You have no idea whether or not your billons of combinations are balanced. That's my point. All you've done is said "these are the combinations". I've no issues with that your youtube link says, but you've not done that.That's why I specifically said "billions of balanced team customizable combinations"
Billions of combinations doesn't necessarily mean billions of balanced combinations. But billions of balanced combinations does by definition HAVE TO be balanced.
A laughable statement. We're talking about games here - not all games are to everyone's taste.You can't just fall back on it's just my opinion vs your opinion. I want something that you don't want and You want something I don't want. No ones right no ones wrong its all just opinions. Because well that is wrong.
Then come up with a viable ruleset. Nobody has said you can't, just that you haven't, and if you do that it is not Blood Bowl but something else: 40k vs DoW again.I want a gamemode that's better suited for online matchmaking
All of which is just opinion. Yours, theirs, mine, it's all opinion. I don't care how popular LoL or DOTA or Starcraft or Magic the Gathering are: they are not to my taste and you are unlikely to get me to want to play them by telling me how competitive they are. I'm more interested in how fun they are, and I don't find those games fun.all to backup my opinion
Riot moving to pseudorandom (by which I assume they mean the RNG is modified to get rid of crits after a crit has procced) have done so because players don't like double crits. That's a design choice by them, much like similar design choices are made in the Civ series. Quad skulls are a design choice for Blood Bowl. Neither is objectively better than the other.
And you need to stop equating deterministic with competitive: they're not the same thing. Deterministic is chess-like, competitive (in this context) is the spirit of competition, and BB certainly has that.
My equation at the end was a mickeytake of your thinking. Shame you missed that. Risk management is a skill which you don't appear to value, which is fine. You basically don't like environmental randomness, which is also fine. I, and others who play this game, like it and value that skill and find BB a good way to compete in that skill which is fundamental to the game.You say:High RNG is competitive
*Ignores any points about increasing player choice increases skill, By making the winner determined by player choice*
More RNG means more Risk management and risk management is a skill so More RNG=More Skill=More competitive
No, I said it was a different type of risk management, one where you have to take into account the possibility that your players will fail the action you are asking them to take when planning your turn. It's not better or worse, it's just different and preferred by those who play this game.You say: RNG has more risk management or Volatility/HIE/Player controlled randomness doesn't involve the same amount of risk management
So here we are. You want a completely different game to BB but based on the BB IP and simply can't understand that people actually like to play with randomness in the game because they find it fun. Apparently you think that because you can quote other people who share your opinion that you are right and we are wrong, as opposed to understanding that people like different things. You also seem unable to comprehend that in BB you are playing against the other coach as well as mitigating for your players' failings and limitations, a factor which limits what you can reasonably expect to get away with as a coach, although there's nothing to stop you trying it should circumstances permit: you might just get away with that crazy play, just like in real life!So here we are. I want to make the game be more player choice driven aka competitive by unnecessary removing RNG and provided fairly reliable sources to back my points up(the best I can find) and you don't want that because you want to keep the RNG because you think removing RNG would remove/lessen the risk management even though I've done my best to explain prove and show you links to decent sources to show you Volatility/HIE/Player controlled randomness requires just as much risk management.
I'm going to say it one more time: the game you want is not based on the same principles as Blood Bowl. The game you want is Frozen Endzone with fantasy football skins. It might be fun, it might not, but it's not utilising the same skillset as this game and is fundamentally different. If you want it then come up with a decent ruleset and either pitch it to a games company or make it yourself.