Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
 Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 00:50 |
 
|
Would someone copy/paste the NAF decision about the Khorne Deamons roster? |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
bijo
Joined: Jan 08, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 00:53 |
|
Some of the membership will be aware that in the October of 2012, the electronic version of the game that Cyanide/Focus have a license for, produced a new add on to the main game.
In this additional content, a new race appeared called The Demons of Khorne, referred in short by many, simply as Khorne.
This additional new race/roster will have caught many by surprise. There were rumors about it but in our hobby, that is one thing we are never short of but they emerged with other content on the PC and games console versions, which of course not everyone has or uses.
We, the hobby in general, therefore need to make decisions in all parts of the world, whether we include this new race in to our generally approved set of races for our local leagues and such like.
This also means that we, the NAF, need make the same decision and the committee has been doing some research to reach what it feels is the right thing to do. The decision needs to be based on several different areas and as much as we, the NAF committee wanted to announce our decision, we also feel that explaining the logic behind it was just as important.
At this point, January 2013, we are not including the Khorne roster to the list of approved rosters for tournaments. I say at this point because in the explanation below, you can see this may change.
Why or how did we reach this decision?
Well, there are a number of things to consider. Let us start with the structure of the roster itself. On the general face of it, the roster seems to have been placed at what we would call 1.5. This means it’s not up there with the very best races but it’s going to have a better win ratio that those in 2 and 3. On initial feedback, this seems to be where it fits but it is still fairly early days. It seems to be fun to play and there is a VERY compelling case that a new race adds a bit of excitement which cannot be denied. Of the five on the NAF committee, four appear in the top 10 most played coaches in the world so we would be the first to say a new race would be fun for us too! But there is quite a lot more to consider and that is where we have think about what this means long term for NAF and it’s members.
The roster was created by Focus/Cyanide it seems and they were helped by a small group of players who did a great job working with what limited time, resource and information they had. I have spoken to all three of those helpers and expressed thanks and in the process got considerable feedback. I have also spoken to GW and without writing paragraphs on the subject, we need to consider the following:
Existing Blood Bowl races have come out of a rigorous testing process that was managed by GW themselves. They were ably assisted by members of our community and from the outset of the game, the BBRC (Blood Bowl Rules Committee) were completely accepted as the established testing and discussion ground for rules and races. (That committee is currently in hibernation but one could suspect that will be back in the future).
The Khorne roster didn’t go down that path. Far from it. There are other issues such as no agreement on Star Players and whilst other forums are happy to run polls and make house rules… quite who is to say they are the right people to make such decisions? The NAF and it’s committee is not the police force of Blood Bowl in the absence of the BBRC, although I am aware that some of the members want it to be so, other members completely disagree.
So we have a new race appear that has still got some unfinished work to it. Local leagues house ruling star players is fine, that and variants of all kinds is built in to the core fabric of the hobby. But for the NAF to suddenly become the arbiter or decision maker of such rules is absolutely not in our remit.
Then another very serious consideration is setting a path, precedent or platform for the future committees. It is perfectly acceptable to reason that at some point further expansions to the online game will appear. Both Focus and GW will want their agreement to be profitable for both parties. They are commercial companies and need to make profits. The best way for this to continue is to make further expansions and have the online community purchase them.
So what happens in the future when two totally unheard of races, let’s say Space Marines and Gretchins, get launched and one is totally over powered to all the other races? If we let Khorne in now under this approval mechanism, how do we say no to any future races coming in from the same route to market? We cannot because there will be global confusion about which races are approved and those not. Once we say yes to one….it stands to reason and logic that you would have to accept all. If you don’t, there will be chaos (no pun intended).
When I contacted GW to ask if this Khorne roster was likely to make the CRP in the future, I was told, absolutely not. Of course that could change, but the answer was emphatic. We could very easily have some 6, 7…8 more rosters like this in the years to come and without the diligent testing process there is every likelihood that eventually one roster will break it. And then there is an awful mess.
One of the great strengths NAF has given over the years is the continuity of tournament rules. We have many different languages and cultures in our membership but it remains fantastic to know that any of us can play on the other side of the world and we all know what races and rules we are using.
The World Cup proved that. We break from this stance because we feel we can import this or that to the desktop world because it appears in an online computer game… we are going to be in confusion.
It is possible Khorne could be accepted. Change happens all the time and for whatever reason in the future this roster may find itself going through the “traditional process” and if that is the case, we would welcome it in. But until such time…..no. |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 00:59 |
|
Thanks  |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 00:59 |
|
Good |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
neoliminal
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 01:37 |
|
Kudos to the current NAF staff. Well done. |
_________________
*
<BBRC>retired</BBRC><NAF>founder, 1st, 2nd Presidents</NAF><BB-Developers>retired</BB-Developers><Game-Developer>active</Game-Developer> |
|
werks
Joined: Dec 09, 2012
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 02:01 |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 09:34 |
|
yay good call. We are safe for another year |
_________________
 |
|
DrDeath
Joined: Mar 27, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 12:12 |
|
Yes good call. Good points made above, but I'd also make another.
For me the key thing that makes Bloodbowl such a good game is it's excellent balance between coaching skill and chance. Now Khorne may not be overpowered in it's win:loss ratio, but with it's stats and mass Frenzy it does introduce far too much chance for my liking. I suspect positioning would pretty much go out of the window, with results largely decided by a mess of dice rolls. This would spoil the game for me and I suspect many others?
Must say I'm basing this on the statlines and hearsay from players on Cyanide. If anyone has firsthand opinions and think Khorne plays differently, would be interesting to hear... |
|
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 12:21 |
|
I applaud the comments by the NAF and agree with them.
Its one thing to do something for profit with a computer game such as selling DLC but its a totally different thing to organically grow a hobby within a balanced framework.
To me, more rosters does not equal a better game and I think the Khorne roster (and any others) needs the scruitiny that the other rosters have been through.
Whilst we may not agree with everything in LRB/CRP, but the fact is the rules were considered for the benefit of the game, not for a PC company's end of year P&L results. |
|
|
Prez
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 12:32 |
|
Good call |
_________________
Prez |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 13:08 |
|
| DrDeath wrote: | Yes good call. Good points made above, but I'd also make another.
For me the key thing that makes Bloodbowl such a good game is it's excellent balance between coaching skill and chance. Now Khorne may not be overpowered in it's win:loss ratio, but with it's stats and mass Frenzy it does introduce far too much chance for my liking. I suspect positioning would pretty much go out of the window, with results largely decided by a mess of dice rolls. This would spoil the game for me and I suspect many others?
Must say I'm basing this on the statlines and hearsay from players on Cyanide. If anyone has firsthand opinions and think Khorne plays differently, would be interesting to hear... |
I don't think it was that, well........it's pretty complex.
Firstly their 'playstyle' is ok I think, this is the sort of play you'd expect from Khorne.
The major problem is the whole project had too many compromises; to which the stats of players on the field, don't really represent the creatures they are.
Why Cyanide chose Khorne as their project (and their original roster idea) really shows they had no idea what they were doing. Realising it wasn't going well, they then brought in an experienced crew to make the best of a bad job.
To make matters worse, between GW and Cyanide, the stipulations that the brought in design team had to work with, were extremely crippling.
Risky theme (for a 25th team), arse about face design project, too many compromises, too many stipulations, a design team that I think didn't expect the community to be hung up on issues they didn't consider important and then lastly Grandma Wendy not wishing to touch it with a barge pole has lead to a lot of negative feedback.
In the end all this made NAFs decision for them. It's a great shame, but in the end the right one in my opinion. |
|
|
dode74
Joined: Aug 14, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 13:32 |
|
I'd agree with almost all of Harvestmouse's statement apart from the bit about them realising it wasn't going well then bringing people in. What actually happened was the original shambolic roster was accidentally released as part of a different beta and discovered by someone who suggested they bring in a few people who at least had an idea what they were doing.
Good decision by the NAF - pretty faultless reasoning. |
|
|
Kondor
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 14:50 |
|
The decision was the right one.
To me, the team design is fine, and it is not over powered. However, just because Cyanide starts puts a team in their version of the game should not make it automatically accepted by the rest of the community. |
|
|
krysskroz
Joined: Dec 05, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 15:33 |
|
I have to laugh when ever I hear about "balance" in BB. I love this game, but it is the most horribly "balanced" system I have ever played. The fact that there are Tier 1-3 teams means that there is not balance, there is hierarchy. Play Flings, Ogres, or Goblins and tell me there is "balance" in the game. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with a lack of balance. It is fun and challenging, and when you are aware of it going it is not an issues.
With that said, to argue that a team that is clearly not going to be the "best" team out there could upset balance is illogical, as is saying that it could be confusing to allow some Cyanide teams and not others (when the door is being left open to do exactly that). Had NAF simply said, we will not accept any team from Cyanide without GW approval, then it would have been clear. As it stands I have no clue what the actual criteria are for accepting new teams from Cyanide besides play testing (which is apparently the main beef here), and to play test extensively we need it to be accesible and measurable (FUMBBL is a perfect community for this sort of thing).
Do I want Khorne in BB? I don't really care one way or the other. My issue is that NAF made a ruling that was based on a conflicting set of logic and I would like a clearly defined avenue for acceptance of new races. I wasn't around for it, but how did Slann, Underworld, and Chaos Pact get accepted? |
_________________
"Most of us regard good luck as our right, and bad luck as a betrayal of that right."
William Feather
Last edited by krysskroz on %b %12, %2013 - %15:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jan 12, 2013 - 15:48 |
|
@krysskroz, If you read the rules per Slann, Underworld and Chaos Pact, you find that they were accepted by "the 5 members of the Blood Bowl Rules Committee (BBRC) (which includes game creator Jervis Johnson) unanimously". The NAF says that it will accept Khorne if BBRC is reinstated and accepts it. As is known from elsewhere, the main reason for GW to delay acceptance of Slaan, Underworld and Chaos Pact was the unavailability of suitable GW miniatures.
As NAF states, Khorne has not been accepted to CRP by the normal process and even GW does not claim Khorne to be part of CRP.
Feel free to laugh to anything you like. They say its healthy. Others may still disagree with your opinion though. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Roster Tiers
Search
