LRB4 was better than CRP, so why not bring it back?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next |
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
 Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 18:06 |
 
|
Wow they are dumb lol. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 18:13 |
|
for those interested there is a HUGE post on page 2  |
_________________
 |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 18:18 |
|
The game is missing aging massively. It's not the amount of players aging removed from the game (I'm not sure that was even the intention. I think the thought was taht 1 injury guys wouldn't be sack). It was the threat of aging.
Players were skilled slow, spp were spread more evenly across the teams, and rosters were bigger and one reason for this was to keep the mvps becoming dangerous.
This has 3 massive effects on the game now:
1. There's a lot more control over team creation. Meaning that there's more chance of cookie cutter builds.
2. Less need for reserves, less need for skilled players over the chosen few. Which means if things do go wrong early, the game is over.
3. Players race their chosen legend through to legend status in ridiculously quick time and this has majorly diluted legend status.
The mechanic 'aging' seems fine (apart from injuries on the first 2 skills), it's the implementation. Old niggle was horrid. Small levels of 'aging' injuries, that probably wouldn't retire your player (at first at least) would work much better. |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 18:19 |
|
Someone mentioned peaking aged players. That would work.
Also Garion you should probably blog your post cos it's pretty good and interesting. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 18:21 |
|
I like ageing I really did, but many hated it, and now it is gone there is no way it could ever be brought back. same for traits sadly. They just wouldn't be accepted now it has moved so far the other way. |
_________________
|
|
cameronhawkins
Joined: Aug 19, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 19:30 |
|
As long as we're throwing things out there, my suggestion would be this––
Change the Apo to the following––
Apothecaries are highly skilled, and can heal any injury, including decapitation. It's all a question of how well they keep their medicines stocked, and whether they can afford the most potent doses of mushrooms and warpstone–– these things aren't cheap, after all! And giving expert care to the more-aged players is always a more tricky matter... all those hairline fractures and worn-down joints eventually add up.
An Apothecary can be used once per match to heal any injury a player suffers, but only if you spent the required amount of Gold. This amount of Gold is equal to 10,000 for every 10 games the player has played, modified by the severity of the injury: Knock Out: x 1, Badly Hurt: x 2, Serious Injury: x 3, RIP: x 4 When used on KO result, the player remains on the pitch, prone. In all other situations, the player is returned to the reserves.
Here's why it's good:
1) Apo becomes more reliable (Less frustration at failure = good)
2) Money is now actually useful (Agency in the use of under-used game mechanics = good)
3) Spiraling Expenses gone (Arbitrary penalization gone = good)
4) Legends become more rare (Legends are truly Legendary = good)
5) More-developed teams are susceptible to a penalization that does not affect younger teams. (Elements to cause attrition selectively in high-TV teams = good)
6) Apo use becomes more interesting. For example, you will have to think more critically about whether you want to save a blodge lineman with 30 games under his belt, or whether it's worth the cost to bring a Legend back from being Badly Hurt. (More interesting choices = good)
7) Team management becomes more interesting. For example, you might consider simply firing players that don't develop quickly, since they will become much more of a burden if they ever do develop. Note that this is more 'realistic' in a fluffy way–– players that don't develop should be fired! (More interesting choices = good) |
Last edited by cameronhawkins on %b %17, %2014 - %19:%May; edited 4 times in total |
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 19:34 |
|
| lizvis wrote: | | @arktoris: imagine that, a team hugger who likes all the JM's that CRaP gave him. shocking. |
imagine that, a cry baby who wants everyone playing orc teams. shocking. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 19:48 |
|
you boys and your passive aggressive comments, lol.
Garion, thanks for the history! |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 20:10 |
|
One day I might get round to doing a full history from monsters of midway to crp |
_________________
|
|
Nextflux
Joined: Jan 22, 2008
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 20:33 |
|
I too want to throw out comments:
1)Nerf the dwarf blocker (remove 1 skill, hopefully tackle)
According to the formula the creators used they actually calculated the dwarves wrong in compersion to other races. (also I hate dwarves)
2)Do not touch the foul, it is fine!!! +2 dp was just stupid, everyone was fouling all the time in lrb 4, and if you didnt have dirty player you were a stupid player.
Dont bring back aging eather it is even more horrible, and the most annoying thing about lrb4
3)Half cost for most inducements, including starplayers. (also dont give the opponent same amount of transfer money as yourself just transferred)
4)TV should only be counted for the most expensive 11 players
5)Add another ssp level, level 7 like in lrb4, but extreame amounts of ssp needed (for example 600 ssp) |
|
|
Rat_Salat
Joined: Apr 22, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 21:30 |
|
| cameronhawkins wrote: | | As long as we're throwing things out there, my suggestion would be this |
It's an idea Cameron, but would really only help teams that are able to actually save gold, meaning the AV9 teams get more durable and the AV7 ones effectively lose their apothecary. |
|
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 21:37 |
|
I liked aging as well. LRB4 could have used J-men and a rework of the kick off and handicaps system, other than that I wouldn't have touched it really. |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
cameronhawkins
Joined: Aug 19, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 22:09 |
|
| Rat_Salat wrote: | | cameronhawkins wrote: | | As long as we're throwing things out there, my suggestion would be this |
It's an idea Cameron, but would really only help teams that are able to actually save gold, meaning the AV9 teams get more durable and the AV7 ones effectively lose their apothecary. |
I dunno... I'm unconvinced. My Underworld team has survived in as bashy an environment as Blockbox, despite many massacres, and has 540k in the bank. Looking at your teams, too, there seems to be at best a weak relationship between treasury and AV.
This apothecary would be free to use for any player with under 10 games, and would be more reliable, so teams that were rebuilding would not have to spend so much on new players. |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
May 17, 2014 - 23:36 |
|
Well, if inducements are weaker then it is much harder to find fair game. (In a world where we have no inducement, then only the blackboxlike matchmaking is usable.)
If inducements are strong, then minmaxing and TV management are at the forefront of competitive decisions.
It is quite simple.
As long as players are not priced according to real power, it is impossible to make every camp happy, because any imbalance create cherrypickings (nobody prefers playing against overpowered team), which leads to matchmaking problems, which creates the gambit of inducements. Which then leads to minmaxing and more cherrypicking. Circle is closed. |
_________________
 |
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
May 18, 2014 - 00:32 |
|
| Quote: | | Looking at your teams, too, there seems to be at best a weak relationship between treasury and AV. |
It's not as simple as that. Factors are the regularity of taking cas, which is not only AV but skill-based (think Blodge); and the cost of replacements, which is itself not as simple as merely lineman cost as some teams (e.g. Orcs) play with few linemen at all, whereas others play with other, more expensive players and tend to take the cas on those players (e.g. Pro Elves on catchers) or on the linemen (e.g. Skaven), combined with whether those cas tend to occur on the Journeymen or not. The fact remains, though, that some races do tend to have more difficulty than others in maintaining a treasury. |
|
|
|
|
| |
RNG speculations
Search
