What would you most like to see happen in October?

[Hamster Boy]

...says the guy who has only been playing since this summer. All i know is the living rule book, so i am not having to relearn anything.

i agree, though, about some of the rules being clarified, and being able to replace missing game pieces (dice, templates, etc)

I would like to see more about translating stats into cash values, so that Star Players could eventually become freebooters between seasons. This probably exists in one of GW's fine publications, but i think it should be included in Da Rulez

chris

[wesleytj]

Updated stars (but seems to be not possible).
More rule clarifications.
A ogre team (:o I can't wait until 2003 ) !

Did you see the suggestion I made regarding that issue? I think I came up with a way to bring them back (perhaps as an optional rule) that is balanced and doesn't make them freeboot only. Of course some of them would have to not exist anymore, but not many.

[wesleytj]

My list is largely pipe dreaming, and it appears i'm in the vast minority on a number of them, but here goes anyway:

1.Bring back spp for cas
2.Revert DT back to old rules and make it an AG trait.
3.Tweak winnings table to be a bit more friendly
4.My star player suggestion (see relevant topic)

pretty much in that order of importance. I can't overstress how silly I think it is that all I can't get spps by fouling or by frenzying ppl out of bounds with witch elves (or whatever else you frenzy ppl out of bounds with)

say it encourages fouling...go ahead say it. I HOPE it does. I think not enough people foul in blood bowl anymore...it's BLOOD bowl for crying out loud! Then we wouldn't need all these artificial caps on team ratings and player advancement because somebody would actually occasionally die now and then.

OK I feel better now. Sorry...

[martynq]

say it encourages fouling...go ahead say it. I HOPE it does. I think not enough people foul in blood bowl anymore...it's BLOOD bowl for crying out loud! Then we wouldn't need all these artificial caps on team ratings and player advancement because somebody would actually occasionally die now and then.

I seem to see a lot of these sort of comments at the moment. Perhaps this indicates that people who think there is not enough violence in the game have a point. OK, here is a question for those people: How often do you think players in your own team should die or suffer a niggle/stat descrease serious injury?

My point is that by increasing the amount of violence this is what you are demanding. My personal opinion is that there is enough violence already. The dark elf team that I play in Galak's MBBL league has suffered a AV-1 serious injury in their first match and a line-elf died due to a thrown rock in their fifth match, and have just completed their sixth match. I currently have 12 players on the team and have nearly enough money to buy a 13th. Ten of the players have their first skill. All in all, I feel the team is developing quite nicely, but another death would leave me a bit disappointed, so I would be rather unhappy with a system that resulted in more injuries.

I await your thoughts on this eagerly!

Cheers,
Martyn

[Deathwing]

After 6 games my MBBL Helfs have finally got back to 11 players. They've carrying a -1 ST on a line-elf, an AV decrease on a DW and an aging niggle on the other DW.

[martynq]

So I doubt that you believe there needs to be more violence in the game, DW?

Martyn

[Deathwing]

Actually I'm a big fan of the current ruleset, some minor tweaks here and there is all that's needed IMO. Agreed that niggles need a little more bite, the handicap table needs looking at, but I like the way the game plays currently on the field.

[ljm]

Actually I'm a big fan of the current ruleset, some minor tweaks here and there is all that's needed IMO. Agreed that niggles need a little more bite, the handicap table needs looking at, but I like the way the game plays currently on the field.

I agree. I am happy with the game mechanics. Things I would like to see added are mainly old things from previous editions like secret weapons, teams, etc.

ljm

[DaImp]

MORE VIOLENCE!!!!!!

I know 2nd ed was a very diferent animal, but I seem to remember there being an average of 1 death a game back then, and teams did not fall apart... you did start with 16 players though.

I would like see the return of secret weapons, SPP's for fouling, an improved handicap table, the return of the special play cards (not going to happen!) or at least bring back some of the elements in these cards to the handicap table (I want Woof! Woof! back). I miss the randomness added by the cards.

What I don't want is a whole new set of rules. I would be happy to see a few skills disapear - like Jump, which is a cheesy skill! Some simplification and clarification of rules would be a good thing.

[Thadrin]

I still love the old second ed rule that something bizarre happens every time someone rolls snake eyes on an armour roll.

Give us a D66 random events table to roll on when that happens, with stuff like Woof Woof!, The Chuck and so on on it and I'm a happy mans. Adds a little more chaos to the game, its a simple mechanic and it has nothing to do with the team ratings.

Secret Weapons. Wild Animal tweaks. Claw/razor sharps tweaked. The above rule. Proper mixed team rules (we shall see very soon apparently...). Maybe make niggles nce per half.

Then we have as close to perfect as I think we can get.

[martynq]

MORE VIOLENCE!!!!!!

I know 2nd ed was a very diferent animal, but I seem to remember there being an average of 1 death a game back then, and teams did not fall apart... you did start with 16 players though.

OK, I really do not understand why you feel this way, but then I never played 2nd edition. One of the things that I really enjoy is the development of a team. I like trying to gain skills for my players and watch as I produce a varied team each of whose members are slightly different in what they can do. If you were to offer me the alternative of a game where one of my players died every game, then it would ruin one fun part of the game. What is the point of gaining SPPs if my player will die within a few matches anyway?

I'm willing to be enlightened, but a statement like "MORE VIOLENCE!!!", even followed by "WAAAGGGHHH!!!" if you like, doesn't really convince me that we are enhancing the game.

Please explain!

Cheers,
Martyn

[neoliminal]

After 6 games my MBBL Helfs have finally got back to 11 players. They've carrying a -1 ST on a line-elf...

On a human team, we call that guy a Catcher.

[DaImp]

My views may be clouded by years of nostalgia but I remember the game being a complet riot. Alot more chaotic, bloodier and just plain funnier than the current version. The game itself was a much closer representation of the Blood Bowl depicted in the history and "did you know" fluff of the rule books.
That said the mechanics of Blood Bowl from 3rd edition onwards are a vast improvement over 2nd ed. But I feel that 4th ed is lacking the "chaos death spikey bits" that made the game Blood Bowl and not just a fantasy football game. Given the choice I would much rather play 4th ed over 2nd ed but I feel there is too much emphasis on team development and growing the perfect well rounded team, to the detrement of the pure fun factor.
My concern is that BB has become too balanced. I know that is a bit of an odd statement, but where are the teams with exceptionally strong and weak players on the same team, teams with access to quirks (secret weapons, hot pots etc...) have been watered down and alot of their character has been lost.
Maybe that is my real concern. BB is in danger of losing it's character by becoming too serious. Balance is not a bad thing, don't get me wrong! but I don't want BB to become a game of chess - all strategy and fairness with no soul or humour in it. Yes, an exagerated comparison, but it is easier to get my thoughts across like this.

um... what was the question again?

[DaImp]

I like Thadrins rule
thtas just the sort of thing thats missing right now

[wesleytj]

Well but it's a combination of factors. I love building teams too, but what you're forgetting is that we've had a new winnings table put on the system that lowers winnings. Would that have been necessary before?

In the current system, without the new winnings table, it would be easy to build a team up to ungodly ratings. But why is that? It's because the older methods of holding a team in check have been slowly eroded away.

Don't get me wrong, I like the casualty die. And I like the current flavor of the igmeoy rule. But I don't like the choose arm/inj for mb and dp. I don't like not getting spps for fouling/crowd casualties. I don't like all the talk about how people foul too much and coming up with yet more ways to limit it. I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle against this further erosion of it. And that might be as much as anything why I seem a little radical.

Yes even on MY own team I think more people should die. My dark elves went their first 6 games without any si'd or deaths. Then I had 2 deaths and 2 nigglers in those 2 games. But an average of a death a game is not that crazy for dark elves. They're elves they should take casualties. Especially if they're going up against orcs or chaos or some other hitting team.

I know guys online that will only play in games if their opponent promises ahead of time to play a no-fouling game. There are quite a few of them. And there are enough people in the online league that they have no trouble finding games at all. To me that's twisted.

And you want to know the funny thing? I myself am not (never was) a fouling coach. I have usually played elves and elves are too expensive to be starting fouling wars all the time. But while I don't do it (first, I always retailiate in kind), I see it as a valid part of an opponent's strategy and respect its use.

In short, what I guess I'm getting at is that yes, I think that every team should have more dead people, and no I don't think that interferes with proper team growth. I had wood elves in one of the most violent vanilla 3rd ed. bb leagues ever I think (several teams fouled every turn with dp), no casualty die, no igmeoy, no nothing. My Wood Elves were TR 410 when they retired as Blood Bowl champs. Could they do that with the current winnings table? Of course not. And I agree with most people that tr 410 is a bit excessive. And that 4 star players is a bit excessive (we had 3 deeproots ourselves) I'm not advocating a return to all of the old rules.

Speaking of which, what's this big deal with everyone wanting to make nigglers more common and more painful? A definite shot at elf teams if I ever saw one. Why is this important for the balance of the game? If it's because teams are growing too fast and not enough bad things are happening to players, see above!!