope i made that point understandable now, since this is a matter of FACT and not subject to Discussion. (no offence!)

Altering the Rules on a Internet Server is commonly known as "Cheating" if you know what i mean

Acerak · Post by **Acerak** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:46 pm

Toby -

This seems like a rather ambitious project. Do you have a squad of other people helping you? Have you contacted Games Workshop to talk to them about this? Do you know whether they already have a contract in place to produce such a game? It sounds great, but if you don't have these ducks in a row, you're probably wasting your time.

Good luck.

-Chet

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 1:49 pm

@ Sputnik

Where in GER are you from ?
I do not play Pen & Paper RPGs or Board Games because i do not know enough peoble who share the Hobby.

Blood Bowl used to be really big here in 95 until 97 but then Games Workshop quit supporting Blood Bowl and the small Gaming Community here fell apart. By the time the Internet grew bigger and bigger i startet to play Starcraft competitively and began to dream about Blood Bowl Internet Play. With the recent developments on Fanatics and Games Workshop side, and the Existanxe of this Board i feel i thould try to bring my ideas on paper somehow. thats it.

I have no intention to start probramming or something. What i care about is Game Design.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 2:16 pm

If you have to pick one rule base, that's easy you go with Vanilla BB2k1 rules like are used by MBBL league at http://www.midgardbb.com . Basically the LRB are the rules.

Regarding the Goblins: I think its stupid to waste cool features on a team that is not competitive and therefore not playable. I know what you mean with the fun aspect, but i can asure you no one would choose halflings to compete in a league.

Toby ... I think you are mistaken in your belief about stunty play. This link is for the team that I am currently playing to compete in the league that I play:
http://www.midgardbb.com/MBBL/Season1/IronChefs.html
"no one would choose halflings to compete in a league" ... another example from the MBBL2 league:
http://www.midgardbb.com/MBBL2/Season2/ ... arger.html
and from the PBeMBBL league:
http://www.mycgiserver.com/~VikingCGI/p ... rkings.htm

Three leagues, three halfling teams.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also I agree with Neominal. Your project does sound a lot like mixing the upcoming NAF organization with SkiJunkie's Java Client which only uses one rules base ... and for a sit-down and play client ... SkiJunkie's program is slick!

As for inability to allow house rules, well that's pretty far from the real. It all depends on what you want from the program. SkiJunkie's program is one rules base. But the PBeM tool is so flexible that it can handle the MBBL (LRB rules only), the PBeMBBL (3rd edition rules with Compendium/Citadel Journal extras), and the MBBL2 (LRB with 76 allowed different BB teams, On-pitch spellcasters, and over 20 new skills). By handle I mean, you set up the rules base and it adapts to the game you wish to play. So it all depends on how you want to write the program.

As for your final point, team management. There are no official rules for this agreed and I'm not sure if there should be. Online leagues that allowed player trading would quickly spiral into the abyss. It would not be difficult for me to play 5 Orc teams under 5 different accounts and then trade the players after several matches so that I have one team that has all players who have avoided aging and niggles and have multiple skills. My TR will suddenly soar ... fine by me ... unless the handicap rolls get me, I'm going to level someone. Also trading players is not like trading items. I don't think I'd ever trade a player for someone else's player as I take a lot of joy in building my team, having someone's work on my roster would annoy me ... I could be only on this one, but I don't think so as a lot of the argument against aging was ... "OH NO!, my Star xxx that I've been building for 2 seasons just got -1 ST ... you've destroyed my baby!!!!

"

Basically I think you underestimate some of the tools already out there or on the way. The NAF is going to be creating a database of coaches. SkiJunkie's program has a great way to allow sit down games and the PBeM tool allows for people with only 10 minute allowances to play the game as well. And we aren't talking little scope here. Look at the 2 largest PBeM leagues: the PBeMBBL (50 teams, 24 coaches, 10 countries) and the MBBL2 (80 teams, 50 coaches, 14 countries) ... those are pretty decent numbers for creatig a community. If you want to go IRC, the OLBBL is massive.

Your idea of software that would allow a coach's room and then a playing field is interesting, but I think you are starting with some wrong ideas about things that are broken/unbalanced in a game that's been fine tuned since 1986.

Galak

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 2:21 pm

Several posts occurred while I was typing.

I agree that for any giving tournament or league the rules must be set up front and in stone ... I agree that this is FACT not debate.

I guess my next question is given the size of the OLBBL isn't that pretty close to what you are talking about already and they use IRC.

Galak

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 3:56 pm

Toby, I think I've understood what you'd like to do... In fact, it's more a game aslike Championship Manager when played online, I guess... with transfers, etc... I can't say if the actual softwares make this job.

A remark: I'm not sure, but it seems you want to use Gold Edition Rules (in Blood Bowl Magazine)... Maybe I've misunderstood what you want to say... If I've undestood weel, it's a big mistake. 4th Gold Edition Rules are not available now.

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 4:08 pm

French Coach, my Game would have 2 equally important Parts, Yes.
Playing the Game and Managing the Team. Playing is taktics, managing long time strategy.

I build on the "Living Rulebook 1.1", but there are nice ideas in "Gold Edition" (Barbarian, Unicorn, Starting Reroll) and "A League Of Their Own" (Sponsoring, Starplayers)

Anthony_TBBF · Post by **Anthony_TBBF** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 4:18 pm

I actually started a Championship Manager BB game a couple of months ago but haven't had much time to work on it. One of these days I'll get back to it..!

DaFrenchCoach · Post by **DaFrenchCoach** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 4:22 pm

Toby,

I should understand there are some good ideas on 4th edition... But the points you mentioned would break the new balance, especially sponsoring... In the 2K1 Rules set, I'm sure you would have understood hiring a starplayer is hard for all the matches... What about this if you have more money ? Lack of money is to my mind a very good thing in 2K1 rules set...

I don't want to discourage you from doing your project, but I'm sure it will be hard for you to build a huge community on your housrules.. cause mixing some 4th gold edition rules and 2K1 rules is house rules... those things you want to avoid !

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 4:34 pm

Let me quickly tell you the Basic idea of Sponsoring:

A Team can not use ANY Starplayers until it Reaches Team Rating 300 (Premier League Team). You can then Buy a Starplayer, for Example Griff Oberwald for 180 K. But, Aditionally, everytime you want to use Griff in a Match you have to Pay his Apearance Fee of 90 K. In order to Enable teams to actually use their Stars, they are payed 100 - 800 (400 K) every 15 Games.

If you rolled a 8 for 800 K Sponsoring and have only Griff on your Team you could use him in 8 of 15 Games.

(i would make appearance Fees cheaper)

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 8:42 pm

The point is that no team will make TR 300 anymore ... so why have rules for StarPlayers when you get there. The League of their own rules were written for the 4th edition rules, not the 2001 Rules Review.

Trying to merge in ANYTHING from 4th edition with the 2001 Rules Review is just asking for loads of trouble.

Galak

Toby · Post by **Toby** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 9:53 pm

U dont get it. I want to pick all good ideas and create a NEW mix, that ends up in a "6.th" edition.

I dont care what rules wer written when, as long as they are cool and can be used or adjusted in a usefull way, they might help and be exiting.

The current Living Rulebook Rules are far from the potential this game has. If you think they are perfect, well thats ok. I am intrested in ideas and suggestions that might improve the game.

never mind.

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 10:16 pm

Toby, the current ruleset is popular throughout the world. The vast majority of coaches are happy with balance, and the formation of the BBRC and the annual rules review will continue to improve the system based on feedback from the world-wide community.
There will soon be an international ranking system in place, where registered coaches can play others in local, national and major international tournaments (as well as via the internet to the other side of the world) all of which will affect rankings.
Now I still don't know what you're trying to achieve exactly, but ignoring posts from well respected members of the BB community and arguing black is white with the same people will achieve nothing.
The game is thriving, popular, and will become more so over the next few years with the measures both in place and underway.
I'm not sure I'd have been as patient as Galak has been. Show a little more respect!