Reconsidering the ruling on Khorne?

[Darkson]

So is there going to be the same clamour for the NAF to rule all human Catchers to become AV8?

Screenshot from the new BB2 trailer:

[VoodooMike]

Just to point out that isn't a ruling they've made post-Khorne, that has been the rule for many years, it's just that many NAF coaches weren't aware of it, and it was rarely used.

Fair enough. The fact that the ruling has only come into the spotlight recently (well... game-recently) highlights the fact that the khorne roster has gained a lot of TT momentum, and it's not because it's such a great roster.

But how would one improve the TV system further?

Sounds like a topic that would fall squarely into its own, destined-to-be-lengthy thread.

So is there going to be the same clamour for the NAF to rule all human Catchers to become AV8?

Probably. There has always been discussion about changing human stats, and true to form, Cyanide appears to have cut through the years of bickering and simply done so.

[harvestmouse]

Re: Voodoomike:

The main problem with your argument I see is that:

1. NAF could decide whatever they wanted, however it doesn't mean the rest of the BB world will see them as the Arbiters of BB. Cyanide would almost certainly not, as it surely wouldn't be in the best interest. This would mean they are no longer the only current official licensed product.

2. With the Khorne issue (as the prime example), it's not clear yet whether the creators of the roster are still going to be using it. Considering Cyanide as an official source right now when it's not clear what direction they're going in, doesn't seem a good idea to me.

3. With the Khorne roster, Cyanide certainly needed the nod from GW to make the roster. It was made clear that 'yes, you may do so, but it is not official in any version bar your own version'. GW made a clear decision on Cyanide here. I see no reason why that standpoint has changed with anything Cyanide has done since unless we're given a clear indication.

4. If the NAF did indeed take on this role (the idea of having a BBRC that had the interests of all major parties and all aspects sounds good to me) who is going to abide by this new BBRC? FUMBBL probably would, but I'm sure there would be coding delays. Making them possibly always behind the times. As indicated in point 1, I think Cyanide wouldn't. Anything else on a computer client (PBeM for example) would need to be coded.......I foresee us ending up with several rule versions being played

Re Plasmoid:

I'm firm believer that although on the pitch resurrection, long league format and perpetual open environment should play the same; match making and handicapping they massively different and the 'suggested' match making and handicapping should be different for each.

Resurrection there isn't much problem (bar underutilized skills). So your suggested fix, may suit this format best.

For the other 2 I think TV itself is the problem. It needs less of an influence altogether. We're using TV too much as a crutch. Worried that any other form of match making opens up too chaotic influence and allows teams of hugely disproportionate power levels to play with little in the way of handicapping.

However it's the case now that teams can have a vastly different power level at as little as 1200 TV. So much so, it's no longer a fair game.

Closed leagues, in a divisional format, with a few divisions I would suggest match making based mainly on divisional standings. A team in 1st place is handicapped against any team lower than it. Here, we would see divisions remain close as long as the elastic isn't snapped.

For open perpetual I think TV has to be considered in some respect, but not as the main indicator. FF or W/D/L or something along these lines really ought to be the largest part of the formula.

Personally, I do not think the 3 formats should be using the same formula anymore. They're totally different animals. All of them would benefit from having a bespoke match making system. Rather than suffering drawbacks due to considering the other 2.

[Chris]

So is there going to be the same clamour for the NAF to rule all human Catchers to become AV8?

Screenshot from the new BB2 trailer:

Oh joy. Is that a plasmoid change in his narrowing exercise?

Shame really I was always in the str 3 camp

[harvestmouse]

So is there going to be the same clamour for the NAF to rule all human Catchers to become AV8?

Screenshot from the new BB2 trailer:

Oh joy. Is that a plasmoid change in his narrowing exercise?

Shame really I was always in the str 3 camp

Yes it is. This and the links to his Bret roster suggests something. We could ask, however I would guess he wouldn't be in the position confirm or refute anything.

[Decker_cky]

Yes it is. This and the links to his Bret roster suggests something. We could ask, however I would guess he wouldn't be in the position confirm or refute anything.

To be fair, the AV8 catchers was a CRP+ change rather than a narrowing tiers change.

And to be honest....the CRP+ changes all seem like safe and reasonable changes (whereas there's some kooky stuff in the narrowing tiers).

[SBG]

So is there going to be the same clamour for the NAF to rule all human Catchers to become AV8?

Screenshot from the new BB2 trailer:

Oh joy. Is that a plasmoid change in his narrowing exercise?

Shame really I was always in the str 3 camp

They do need St3 much more than AV8. How come elf catchers get ST3 and not humans???

Fred

[SBG]

We play in a perpetual league where teams got to (and beyond) TV 250.

The league has anywhere between 6 to 10 clubs and we play 10 to 12 games / season. Next season will be our 15th.

I think LRB 6.0 is fine as it is. Inducements play the role they should be playing: giving almost an equal chance of winning. Every coach that has 15TV more than his opponent in the league fears the wizard. There are many good 100 K Cards. Of course, if you want to bring a new team (we start at 130 TV, so basically you got all positionals starting up) and face a 220 TV team, it might not be that even. But even well-developped t4eams need re-rolls and a wizard, a chef and 400 K card is quite a killing combo in itself.

Skills? Yes some combos are stronger than others, but not every roster can acces Mighty Blow-Piling ON and even then, you have to catch Gutter Runeers or the elves to apply it. Wardancers cost 130 K: I hope for that price they come with a strong starting skills set and have access to good combos. If you're tired of piling on, just foul the pilers every time they go down: your opponent will think twice.

There are how many tournaments per week involving how many people? I think the ruleset is fine as it is and doesn't need any change (apart from ST3 human catchers! ). To my taste, 23 rosters is more than enough to suit anybody or any style of play.

Fred

[VoodooMike]

1. NAF could decide whatever they wanted, however it doesn't mean the rest of the BB world will see them as the Arbiters of BB. Cyanide would almost certainly not, as it surely wouldn't be in the best interest. This would mean they are no longer the only current official licensed product.

You've already stated that your community-of-choice (FUMBBL) would follow the NAF's lead. We can assume that the majority of the tournament world would follow the NAF's lead... and guess what.... Cyanide already doesn't follow what everyone else is doing! So, your worst case scenario is that the NAF takes the lead in everything but Cyanide's implementation. Compare that to the current situation in which the NAF is being pressured to follow Cyanide's lead - pressure that is likely to increase with Cyanide having a new and even more modified offering later this year. The NAF needs to stop twiddling its thumbs at the kids table, and pull up a chair to the grown up's table.

2. With the Khorne issue (as the prime example), it's not clear yet whether the creators of the roster are still going to be using it. Considering Cyanide as an official source right now when it's not clear what direction they're going in, doesn't seem a good idea to me.

I can pretty much guarantee they'll roll out the Khorne roster again. They're certainly adding new rosters (as we've seen from the bretonnians) and they're taking much of their inspiration from existing community discussions and ideas (whether those have proven overwhelmingly popular or simply very contentious). Since the khorne roster has picked up quite a bit of steam in the TT world (compared to any other non-BBRC roster ever) and since the khorne roster represents an obvious pro-cyanide point, it can only be a benefit to them to continue to provide it in the long run.

For all you, or I, question Cyanide's concern for the game, they do keep dragging in members of the community to be involved behind closed doors. To at least some degree, each of these changes has come from members of the community that they (sometimes erroneously) have identified as "community leaders". Do you think Galak, who was involved in making the khorne roster, is going to come out against it? Do you think plasmoid is going to voice opposition to people using his Bretonnian roster? Many of Cyanide's choices seem fairly deliberate in terms of shaping BB and pre-empting the opposition from the community to the changes they make.

3. With the Khorne roster, Cyanide certainly needed the nod from GW to make the roster. It was made clear that 'yes, you may do so, but it is not official in any version bar your own version'. GW made a clear decision on Cyanide here. I see no reason why that standpoint has changed with anything Cyanide has done since unless we're given a clear indication.

Yeah, I don't see it the way you do. GW has effectively abandoned this game beyond retaining ownership of the various IP elements.. You see it as them saying "you may not make official changes" to Cyanide, I see it as them saying "Do whatever, we won't be doing any official anything with the rules because we don't give two monkey-shits about it". GW dissolved the BBRC, and they pulled any formal licensing relationships they had with the community (such as the NAF's ability to print block dice).. it screams that they're done with the game from their side of things. Pretty much any argument that includes "..but GW..." is a cop out, at this point.

[MattDakka]

Wardancers cost 130 K: I hope for that price they come with a strong starting skills set and have access to good combos

Wardancers cost 120K and are underpriced.

To my taste, 23 rosters is more than enough to suit anybody or any style of play.

The rosters are 24.

[SBG]

Wardancers cost 130 K: I hope for that price they come with a strong starting skills set and have access to good combos

Wardancers cost 120K and are underpriced.

To my taste, 23 rosters is more than enough to suit anybody or any style of play.

The rosters are 24.

You get my point for the rosters.

Is there a formula to tell WD are underpriced? Their lineman aren't overpiced at 70 K ? I don't see a problem with 120 K WD.

Fred

[Chris]

Yes it is. This and the links to his Bret roster suggests something. We could ask, however I would guess he wouldn't be in the position confirm or refute anything.

To be fair, the AV8 catchers was a CRP+ change rather than a narrowing tiers change.

And to be honest....the CRP+ changes all seem like safe and reasonable changes (whereas there's some kooky stuff in the narrowing tiers).

I don't think all the CRP+ stuff was from the BBRC, some of it I think is just Plasmoid, though he is clear about the origin of each rule.

[Vanguard]

Yes it is. This and the links to his Bret roster suggests something. We could ask, however I would guess he wouldn't be in the position confirm or refute anything.

To be fair, the AV8 catchers was a CRP+ change rather than a narrowing tiers change.

And to be honest....the CRP+ changes all seem like safe and reasonable changes (whereas there's some kooky stuff in the narrowing tiers).

I don't think all the CRP+ stuff was from the BBRC, some of it I think is just Plasmoid, though he is clear about the origin of each rule.

Plasmoid is fairly explicit that the CRP+ came out of the BBRC while the Narrow Tiers are his own creation.

Welcome to the Narrow Tier Blood Bowl (NTBB) rules. NTBB has 2 parts: First, the CRP+: 10 house rules to improve CRP Blood Bowl, approved for further unofficial testing by Tom Anders, Ian Williams and Stephen Babbage of the former BBRC. Second, my own Narrow Tier roster changes to 10 of the 24 official teams.

[Decker_cky]

From my understanding, CRP+ stuff was things that the BBRC members could agree was 'on the deck' to consider changes. Basically, it's 10 changes that the members could agree to for what would have been the next stage of testing. May not have made it in the same form, or at all, but there was some recognition of a problem and after they were disbanded, plasmoid contacted the other members to put together a list of tweaks they could agree to.

Narrowing bands is plasmoids baby, based on the statistics he could put together.

[Shteve0]

Let's bust open some myths here.

NTBB is not based on statistics, nor is it about narrowing bands. It's based on observation and is about narrowing the gap between tiers, not within them.

The CRP+ rules are rules compiled and circulated by plasmoid to BBRC members. That they didn't object to the idea that they would be worth testing is a world away from saying they were on the way to adopting them.

Plasmoid allows (encourages?) a lot of grey area to develop around his house rules and fosters a legitimacy to them that honestly I don't believe exists. Which is a shame as it unfortunately detracts from some decent ideas (and some not so decent ideas).