Posted by robocoyote on 2012-08-20 18:12:50
I like the vampire Idea alot
Posted by harvestmouse on 2012-08-20 19:40:20
Like the goblins and bribes.
Isn't that how claw works now?
Something of the other aspects are a bit technical for me, I don't really have the experience to answer for CRP.
Rosters
Humans
Linemen cost 40k
A 6 3 3 8 lino with G access for 50k, is your basic player. All other prices were based off this, you can't change the price here, without unbalancing everything else.
Halflings
0-2 Halfling Runners: 6 2 4 6 70k dodge, stunty, right stuff A
I'm somewhere in the middle for this one. It's kinda like old 2nd ed catchers.
Dwarves:
Longbeards 4 3 2 9 Block, Thick Skull, Stand Firm 70k GS
Troll Slayer 5 3 2 8 Dauntless, Block, Tackle, Frenzy 90k GS
I don't like this, stand firm on longbeards as standard will kill low agility teams.
Chaos Pact
Marauders 6 3 3 8 50k GMP
This of course is an improvement.
Vampires
0-1 Elf Thrall 6 3 4 7 70k Animosity GA
0-1 Orc Thrall 5 3 3 9 50k Animosity G
0-4 Zombies 4 3 2 8 40k Animosity, Loner, Regenerate G (Can't be biten)
Elf and Orc thrall, I hate, no fluff reason for this inclusion. Zombie inclusion I like, possibly as an alternative roster.
Posted by Fightingmongoose on 2012-08-20 19:42:28
My favorite thing is the change to FA. I have always wanted to try some FA goblins on underworld. If it combined with DP, it would be really fun. I think that would become another mutation people would actually take, instead of always claw, tents, horns, only.
I very much agree that the Longbeards need the tackle gone. I think it make more sense to add it to the Blitzers though instead of the Slayers. Minor thing.
The one thing that I don't like is removing strength and ag from the marauders. While I agree that they are too strong as constructed, If you take away the access, you lose the flavour of the team. I think they would become a tier 3 team without any strength on a non-big guy.
All in all though, I like your ideas, and I hope there is indeed another LRB edition coming one day.
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-08-20 20:06:15
Harvest wrote:
"A 6 3 3 8 lino with G access for 50k, is your basic player. All other prices were based off this, you can't change the price here, without unbalancing everything else."
I know it is commonly thought that equal players need to have equal prices but I don't feel the LRB follows this concept very closely and the more important question should probably be how the entire human team would be unbalanced in comparison to other teams that get much worse players for a lower pricing. Do you feel like humans would be overpowerd in regard to vampires, or one of the undead races, maybe in comparison to goblins? Would it stand out more against one of the stronger teams? Frankly I don't see it. A cost reduction of 40-70TV on a human team could go a long way to make that T3 race competative.
"I don't like this, stand firm on longbeards as standard will kill low agility teams."
Right.. mmmh....
"Elf and Orc thrall, I hate, no fluff reason for this inclusion. Zombie inclusion I like, possibly as an alternative roster."
The inclusion was actually mostly for fluff reasons. Why should a Vampire team only have human thralls? Elves and Orcs seemed to be to me the most feasible alternatives. Generally when it comes to controlling mortals alignment should play a secondary roll. I didn't feel like including a goblin since too many teams have that already. Big Guys shouldn't be on a vampire roster. Fluff wise dwarves may be persistant to being enslaved, really only leaves elves and orcs.
FIghtinmongoose wrote:
" If you take away the access, you lose the flavour of the team. I think they would become a tier 3 team without any strength on a non-big guy. "
When I look at pact I see so much potential to build incredibly agile ball handling teams. They have been given passing access for a reason and three skill categories provide still so many great options to choose from. I have played my fair share of pact games and I feel taking strengh skills on doubles would still make them a good team. They would still have access to clawpomb it would be just harder to aquire. They would still have access to 3 big guys to employ strengh teams if they desire. In the meantime they could utilize on the full potential of mutations and passing skills. I think they would really make a unique very flavored team much more being played in the way they probably were originally designed for.
" I think it make more sense to add it to the Blitzers though instead of the Slayers. "
Right... Either that or add it to both... hmmm
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-08-20 20:18:01
Actually maybe I should include another pact player with strengh access. Something along the lines like: 0-1 Beastman 6 3 3 8 Horns, Animosity GSM
Posted by Nelphine on 2012-08-20 22:56:33
hum, changed marauders, but didn't change beastmen? I would change beastmen and pestigors to not have M access except on doubles (similar to the marauder change, but different just for variety. alternatively, remove S access except on doubles).
Not a fan of the human change.
Would like to see break tackle apply to leaps as well as dodges.
I don't think very long legs should apply to shadowing, and I don't have enough experience with pass block to know how that would change it.
Don't understand the skill/stat pricing change (does that mean normal rolls are 30k, doubles/MA/AV 40k, agi 50k, S 60k? Except on stunty players when it's 5k cheaper? If so that seems fairly strange, especially given your changes to spiralling expenses.)
I like the niggle change.
Posted by harvestmouse on 2012-08-20 23:54:17
I'm not really sure humans need a boost, however bring blitzer prices in line with orc blitzers would be a much better option IMO. I dislike the idea of pricing (basic) players differently on different teams, unless it's to signify they are rare.
My problem with your longbeards, would be let's say Norse for example. Generally they'd need to remove themselves from the longbeards, and the best way to do that is to double up and block your way out (for teams like this) blanket stand firm, would literally kill them.
Vampires as we know them are ex humans, who live a quasi human existance. There is no fluff or reason to support cross breed interaction. I see no reason to support this idea.
Fightingmongoose, you realise marauders don't get ag on regular rolls right?
Posted by Wreckage on 2012-08-21 08:07:09
Nelphine wrote:
"would change beastmen and pestigors to not have M access except on doubles (similar to the marauder change, but different just for variety. alternatively, remove S access except on doubles)."
I have been thinking about it. To me it was important that there is no player in the game who costs less than 60tv and has strengh access. Beastmen are rather expensive linemen for only coming with horns. I believe their skill access is a fair trade off. The killer combo of course will inevitably still hold some dominance but you also have to see the big picture in wich its efficiency should be reduced by around 20%. I think there are a lot of good alternatives out there to skill a team and it should be the chaos flavor to have the special GSM acess.
I didn't really think much about Nurgle mainly for the reason I never played them much nor payed attention to them and even my memory about their current stats are a bit blurry. I think Pestigors are pretty highly priced simply for the access and it wouldn't really make sense to change them. The best reason to alter those two teams would be probably their similarities but I didn't really look into that.
"Don't understand the skill/stat pricing change (does that mean normal rolls are 30k, doubles/MA/AV 40k, agi 50k, S 60k? Except on stunty players when it's 5k cheaper? If so that seems fairly strange, especially given your changes to spiralling expenses.)"
That's correct. I explained my reasons in the text below the rule changes. A halfling would pay 25 TV for a regular skill and 35 TV for example for +ma. So he would efficiently pay more too. Increasing the distance between steps for spiralling expenses is only consequential.
"I don't think very long legs should apply to shadowing, and I don't have enough experience with pass block to know how that would change it."
In LRB4 VLL used to be a pretty valuable skill. The CRP ruleset had managed to bring most skills on par but VLL had efficiently become the most useless skill in the game. Up to today I couldn't think of a single reason to ever take it. Wardancers have no access to it and Slann already start with it. For all the mutation races it would have been just such a waste to invest a whole skill on just getting +1 to leaps. Since it wasn't possible to revert it back to its former form I had been thinking about what else to do with it. I liked the idea very much to make it a skill that utilizes on lots of other crappy skills and mechanics in the game. we all know what a terrible junk shadowing and pass block and leap is and what relevance interceptions in the game have. So packing all in one together just seemed like a great idea.
Ok thanks for the input guys, I think I have a couple ideas for changes.
Posted by harvestmouse on 2012-08-21 13:54:09
Forgot to add that I really like the idea of adding a beastman after taking away S access for marauders.
Posted by zakatan on 2012-08-22 12:29:00
Increasing the pricing of skills has another side effect that you don't seem to consider. It will reward enormously better starting statlines at high TV.
Teams that are now good at low TV like UD, Khems, Amazons or Humans, but that suffer at mid TV and suck at high TV will suck already at mid TV.
It will also incentivate the 1 or 2 superstar players and fodder. Any skilled lino goes out immediately. It kinda is a min-maxing paradise rule.