Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2012-02-04 08:09:02
Well said bro
Posted by Purplegoo on 2012-02-04 08:17:01
Shades of grey. As ever.
Posted by pythrr on 2012-02-04 08:25:22
mostly right, except you concentrate on clawpomb.
clawpomb is not he problem.
PO is the problem. remove (or fix) that, and all is well.
Posted by lizvis on 2012-02-04 08:34:11
both rule sets are dumb, but at least lrb4 was fun dumbness at high TR. CRP is just dumb at high TV. i notice how your argument (and everyone else who likes CRP for that matter) neglects to mention that the four dominate races in high TV CRP all come from the same mold, i.e. clawpomb. whereas in lrb4, you had multiple good teams from at least two, possibly three different molds. and THAT is the difference between a rule set worth playing and one that is a flaming pile of CRaP. notice how the race vs race winning percentages are no longer in the statisitcs..............gee i wonder why that is...........maybe its to make it easier to perpetuate the myth that there is a counter to clawpomb and we didn't have an awful rule set forced on us................just a thought
Posted by anisdrin on 2012-02-04 08:53:11
The problem of CRP is Clawpomb because it is boooooooring.
Back in LRB4 to get a RSC player required good skill and aging rolls. I think in more than 500 games I only faced it 1 or twice.
Fouling required some players and usually bad players sacrificed position to do it. But anyway was something that all teams could do, clawpomb not.
Now with a single Clawpomb player and 1 blitz a turn you can solve a game without the opponent being able to do anything.
Clawpomb is boring. Has nothing to do with killing potential. Fouls in LRB4 killed much more people.
Posted by koadah on 2012-02-04 09:22:54
It takes three skills to be a C-POMBer and you'll probably want block too. It only took one to get a DP.
Dudes like RandomOracle & BillBrasky play enough games to be fully claw/RSCed up with no one else 'lucky' enough to be able to stop them.
If we still played LRB4 style rules the Box would still be dead as everyone crapped their pants at seeing all those multi 60k DPs at low TV.
The main problem IMO of C-POMB is that for what it is, it is way too cheap.
Posted by SvenS on 2012-02-04 10:01:10
Well put! =)
Posted by JigerJones on 2012-02-04 10:20:58
Well said Stonetroll, rated 6
Posted by Alf115 on 2012-02-04 10:26:31
About the rsc claw, it is just that now, with the removal of traits, any dumbass coach (me included), can take claw as a regular skill.
It's the removal of traits that makes all this fuss actually.
Posted by Calcium on 2012-02-04 10:27:24
A well constructed piece which avoids the usual bollocks of 'clawPOMB is sooooo boring'
I wonder, will the majority ever be happy here regardless of the changes that are made to the ruleset? One day we will all be whining about Christer and his select squad's FUMBBL LRB7...
Posted by Purplegoo on 2012-02-04 10:40:09
Absolutely, Calcium.
But I've no doubt we'll produce endless chat on the topic anyway!
Posted by pythrr on 2012-02-04 10:43:53
chat FTW
but... as C has said MANY TIMES .... FUMBBL will stick as close as possible to the official rules.
Posted by Garion on 2012-02-04 10:54:19
I agree with some, disagree with alot.
But that doesn't really matter. It is still Bloodbowl and what is really really boring is the number of mute coaches recently, I just wish people would be a little more sociable in games. All you get a lot of the time atm is silience throughout a game follow be a 'gg' at the end. Talk to your opponent. It makes dicings funny not frustrating, it makes injuries more fun, and crazy plays more fun.
Not good enough imo.
Posted by koadah on 2012-02-04 11:12:50
@MrCasChampion If it's that boring don't do it. ;)
Posted by koadah on 2012-02-04 11:14:59
@pythrr When you have multiple divisions you can both stick closely to the rules and not stick closely to the rules.
Posted by Calcium on 2012-02-04 11:25:21
lol, I personally think its bloody exciting :)
Posted by PurpleChest on 2012-02-04 11:26:01
utter piffle. Only imbeciles played LRB4 the way you say, most players were a hell of a lot more tactical than that.
Posted by Calcium on 2012-02-04 11:30:43
Imbecile? I know you don't mean me when u say that ;)
Posted by koadah on 2012-02-04 11:51:28
@PurpleChest well if your DP cost you 90k rather than 60k then I'm sure you would be more tactical.
Even so, there appeared to be plenty of so called 'imbeciles' in the Box.
Not naming names though. ;)
Posted by koadah on 2012-02-04 11:58:07
@MrCasChampion Ah, so have I misunderstood you? You don't object to the C-POMB you just want the evil LRB4 fouling AS WELL? :shock:
Posted by Formengil on 2012-02-04 12:09:32
Brilliant entry 0/
Posted by pythrr on 2012-02-04 13:34:52
once again, PC hits the nail on the (stupid) head
Posted by Electric_Wizard on 2012-02-04 13:59:18
I'm in love with Stonetroll.
Posted by uuni on 2012-02-04 14:02:46
I agree with this blog post.
Posted by bghandras on 2012-02-04 15:51:49
Rated 6. Best comment from a troll. Ever.
Posted by Afro on 2012-02-04 16:28:08
Well said, Stonetroll.
Posted by dynamo380 on 2012-02-05 01:21:46
Well said stonetroll.
PO needs fixing otherwise I dont think theres anything too wrong with the ruleset.
Fouling in lrb4 was just as bad, if not worse, than clawpomb
Posted by nThatch on 2012-02-05 04:03:18
Doubles for mutations.(Seriously why should those chaosy teams have it so much easier than we ratz!? We looooooove warpstones too!)
Posted by Loew on 2012-02-05 04:38:47
i still don't understand it...the only difference in tactics between LRB4 and CRP is fouling vs clawpomb?
you get one foul / turn, but you get 4 blocks at least in the first turn of your drive.
For an effective foul you need to knock down a player and position maybe 3+ player in one tight spot in such a way that they can assist the foul and you don't give up too much coverage of the field and have a dp in reach-for an effective clawpomb you need one clawpomber to knock over its target.
Of course CRP brought many good things to the game, journeymen, inducements instead of handicaps, TV instead of TR...there really seem to be less cherrypicking now - and indeed, how should we cherrypick nowadays, when every team looks like the other, because certain skills/combos are just too good to turn down.
I specced a lot of games than and i specc a lot of games now...maybe i'm getting old and sentimental, but my feeling is, that now there are a lot more games (between teams that looked equal strong at the beginning of the game) that are over after the first few turns, simply because one team hasn't enough player left
Posted by Meltyman on 2012-02-05 20:24:30
simple way to avoid the "boring" tactic is to play fast tournaments, where you have to make a new team after each season. worked for me ! :P
this wasn't so good option in lrb4 because you couldn't avoid the "boring" fouling, unless you banned it from the league... which kinda is stupid...