Kalamona
Joined: Apr 21, 2005
|
 Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 11:49 |
 
|
i think there is no problem having 2 G access players (punter) and 2 ag4 players at the same time. but u can alway change the catcher's str to 1 or their av to 5. that would give them a prosperous, but rather short life. Hot pot on the roster is a great idea.
The problem is is at higher level. At around TR1600 most teams have at least 1-2 players with block tackle (on normal rolls) and/or saw, bombs which can take players out effectively. Not proflings though, their game at high level is all about trying to survive. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 11:56 |
|
Well, I can't comment on Whatball's thoughs. However I was involved in all stages of the making of this roster and the ag4 was a trade off to 'G' access to make something different.
If they cannot survive above 1600TV, then so be it (in my eyes) they cannot. In which case they'd stay below this deck and play up with inducements. Possibly they could have a star player that had blockle......but I'm not sure about that. I know we had some ideas for more Star Players.
However for me, yes I'm all for making some changes (particularly the punters) but I think it'd be a shame that they were forced to have G access added. This removes part of their uniqueness. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 11:56 |
|
I think Stunty player using TTM is fine, but you need a reason to use it. As I say if he has big hand then he can pick the loose balls up the borrower knocks free, then punt them down field. The more I think about i the more I think this would be quite a fun change tbh. |
_________________
 |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 12:01 |
|
Well if we are to change them, I'd like to see it in baby steps rather than massive changes at once.
So possibly:
One revamp Punters (not sure how yet).
Then if they still need help
Two add another Moot Guard
Then
Three add the HotPot
All 3 of those changes are for a long term team and keep the ag4/no G access balance. Only after this would I look at G access and if that had to be added..........well I consider the project a bit of a failure  |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 12:08 |
|
The only problem I can see with adding another Moot Guard is the team is already really good at low TV and this could possibly tip them over the edge, but then again, maybe not, I think you are right though, baby steps first and the punter is probably the positional that needs looking at first. |
_________________
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
What about the G access tree? This was in the original proposal until it was switched for the P access tree late on. Does anyone make good use of the P access? I think the G Tree could make a big difference to their high TV effectiveness.
I love the punters. I think the problem with them is that they start with all the (normal) skills that you'd ever want them to have. Maybe the punter as is is better suited as a cheap star? Maybe he should lose some skills and be cheaper so he has somewhere to develop to? Or maybe him and the hotpot could be combined? |
|
|
Duckn
Joined: Apr 20, 2014
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 12:50 |
|
Rather than big hand, why not give the punter catch? Ball can be more easily handed off to him for punting down field + you have 2 more options for the dump off players.
Probably too much catch on the team tho, so maybe diving catch for a defensive dump-off reciever?
Could also be useful for catching a scattering stripped ball. P access allows adding nos later if coaches like. |
|
|
selfy_74
Joined: Sep 03, 2010
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 12:53 |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 13:04 |
|
Punters already receive P access. Also there's little benefit in giving him catch skills when you have an ag 4 catcher on the team.
The idea behind the Punter (and the team to some extent) is that it's a professional BB team, with professional play. As an example; they can play a passing game unlike other stunty teams. Catchers were of course a given (seeing as they used to have them). However throwers seem a little far fetched for stunties, so they were given a Punter. This little fellow has developed as a fair decent thrower, by kicking the ball. Of course with the Halflings feet being so big and firm, the idea seems perfect for this team.
I think I'd drop stunty from him, and add kick off return. However for no price increase (2 kick off returns isn't a good return of money). This then means he has more chance of being the ball carrier and doing something with it. If he still needs a bump, maybe consider pass?
Adding G access to the Treeman, seems like a good bump for low TV as well as high TV. As he comes with 3 blocks with MB per turn. You can skill one of these quickly, and recycle the rest of the team. I could see coaches treading water like this. Using 2 super catchers, a bunch of linos and a kick ass tree.
I think the Moot Guard are definitely long term. All the good skills are yet to come and they're pretty expensive compared to their use as a new player. I'm not sure they need or should have stunty. It's a pretty negative skill for them. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 13:36 |
|
| selfy_74 wrote: | | What is the limitation of the client that makes the hotpot not work as intended? |
**ROSTER UPDATE**
Just an FYI, that I have removed Take Root from the HotPot star player for now. I noticed there is a bug where HMP will fail if TR happens, which is rather silly. As it is 1 MA anyway, no big deal. I will add it back when the nug is fixed. There are enough HMP bugs as it is that we don't need another one. |
|
|
Kalamona
Joined: Apr 21, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 30, 2014 - 14:46 |
|
some really good ideas guys. Big hand/kick off return for the punter, 3 guards (if they lose stunty) OR a G access tree would make them durable enough to survive at higher TR as well. |
|
|
Sigmar1
Joined: Aug 13, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 01, 2014 - 03:25 |
|
My PFlings have had decent success up to about 1750 TV, above that is really dicey. Well developed MG are essential at that TV.
I agree that the Punter position needs a rework. It's virtually worthless as is, other than the Kick skill. Pass access has no real value. Remove P access and cut their cost seems best. Just make them a one-trick player. Maybe even make them 0-1 as I don't think I've ever seen a team run with more than one anyway.
I also find the Hot Pot (as currently configured) a waste of inducement money unless I just want a high AV body for the LOS (good vs. non-claw Blackle Pombers). Maybe it'll even stand up. Pulling a 2nd player from the action in order to get a HMP bomber is a losing proposition IMO. Really, I get the fluff, but the star is worthless. Without RS it might actually be worth it. Or give it Strong Arm so it might be worthwhile as a medium range bomber that gets abandoned by its minder once the scrum pushes into/ past it. |
_________________
Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges! |
|
CastleMan
Joined: Apr 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Sep 01, 2014 - 03:27 |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | Adding G access to the Treeman, seems like a good bump for low TV as well as high TV. As he comes with 3 blocks with MB per turn. You can skill one of these quickly, and recycle the rest of the team. I could see coaches treading water like this. Using 2 super catchers, a bunch of linos and a kick ass tree. |
I think it would be a good bump at all TVs, but more so at the higher end. I don't get the 3 blocks with MB per turn thing, can you explain that? Also, I don't generally like the idea of discounting options on the theory that someone could min/max something. In my (admittedly low number of) games with them my problem was keeping my catchers and Moots alive as they are obvious targets. I think if someone could develop 2 super Catchers then fair play to them!
On the punters, I was thinking over your suggestion to remove Stunty and add kick-off return. I really like this, but to take it a step further - Pro Flings are loosely Rugby themed so the Punters could become like rugby full backs. Here's what I was thinking: Add Kick-off return and remove Stunty as suggested. Also remove HMP and switch their AV and MA around (so they don't become tougher by losing Stunty and also they become better at carrying).
6 2 3 5 Dodge, Kick, Kick-off Return, Right Stuff AP GS
The idea being that they're still useful at the start, but less so, and in the long term they can become better (and actually good) throwers than currently, so they have somewhere to develop to.
Thoughts?
Note: One of my own Punters has a stat line 6235. This is purely coincidence  |
|
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 02, 2014 - 11:33 |
|
0-1 punter is fine. I do love the HMP on them, and kick is great in stunty as well (I even gave it to a squig slayer).
So far I'm 7/0/4 with the little buggers. I love how they can play up heaps and win, like in my first ever game with proflings. |
|
|
|
|
Gnomes are trash
Search
