Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
 Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 02:27 |
 
|
| VillainousIntent wrote: | | I miss stat freaks |
Every developed ball carrier becomes one now, because people just save for it.
I miss when random linos became them tho. |
|
|
Carthage
Joined: Mar 18, 2021
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 04:09 |
|
I think +MAx2 ball carriers don't really qualify as "stat freaks" more like "selectively bred" |
|
|
Drrek
Joined: Jul 23, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 05:36 |
|
| Carthage wrote: | | I think +MAx2 ball carriers don't really qualify as "stat freaks" more like "selectively bred" |
I mean, you take the +MAx2, but you're hunting for the +AG really |
|
|
Zelmor
Joined: Sep 29, 2022
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 20:29 |
|
+2 skills like DP, MB. Too great an advantage on 2d6 curve.
Wildly inaccurate not deviating from target square.
I counted 15 skills (without accounting for the mutations tree) that most good coaches would never pick. That's more than one whole skill-group. Just merge things down, change things up. Make everything useful, no need for newbie traps and random-roll potholes. It's bad design. We can do with 8 skills in every tree, the game already has a d8 die for resolving bounces, make use of that.
Teams with block/dodge on linemen while retaining G access on primary. Make Amazon linewomen A primary G secondary. Increase Norse linemen cost. |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 21:08 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | JanMattys wrote: | | The more a team needs them, the higher the cost. |
And that's clearly bad design. It should be the other way around. |
First of all, that's your opinion, so don't use clearly please  It makes sense if you think about it: You pay things for their value. The more a reroll brings to the table, the more its value is higher for the team. The less you really need it, the less value it brings. For humans, a reroll is not a life or death thing. For Tomb Kings it might well be.
Second, yeah, I can see where you come from. I really do. The fact is, many teams without skills often already make up for it with incredible statlines. Chaos Warriors have an incredible statline, for example, and that's something a human positional will never reach without a lot of spps and a bloated tv increase.
If "bad teams" had cheaper rerolls they could field a full roster more easily, and become competitive way earlier than intended.
That's the thing to remember (you might like it or dislike it, but it is not bad design, just a decision): the tiers are not intended to be equal. It is written in the rulebook that lower tiers must be considered as a challenge for the player, so they are supposed to be a tougher team to develop. The general idea of "making up for it" goes directly against the rules as intended.
As for the stunties in your example, I consider them a whole different thing. Stunties are meant to be a messy, funny thing of their own and while on principle I agree that cheaper rerolls wouldn't make stunties particularly competitive, I don't look favourably at things that trim their tv even more. In a blackbox environment there's already a lot of teams relying on low tv stunties to smash the asses of recovering teams with fouls, stars and a long bench. Hell, the behaviour even crept to leagues with underworld, which is not a stunty team but works the same way. Lowering their tv would exacerbate the problem imho. |
_________________
 |
|
[Suggestion] Add an ...
Search
