Changes You Would Make

Everything dealing with the video game developed by Cyanide!
User avatar
Scram Lyche
Posts: 138
Joined: 22 July 2015, 10:04

Changes You Would Make

Postby Scram Lyche » 23 September 2016, 02:02

Ok we all love Blood Bowl.. well most of us do anyway, but I'm sure none of us would agree it's perfect. What changes would you make to the game and why?

I'll start, and in no particular order..

1: 2 square deep endzone. I have mentioned this issue in another thread, don't need to expand here other than to say 2 squares would add to the tactics of defending the goal line.. imo.

2: Wardancers should have frenzy as a starting skill instead of block. Take block @ 6sp but c'mon wardancers without frenzy? Just read the official Warhammer description of a Wardancer and I'm sure you'll find plenty of pro argument.

3: Halflings should be included (2 max) in Wood Elf teams. For lore and synergy, without a stunty to throw it seems that the Treeman has little synergy with this team and as for lore.. you have read Lord of the Rings haven't you?

4: Foul injuries should grant 2 sp like any other injury.. I find this one the strangest.

5: Side Step should only work if the player is not knocked off his feet. As things stand it's virtually impossible to knock a player with sidestep out of bounds.

Comments, inclusions and assassinations welcome.
Last edited by Scram Lyche on 26 September 2016, 18:52, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 6828
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby dode74 » 23 September 2016, 06:17

A couple I'd like to try:
Alteration to cost of multiple skill-category access: viewtopic.php?p=35553#p35553
A change to the way passing works: http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/view ... =4&t=35377
Image

User avatar
Darkson
Posts: 2671
Joined: 17 September 2008, 20:43
Location: Somewhere on the same planet as you.
Contact:

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby Darkson » 23 September 2016, 08:07

3. No. Halflings in GW fluff live in their own land within the Empire - they don't have anything to do with Wood Elves. If anything it's halflings having access to Treemen that is wrong, as the only Treemen in WFB were part of the Wood Elf army. Halflings should have access to Ogres both due to the Empire connection and the (unexpanded) hints of a relationship between the origins of Halflings and Ogres.

4. No thanks, not again. Having lived through the time in BB where each team had a designated fouler who topped the SPP charts I don't want to go through that again. Yeah, I know fouling was easier in straight 3rd ed, but its still easy enough now and carries less risk (to the player) than blocking. It doesn't need an extra incentive.
Galak 3:16 says "There is a point in time that a player really should read the rulebook."
Home of the ARBBL
TalkFantasyFootball admin - PM me if you need help.
plasmoid wrote:And hey, don't knock masturbating. Judging from this thread, it's a reasonably popular pastime.

MalicWanderer
Posts: 65
Joined: 02 August 2016, 20:28

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby MalicWanderer » 24 September 2016, 04:44

Scram Lyche wrote:1: 2 square deep endzone. I have mentioned this issue in another thread, don't need to expand here other than to say 2 squares would add to the tactics of defending the goal line.. imo.

I don't see what that would help? You don't defend the goal line by standing inside the end zone, you stand in front of it, making it deeper won't do anything to help you there. All it does (by itself) is make it safer to go stand in the end zone and wait to catch a pass, since only frenzy players will be able to surf you.

If combined with making the pitch longer, so that end-zone to end-zone is the same distance, it also makes touch backs less likely, and further penalizes slow teams against opponents with kick, who can place the ball deep. If you don't make the pitch longer, than the distance you have to run to score is shorter, which is also a big advantage to faster teams since it makes one turning easier. A gutter runner could do it with no pushes just by picking up sprint, no stat ups or doubles or anything needed, for example. Of course it also makes one turning easier for slower teams, but an MA 6 piece is still going to have a hard time. It's also a big buff to TTM one turning.
2: Wardancers should have frenzy as a starting skill instead of block. Take block @ 6sp but c'mon wardancers without frenzy? Just read the official Warhammer description of a Wardancer and I'm sure you'll find plenty of pro argument.

A) That would make them too similar to witch elves, imo. B) It would be a huge nerf. Frenzy is a fantastic skill, but it's also a double edged sword, and on an AV 7 piece who often forms the spearhead of the team, especially after you take away the defensive ability of block, is going to cause you more harm than good. At least witches have AV 8 friends with a lot of block to help them out.

C) I couldn't care less about the official Warhammer description of anything. This is Blood Bowl, not Warhammer. It's a different world with different rules.
3: Halflings should be included (2 max) in Wood Elf teams. For lore and synergy, without a stunty to throw it seems that the Treeman has little synergy with this team and as for lore.. you have read Lord of the Rings haven't you?

Wood elves are already second best at one turning out of the non-TTM teams, on top of being all around fast and having across the board AG 4. They don't need TTM.

4: Foul injuries should grant 2 sp like any other injury.. I find this one the strangest.

Because fouling is significantly more likely to cause an injury than blocking, and there's zero risk that your own player get's hurt (sure they can get sent off, but that just makes them safe.) You skip the block entirely, which low AV players in particular are often relying on to keep them alive (ie, blodge) so you've got a 100% chance at getting to roll armor, vs a maximum of 98% (that's 6 dice (3-die block + reroll pushes, no loner) with Block vs no Block, and with tackle or vs no dodge.) or a much more common 55% (2 dice, no reroll, they have either block or dodge and you don't have tackle. Or they have both and you do.) with blocking. Then you get bonuses to the armor roll for assists, and you can apply Dirty Player to either the armor or injury (same as Mighty Blow, but they don't get those extra bonuses to the armor besides.)

dode74 wrote:A change to the way passing works: http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/view ... =4&t=35377

Passing is completely fine as it is. And I'm very much a coach who prefers the passing game, so I'm going against my own self interests saying "no, don't buff it." I won't go into all the details/numbers here because I've already done it on BBTactics, if you're curious you can look there: http://bbtactics.com/forum/threads/what ... ost-172924 (that's just the post with most of the numbers, if you want the whole context you'll have to scroll up and read the thread.)
tl;dr; Passing is just fine, it's scoring that's weak. If you want to see more pass plays, don't buff passing, nerf stalling. (Not that I'm actually suggesting that either, I think it'd make the lives of say Dwarves and Khemri, who take basically all 8 turns to score anyway, very painful.)

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 6828
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby dode74 » 24 September 2016, 06:38

Yeah. You've theorybowled regarding probabilities while I've looked at actual numbers regarding how often people pass, particularly with AG3 teams who have throwers available. The relative probabilities (between stalling and passing for AG3 thrower teams) are the incentive to carry out either action, and the while the theoretical numbers are fine, the data suggests AG3 thrower teams could do with an incentive to pass more often. That's what my proposal does. It's not a necessary change, which is why I said I'd like to try it out rather than it was needed.
Image

MalicWanderer
Posts: 65
Joined: 02 August 2016, 20:28

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby MalicWanderer » 25 September 2016, 09:50

dode74 wrote:Yeah. You've theorybowled regarding probabilities while I've looked at actual numbers regarding how often people pass, particularly with AG3 teams who have throwers available. The relative probabilities (between stalling and passing for AG3 thrower teams) are the incentive to carry out either action, and the while the theoretical numbers are fine, the data suggests AG3 thrower teams could do with an incentive to pass more often. That's what my proposal does. It's not a necessary change, which is why I said I'd like to try it out rather than it was needed.

It's not just probability of success, it's payoffs as well. Unless you're already behind the payoff for stalling is almost always better than the payoff for scoring. And passing is a tactic you use, generally, when you want to score. No amount of making passing easier will change that really. I'm not disagreeing that people don't pass that much, I just don't think buffing passing is what's going to fix that. And while your data is great at demonstrating they don't pass a lot, it says nothing about why. :P

I had about three paragraphs of additional thoughts written up, but I realized I shouldn't derail this thread into a big discussion on one specific proposal, and I don't wanna necro a 5 year old thread so... I guess if you're interested I can PM you? *shrug* The gist of it was I think it's a big buff to the passing game of teams that currently have little to none at all, especially Chaos because Extra Arms, and to the out of box one for AG 3 teams that do have catchers, but it's a nerf to AG 4 and developed AG 3 passing game.


As to what I'd change, basically just more teams. Specifically, I think there are still some niche playstyles/mechanical themes that existing teams don't quite fill and can't really be built into, and it'd be cool to see those added. In particular I'd like to see a hybrid team that mixes high and low agility players (preferably with no AG 3 at all). I actually have a draft of an undead elf team designed around the idea, but if I'm not gonna derail this thread discussing somebody else's idea I definitely shouldn't do so over my own. :) If anyone does wanna see it, it's here: http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/view ... =4&t=43185

Also maybe make the Tier 3 teams actually half viable in competitive play (or, introduce new, more competitive variations on them, so the people who love their 30% win rate Ogres can keep them. :) ) Something like FUMBBL's Pro Halfings would be awesome.

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 6828
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby dode74 » 25 September 2016, 10:07

MalicWanderer wrote:It's not just probability of success, it's payoffs as well. Unless you're already behind the payoff for stalling is almost always better than the payoff for scoring. And passing is a tactic you use, generally, when you want to score. No amount of making passing easier will change that really. I'm not disagreeing that people don't pass that much, I just don't think buffing passing is what's going to fix that. And while your data is great at demonstrating they don't pass a lot, it says nothing about why. :P
If it's about stalling vs scoring that suggests buffing passing will make the payoff for stalling less: if you have to stall for longer because your opponent will find it easier to score in fewer turns then your stall has to be more solid as it's very often a trade-off about how long you will stall vs the risk of stalling itself. Sure, there are games where the stalling team is completely in control, but in those games there's no risk to not stalling anyway.
The gist of it was I think it's a big buff to the passing game of teams that currently have little to none at all, especially Chaos because Extra Arms, and to the out of box one for AG 3 teams that do have catchers, but it's a nerf to AG 4 and developed AG 3 passing game.
Then I don't think you read the numbers I posted properly. The real buff is to passing, not to catching. EA has little effect on that. It's certainly not a nerf to AG4 or to developed AG3 passing though.
Image

MalicWanderer
Posts: 65
Joined: 02 August 2016, 20:28

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby MalicWanderer » 25 September 2016, 10:54

dode74 wrote:Then I don't think you read the numbers I posted properly. The real buff is to passing, not to catching. EA has little effect on that. It's certainly not a nerf to AG4 or to developed AG3 passing though.

I mean, it's a buff to the Pass skill by way of letting whoever you throw it to reroll the catch. The actual pass roll isn't affected at all, unless I totally missed a section somehow? So any changes to the actual pass-play-success-rate will be relative to who's doing the catching.

EA adds a +1 to the catch roll, so Chaos doesn't need a double for DC to get it to a 2+, nor do they need one for Catch to get the reroll, thus not having any A access is significantly less of a problem for their potential passing game than before. Not saying they'd be the best AG 3 passers or anything, just that I think they'd get the highest delta from where they are now.

It's a nerf to AG 4 passing because they already catch on a 2+ outside TZ's and rain, so the bonus from diving catch doesn't help them, but you got rid of their free reroll from having Catch. True, they can still reroll if the thrower didn't, but that's not as good as being able to reroll both. Tho, I guess now the non catchers can also reroll, so maybe it's less a nerf to elf passing game and more a nerf to elf catchers (particularly pro elves, for whom DC doesn't even help mitigate TZ's.)

Developed AG 3 is a nerf because before you could take Catch and DC, for a +1 and a reroll regardless of whether the throw was rerolled (or even if it's a diving catch scatter launch.) They no longer have that option with your change. Since it's no longer possible to get a free catch reroll that's not shared with the pass roll, maximum possible Pass+Catch success rate obtainable by adding skills to your players will go down.

Also, mostly unrelated to the general passing game, but I just realized this change gives Slann Catchers an out-of-box 75% intercept rate, which is kind of gross. I'd kind of assumed they were the only catcher to start with DC rather than Catch specifically to avoid exactly that.

Unless you're referring to revisions later on in the thread, I only read the first post. If that's the case then I apologize. Maybe I'll have to go read the whole thing later and just necro it if I still have anything to say. ;)

User avatar
dode74
Posts: 6828
Joined: 11 December 2008, 11:18
Location: Nr. Reading, UK
Contact:

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby dode74 » 25 September 2016, 11:11

Chaos still require doubles for the Pass skill. The EA thing isn't a change at all.

Not all AG4 have catch, and the +1 from DC has an effect on marking catchers being less effective. They still get the benefits from having catch on a hand-off.

Developed AG3 with a dedicated thrower aren't required to spend as many skill slots to get the same modifier: they can pass to anyone and get the reroll on the pass.

I understand your objections, but disagree with you on them. We're well into the realms of theorybowl regarding how it is used, though. We do agree that the disparity between stalling and scoring is the issue, just disagree on how to address it: I would give certain teams an easier method of scoring (in response to a stall, potentially making the stall harder) while you'd change something(?) about stalling.
Image

Valcurdra
Posts: 538
Joined: 21 November 2012, 04:35

Re: Changes You Would Make

Postby Valcurdra » 25 September 2016, 11:41

Not interested in specifics more in approach.

I would look at rarely picked skills and consider a buff or replacement skills.

You could look at most picked skills and work in new skills to nerf them. Similar to wrestle/block


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests