Okay for those of you who wanted to see the feedback to the Hot List here is what Chet helped me put together this week. A lot of the non-Q&A items are seriously being considered for experimental rules.
Which ones will make it in is not yet determined. Anyway, this way you can see how the BBRC used our comments in this year's discussion. Also please remember that the BB community and JJ requested minimal changes for this year.
Anyway, the Hot List with answers can be found at:
http://www.midgardbb.com/BBRC_HotList.html
BBRC Rules Review 2002 Hot List ... updated with responses
Moderator: TFF Mods
-
GalakStarscraper
- Godfather of Blood Bowl
- Posts: 15882
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2001 12:00 am
- Location: Indiana, USA
- Contact:
-
millimil
- Rookie
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Please bring back the snots in mag #6 !!!
Hi Galak,
thanx for the great information about the BBRC 2002 !
But what about the snots ? Is there a possibility for experimental rules in 2003 ? What do the BBRC- guys think of the little fellows ? Look at ebay auctions, discussions here ant in other boards. They are not forgotten, there should be experimental rules to bring them back to blood bowl !!!
*cheering* BRING BACK THE SNOTS !
greetings
thanx for the great information about the BBRC 2002 !
But what about the snots ? Is there a possibility for experimental rules in 2003 ? What do the BBRC- guys think of the little fellows ? Look at ebay auctions, discussions here ant in other boards. They are not forgotten, there should be experimental rules to bring them back to blood bowl !!!
*cheering* BRING BACK THE SNOTS !
greetings
Reason: ''
may your re-roll always a success,
millimil
;-)
millimil
;-)
-
Skummy
- Legend
- Posts: 4567
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 5:48 pm
- Location: Camping on private island, per BBRC advice.
-
sean newboy
- Legend
- Posts: 4805
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
- Location: West Palm Beach, florida
- Contact:
-
Ghost of Pariah
- Legend
- Posts: 2249
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2002 7:36 am
- Location: Haunting the hallowed halls of TBB!
- Contact:
-
Mojoshenpo
- Veteran
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 12:12 am
-
plasmoid
- Legend
- Posts: 5334
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
- Location: Copenhagen
- Contact:
Hi all,
I just posted my comments regarding the 2002 rules review, so I might as well comment on the possible future changes - on the off chance that the BBRC is looking for feedback.
*TZs and assists:
IMO, don't change these rules. The fact that people are playing it wrong shouldn't mean that the rules are changed. Making "gazed" players unable to lend assists will just make hypnotic gaze (i.e. vampires) even more powerful, and we've got enough problems with them as it is.
*Apothecary patients moved to reserves:
IMO, this removes the ability to use the apothecary tactically to keep a key player face-up/on the pitch. I see no reason to change this.
*TTM'ing to an occupied square:
Please no. An extra blitz is not a good idea!
I'm a gobbo coach myself (at least I was) and I hope that you won't attempt to help a weak team by adding a broken mechanic.
*Shadowing a player that 'follows-up':
Is this really legal? I mean, follow up moves allow you to ignore TZs - and I've always assumed that this included skills that rely on tacklezones to work.
*Intercepting while being 'between':
OK, this whole between thing can cause some confusion when the intercepter is adjacent to the passer or reciever. Especially if the throw is at an angle.
It would be a lot easier if it was possible to intercept from any position adjacent to the passer or reciever - (and it would also make pass block skill a bit better).
*Revamping handicap table:
I'm all for it! Some results are utterly useless, while others are a tad overpowered.
*Revamping the kick-off table:
We've done it in my league. But please keep it a 2d6 roll, and not a d66 roll. It is very nice to be able to learn the table by heart, rather than look at a reference sheet at every kick-off.
*Official turn-over table:
Please do not make it a turn-over to fail a catch, as some have suggested.
It would make a bouncing ball a moment of dread for the moving team.
The rule isn't particularly complicated as it is now.
*EXP system:
I liked the MVP system, but hated ageing - this looks like on OK compromise.
*New skills:
Please, don't bring back diving tackle (i.e. stiff arm).
It has done a world of good for the game to get rid of that mechanic.
Comments are welcome
Martin
I just posted my comments regarding the 2002 rules review, so I might as well comment on the possible future changes - on the off chance that the BBRC is looking for feedback.
*TZs and assists:
IMO, don't change these rules. The fact that people are playing it wrong shouldn't mean that the rules are changed. Making "gazed" players unable to lend assists will just make hypnotic gaze (i.e. vampires) even more powerful, and we've got enough problems with them as it is.
*Apothecary patients moved to reserves:
IMO, this removes the ability to use the apothecary tactically to keep a key player face-up/on the pitch. I see no reason to change this.
*TTM'ing to an occupied square:
Please no. An extra blitz is not a good idea!
I'm a gobbo coach myself (at least I was) and I hope that you won't attempt to help a weak team by adding a broken mechanic.
*Shadowing a player that 'follows-up':
Is this really legal? I mean, follow up moves allow you to ignore TZs - and I've always assumed that this included skills that rely on tacklezones to work.
*Intercepting while being 'between':
OK, this whole between thing can cause some confusion when the intercepter is adjacent to the passer or reciever. Especially if the throw is at an angle.
It would be a lot easier if it was possible to intercept from any position adjacent to the passer or reciever - (and it would also make pass block skill a bit better).
*Revamping handicap table:
I'm all for it! Some results are utterly useless, while others are a tad overpowered.
*Revamping the kick-off table:
We've done it in my league. But please keep it a 2d6 roll, and not a d66 roll. It is very nice to be able to learn the table by heart, rather than look at a reference sheet at every kick-off.
*Official turn-over table:
Please do not make it a turn-over to fail a catch, as some have suggested.
It would make a bouncing ball a moment of dread for the moving team.
The rule isn't particularly complicated as it is now.
*EXP system:
I liked the MVP system, but hated ageing - this looks like on OK compromise.
*New skills:
Please, don't bring back diving tackle (i.e. stiff arm).
It has done a world of good for the game to get rid of that mechanic.
Comments are welcome
Martin
Reason: ''
-
plasmoid
- Legend
- Posts: 5334
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 8:55 am
- Location: Copenhagen
- Contact:
Hi again,
a single suggestion for the next hotlist:
Clarification on TTM'ing:
The rules state that failing a landing roll is not a turn over (unless you have the ball). However, if the throw is fumbled, or the flyer ends up in an occupied square he is knocked over. No mention of "automatically failing the landing roll". There just isn't one.
Doesn't this mean that fumbling/colliding causes a turn over?
Martin
a single suggestion for the next hotlist:
Clarification on TTM'ing:
The rules state that failing a landing roll is not a turn over (unless you have the ball). However, if the throw is fumbled, or the flyer ends up in an occupied square he is knocked over. No mention of "automatically failing the landing roll". There just isn't one.
Doesn't this mean that fumbling/colliding causes a turn over?
Martin
Reason: ''