MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 15:04 |
 
|
Yes, I'm not ordering to increase the budget, it was supposed to be a suggestion for the future. The point of forums is sharing ideas and opinions, as wrong or as right they might be.
+50k to Re-Draft budget would not change drastically the TV of the teams and break the meta, in my humble opinion.
As an aside, since I got back my old Wood Elf team from the old Box division, I retired the Wood Elf team with the Legend freak. 
After more than 4 years Isha's Willows are back
https://fumbbl.com/t/736973
With a nice +AG WD! |
|
|
MerryZ
Joined: Nov 28, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 15:20 |
|
This is again just a pointless thread where new whinge is surprise, surprise about some stupid new rules idea who nobody else cares about.
And why whinge about orcs and other tier1 teams being good when those are your most played teams.
Just close thread, please. |
_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies. |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 15:21 |
|
Most played team because there was Bomber and I had to counter him, not my fault.
Blame the rules. |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 15:27 |
|
| Rawlf wrote: | | MattDakka wrote: | | Otherwise, what's the difference between a TV 1000 just created and a Season 2 (or 3 or 4 etc.) team? |
350 TV. If you cant fit 3 positionals and 9 Linemen into 1350TV you are doing it wrong. Are your positionals super old maybe? Because such players should have never existed under these rules to begin with, making it hard or even impossible to redraft them is the idea behind it all. Try it for a few seasons, you are clever, you will find a way to get a good revolving roster going.
And yes, teams are not balanced. Some are better, some are worse. Elves are not tier 1. |
This right here is my exact problem with redraft and the attitude behind it. Why should super old player never exist? Heavens forbid someone get emotionally attached to a player they've played dozens of games with.
I understand that redraft has its values, and that it should be painful to keep stat freaks around. And in a league where you have new teams coming in all the time expected to compete with old teams, redraft is necessary. But this idea that old players should just never exist and that teams should only ever be allowed to raise themselves beyond low TV for more than a couple of games is just sad.
Some people find old players fun, find old teams fun. But the attitude of "well I don't personally find it fun and thus it must exist for no one" means that those people are just now not allowed to have their fun too.
And yes, I understand that the current system of super teams (and especially those of Vampires) in majors makes majors unenticing for a lot of people. And that is a problem that (hopefully, I have my doubts that Vampires won't end up still being the just best thing you can be doing there at whatever TV you can jack them up to) redraft should help with.
But not every team was made with majors in mind. Not every coach even wants to participate in them. The site already incentivizes everyone to just make and discard teams all the time with the site-wide competitions being based around running brand new teams. Where is the place for people who like building teams with history? |
|
|
awambawamb
Joined: Feb 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 16:07 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | Because I like to change gameplay. Playing just a small subset of races with 29 available is boring and sad. |
It's not mandatory to have fun with all the races. With the redraft as is, it's just that.
Perhaps they will change it in the future, or you can change it in your house rules. The beauty of FUMBBL resides in that, we can get leagues with different flavors, just find friends playing in your ruleset and youre done. You can also keep track of your win % of every match with APIs, if that's what you're looking for.
Alright, you can squeeze in one more elf with 50k. Others will get potentially 5 more mighty blows.
We all know it's different from the game we played before, be like water. Adapt. Change.
| Drrek wrote: | | Where is the place for people who like building teams with history? |
Leagues like OLC. |
_________________
"la virtù sta nel cielo e nella terra, ma anche nelle nuvole e nelle stelle"
 |
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 16:45 |
|
| awambawamb wrote: |
| Drrek wrote: | | Where is the place for people who like building teams with history? |
Leagues like OLC. |
This is the answer people always give for this, but I'm in leagues. I play in leagues because of this reason. And yet, because leagues require playing specific people there is a much harder limit on how many of those you can participate in and be able to schedule for than playing in C.
But people who like low TV and hate team history have apparently decided C is entirely for them and the rest of us aren't welcome.
I do still like low TV enough that I play a fair amount of C, but my favorite way of playing is just gone now. My favorite team to play was my humans back in CRP that played several hundred games in Box. That's not something that makes sense to do now because of how things are set up in C. And in fact, if there weren't people I liked in leagues set up in a way that lets me play as I'd actually prefer, I would have never come back to blood bowl at all.
I quit the game over this exact issue years ago, and am only playing today because of those exact leagues. By eliminating a way people are allowed to play the game, anyone who doesn't have those friends to drag them into leagues that keep them engaged might just quit and never come back.
And that's my exact problem with this whole thing. A way of playing the game (which people who don't like playing that way never actually have to engage with outside of majors, and I have no problem with redraft being a requirement of any team that wants to participate in those), is eliminated because people who don't have to play that way apparently don't like that people who do want to play that way do it. You don't want to play with high tv or old teams with old players? Sure, make new teams. Play low tv to your heart's content, we have now multiple site-wide competitions to incentivize you to play exactly like that. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 17:28 |
|
I'm not complaining about Re-Draft implementation (I can find more easily games in the Box now, although they are more boring to play), just my academic 2 cents about it: there were different possible ways to keep the TV under control:
- Re-Draft, with its annoying yo-yo effect and bookkeeping task (teams can grow up to 1600, roughly, then get trimmed back to 1200-1300 and so on). The downsides of this are:
1) Strong tier 1 teams have a big advantage, because they are cheaper to Re-Draft and play more games in their sweetpot; 2) Since the TV control takes place after 15 games, team can grow up to the TVs where the game is less balanced (and they could even join a tournament with a high TV). I wonder why people so afraid of broken games don't consider that.
- TV cap: decide a max TV cap lower than 1600 (where most teams are playable, it could be 1500 or 1400, or somewhere there) and let people play teams up to it. That way the teams will hover at max that TV in a more natural and realistic way (and the TV control would be applied after each and every game, not just after 15 games) and teams such as Chaos, Nurgle and Lizardmen would be less frustrating to play. All tournament teams would be lower than 1600 and that would even way more the ground. To solve the freak issue, cap each player's skill slots at 3 and stat boosts at max +1 per characteristic. Let's face it, the big unbalance comes when too many skills and stat boosts are stacked on few players. When skills are spread over many players generally there is no huge unbalance. With 3 skill slots, max 1 stat boost per characteristic and hard TV cap it's hard to build nasty monster teams.
You don't see in real life teams suddenly firing players and getting back to a weaker team just because rookies want extra agent fees. It makes no sense even for a fantasy game like this. It's a bad way to keep teams in check.
I'm not asking to house rule this, just saying that there was a better and simpler way to keep the teams in check. |
|
|
Rawlf
Joined: Jul 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 17:49 |
|
Drrek, I hope you understand that "these players should never exist" is not at all my personal opinion but simply the result of GW's rules. |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 17:56 |
|
| Rawlf wrote: | | Drrek, I hope you understand that "these players should never exist" is not at all my personal opinion but simply the result of GW's rules. |
I'm well aware that GW has been designing the rules in such a way that can only be explained that they want high tv to not exist.
And I'll complain to GW if they give me the chance. But I'm talking about here, and now, on this site, and what we are doing and what we could be doing. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 18:01 |
|
| Rawlf wrote: | | Drrek, I hope you understand that "these players should never exist" is not at all my personal opinion but simply the result of GW's rules. |
problem is, with stat increases and doubles working as they do, the game simply doesn't work when you allow constant progression now... It's just far far too easy to build stat freaks which undermine the teams designed strengths and weaknesses...
some people might like that... but for me stats and doubles in this edition are terribly handled and mean there has to be re-draft, even though im not a massive fan |
_________________
 |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 18:05 |
|
With a hand they show you the possibility of building great players (6 skill slots and easily obtainable stat boosts), with another hand they trim your team (nope! don't dare to keep your players!).
It's schizophrenic game design.  |
|
|
Rawlf
Joined: Jul 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 18:20 |
|
Garion, you quoted me but what you say has nothing to do with what I posted. Just so that's clear. |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 18:26 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | Rawlf wrote: | | Drrek, I hope you understand that "these players should never exist" is not at all my personal opinion but simply the result of GW's rules. |
problem is, with stat increases and doubles working as they do, the game simply doesn't work when you allow constant progression now... It's just far far too easy to build stat freaks which undermine the teams designed strengths and weaknesses...
some people might like that... but for me stats and doubles in this edition are terribly handled and mean there has to be re-draft, even though im not a massive fan |
I mean... I have been on record numerous times (mostly on discord) saying that the skilling system is the absolute worst thing in this edition of blood bowl... so no arguments that that should be changed. |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 20:09 |
|
There was open play. And people hated it.
There was aging. And people hated it.
There was a reworked handicaps table. And people hated it.
There was a reworked inducements system. And people hated it.
There was the redraft. And people hated it.
I guess some people have a problem for every solution.
Personally, having managed a league for quite a few years now, I think that the 1350 redraft hits just the soft spot: it forces coaches to trade some tv (in 20k increments) for better players, or roll back to a more basic roster with nice utilities from the get go (apo, a decent number of rerolls, etc). Hard choices. Which is nice.
But I also loved the ageing mechanic, so I'm probably a nut. |
_________________
 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 27, 2025 - 20:13 |
|
| Rawlf wrote: | | Garion, you quoted me but what you say has nothing to do with what I posted. Just so that's clear. |
I'm just supporting the statement that stat freaks should never exist in this edition.
| JanMattys wrote: |
But I also loved the ageing mechanic, so I'm probably a nut. |
I also liked ageing... more than what we have now tbh
| Drrek wrote: | | Garion wrote: | | Rawlf wrote: | | Drrek, I hope you understand that "these players should never exist" is not at all my personal opinion but simply the result of GW's rules. |
problem is, with stat increases and doubles working as they do, the game simply doesn't work when you allow constant progression now... It's just far far too easy to build stat freaks which undermine the teams designed strengths and weaknesses...
some people might like that... but for me stats and doubles in this edition are terribly handled and mean there has to be re-draft, even though im not a massive fan |
I mean... I have been on record numerous times (mostly on discord) saying that the skilling system is the absolute worst thing in this edition of blood bowl... so no arguments that that should be changed. |
yeah its awful..
that and Wildly inaccurate... and bomber stars.. but bomber stars have been banned now... so that's one thing fixed |
_________________
|
|
|
|
| |
Increasing the max R...
Search
