Poll: spps for crowd and fouling cas: USE THIS POLL!!

[Zombie]

Listen guys, there are 3 things i hated with vanilla 3rd ed fouling:
1. It was overpowered
2. The meaningless fouls
3. The guy with the most SPPs on any team was the dirty player

All 3 have been taken care of in the LRB. Bring back SPPs for fouling and points 2 and 3 are back. That would be a disaster for the game.

[Snew]

I just haven't seen the meaningless fouls go away. I don't mind them being there though. Maybe I just don't understand what a "meaningless" foul is. For me it's the compulsory, "Oh, I haven't fouled this turn yet." foul. There's still plenty of that here. There's a place for it in this game and I don't think it needs to go away. Now it's a little riskier but it's still there.

[Zombie]

I said it on a prior thread; we have played in excess of 25 games per team, with 7 teams in my current league, which has awarded SPPs for fouling since game 1. Not 1 of our league leaders in CAS has DP, and the DP with the most CAS has less than half the CAS of the league leader (in fact, I think the DP is on 5 [only 3 thanks to fouling], while the leader is somewhere in the high teens to low 20s). You know it was broken in previous editions of the game; try it in the current edition before lambasting it as a bad idea. Westley and others know, as you do, that in previous editions fouling was broken, but they have looked at the current rules and believe that there are enough elements in place to prevent fouling from getting out of hand. I have played such rules and given SPPs, and fouling does not seem to be out of hand by my playtesting. I'm not saying put it back in the rules straight-up, but I am very much in support for a trial re-introduction of SPPs for fouling so we can continue to work on the fouling system.

That's because the players in your league don't know that it's still often worth it to foul with the ref watching you. They don't foul enough. We don't allow SPPs for fouling, yet i have 3 dirty players in my team, and one of them must have at least 10-15 CAS that didn't get awarded to him because he got them through fouls. The number of CAS through fouling for my team is higher than that obtained through blocking, and that's for a chaos dwarf team that includes 3 piling on players!

Also, like i've said before, i used to play under much harsher rules under 3rd ed and the leader in SPPs in most teams (the exceptions being one-turn scorers) were dirty players.

There's no problem in your league because people there don't foul a lot. But for leagues that do, reintroducing SPPs for fouling would spell disaster.

[Sixpack595]

I would rather see SPPs brought back, but I understand your gripes. Since some leagues have a problem with poor sportsmanship, disuade the fouling with other methods. I'm a fan of fines or suspensions if anything was needed. 10K per foul cought by the ref, player can't play till paid. You track it in the injury collumn.

Listen guys, there are 3 things i hated with vanilla 3rd ed fouling:
1. It was overpowered
2. The meaningless fouls
3. The guy with the most SPPs on any team was the dirty player

All 3 have been taken care of in the LRB. Bring back SPPs for fouling and points 2 and 3 are back. That would be a disaster for the game.

[Zombie]

I just haven't seen the meaningless fouls go away. I don't mind them being there though. Maybe I just don't understand what a "meaningless" foul is. For me it's the compulsory, "Oh, I haven't fouled this turn yet." foul. There's still plenty of that here. There's a place for it in this game and I don't think it needs to go away. Now it's a little riskier but it's still there.

A meaningless foul is one that doesn't help you to win directly or indirectly. Maybe it didn't go away. It didn't completely disappear in my league either. But without SPPs for fouling, it's much more rare, and that to me is a very good thing. I love violence in the game, but only if it helps you to win.

[Icedman]

When I played way back in 3rd Ed. we didn't believe in house rules, so I guess no, there was nothing that "influenced" my league back then in relation to fouling. In fact, me and mine have always played as close to the current rulset as we collectively feel comfortable; in our current league, that is LRB 2.0 with SPPs for fouling, and the old (3rd Ed) handicap system, complete with Special Play cards.

You don't believe in house rules though huh? And spp's work with no mods? Huh? Do you even read what you type?

I said I didn't believe in house rules back in 3rd Ed; I said nothing about not believing in them now. When the crock that was 4th Ed was released, I finally understood why everyone else in the world was playing the game the way they wanted to.

Tell me, what in the cards affects SPPs and fouling? More money? Just means you can buy back someone that died that tiny bit quicker at higher TRs. Only 1 card in all 3 decks makes one more adept at fouling: Blatant Foul. Your player is ejected from the game, you suffer a TO, and the opposing player is automatically injured

The LRB is based on proof and playtesting from many many people on this board and if you would like links to any of the leagues they are all listed right here on Talk Blood Bowl. Do you understand how the LRB works? Or how BB2K1 came about? It came from playtesting. The rules work and if you need further proof then I suggest you try your own league, like I said.

I'm not sure whter to laugh or seriously reply to this one Pariah....

Every second post you're blasting the LRB for being crap and the BBRC for throwing out untested rules, and now suddenly the LRB is Gospel?

Now, on to actual reply...

Would you like to assist/set up this league? Currenly, I'm at uni 3 days a week, and working 2-3 of the other ones; time could (I won't say will, but could) be an issue for me. Additionally, I haven't the foggiest as to how to run the PBeM tool, much less running an online league. Javabowl I might be able to do: do you want to stay up until 3am to play me?

Bottomline, the LRB is tested and proven, not only by the creators but the community at large. Your idea, however, is not. So...like I said, prove it.

Bottom-line, my proof exists; it may only be from my little TT league, but its out there. Where's your proof otherwise?

BTW,

Which is why PBeM is so popular. That, a general lack of bugs and the program is finished.

Last I heard, the PBeM tool still couldn't implement Dump Off, Pass Block, and a couple other skills. When did that change?

[Zombie]

In case anyone's interested, the poll currently says regarding SPPs for fouling:

41 NO (60%)
27 YES (40%)

So i guess the verdict is clear!

[Sixpack595]

Very clear, most people are not happy with the way SPPs are awarded.

OK, to be perfectly honest, the verdict is that there is a large group that is not happy with the current way. Why not come up with a better solution, rather than bicker?

In case anyone's interested, the poll currently says regarding SPPs for fouling:

41 NO (60%)
27 YES (40%)

So i guess the verdict is clear!

[Zombie]

Very clear, most people are not happy with the way SPPs are awarded.

That's not a fair statement. I'm pretty sure that 100% (or very close) of the coaches on this board are not happy with at least one rule in Blood Bowl. Does that mean that we should change every rule that has at least a single guy in disagreement with it?

The rules must be viewed seperately. Regarding SPPs for fouling, the majority likes the current rule. But i agree that 40% is still a lot. However, those 40% will have to find another system that over 50% agree with if they want something to be done.

[Icedman]

Very clear, most people are not happy with the way SPPs are awarded.

OK, to be perfectly honest, the verdict is that there is a large group that is not happy with the current way. Why not come up with a better solution, rather than bicker?

In case anyone's interested, the poll currently says regarding SPPs for fouling:

41 NO (60%)
27 YES (40%)

So i guess the verdict is clear!

Thankyou Six; the point I've been trying to make (the point in which the anti-foulers are not getting) is that the system can be refined such that fouling can get SPPs without the munchkins getting out of hand. What we need to do is find this system; but to do this, we must start somewhere, and the LRB rules is really the only place we have.

[Icedman]

However, those 40% will have to find another system that over 50% agree with if they want something to be done.

The problem I see here Zombie, is that many who don't want to see SPPs for fouling are not even open to debate on the topic; their minds are made up.

[Zombie]

If you're talking about me, you're wrong. Even though i may not sound that way, i'm always open to suggestions. Give me a rule that works, and that works better than the current one, and i'll switch to your side before you can realize.

[Icedman]

If you're talking about me, you're wrong. Even though i may not sound that way, i'm always open to suggestions. Give me a rule that works, and that works better than the current one, and i'll switch to your side before you can realize.

I wasn't speaking of any particular anti-fouler; just the general tone that I picked up from the camp. It's nice to know that you're open to suggestions, now all I gotta do is come up with one I'm happy with

[Sixpack595]

What about my earlier post? Some type of Fine, or MNG for a fouler sent off? Make it just like now, add SPPs, but if you are ejected you pay a fine. say 10K? How about MNG? You track it under the Injury column, so the current sheet works fune too.

Something to build on?

[Icedman]

What about my earlier post? Some type of Fine, or MNG for a fouler sent off? Make it just like now, add SPPs, but if you are ejected you pay a fine. say 10K? How about MNG? You track it under the Injury column, so the current sheet works fune too.

Something to build on?

It works... I think Pariah had another one earlier.... something like just the current stuff, but you're autmatically sent if you cause a CAS, something like that.

See; if we try, instead of saying that we don't want it like the old days, we can come up with solutions.