61 coaches online • Server time: 14:08
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post All Stars Anniversar...goto Post Argue The Call &...goto Post FUMBBL HAIKU'S
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Should She?
Yes
77%
 77%  [ 60 ]
No
22%
 22%  [ 17 ]
Total Votes : 77


Christer



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: May 25, 2023 - 23:19
FUMBBL Staff
Reply with quote Back to top

Let's do a poll for fun..
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 25, 2023 - 23:22 Reply with quote Back to top

If being a Mega-Star means she is banned, yes. Very Happy
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: May 25, 2023 - 23:35 Reply with quote Back to top

We just had one. That one had a "pie" option.

How can it be fun without a "pie" option?

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! ----- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
Halfabrain



Joined: Jan 20, 2018

Post   Posted: May 25, 2023 - 23:46 Reply with quote Back to top

If only goblins could take bomma then he wouldn't be a mega-star.
Cindy is very nearly as good as Bomma and can play for a load of teams that have no business paying a mere 50k for her. So yes she should be banned.
Again, wouldn't be a problem if she was only available for flings
JanMattys



Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 00:26 Reply with quote Back to top

Voted yes.

Personally I'm against the banning of mega-stars in Competitive. But if Bomber gets the axe, so should Cindy. That's pretty much a no brainer and I can't think of a single reasonable argument in favour of keeping Cindy while axing Bomber. Except "We follow the rules to the letter", of course.

Might even be that axing Cindy on Fumbbl could lead to a quicker errata from GW fixing the issue.

_________________
Image
ArrestedDevelopment



Joined: Sep 14, 2015

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 01:44 Reply with quote Back to top

I voted no.

But that's because I think mega-stars are a poor band-aid solution to a problem that actually is wider than just the particular stars in that grouping. Mega-stars are just the obvious problem that got pushed to the side.

That isn't to say that Bomber, Hakflem, Morg etc aren't capable of huge effect on game, but to say that currently almost all stars can have huge influence on games and represent such a cost effective solution that there exists downward pressure in a TV matching system, both to avoid playing against them and to attempt to "roster" them.

Most stars have a special ability that swings games, or stat-line, or stacking of skills that is either massively more efficient than anything a typical team at the average TVs played at can counter/manage themselves - or two or all of the previous. The stars designated as megastars currently, and Cindy are just the really obvious examples of that, but it's not so hard to imagine others slotting into the roles; not necessarily as effectively, but still with an actively poor impression upon the overall game, especially since roster access to stars is now somewhat erratic to say the least.

So I voted no. Because I don't think making Cindy a megastar is really the hill to die on when it comes to diverging from GW rulings. But also because I think the use of stars in general would be the overall I'd look at, potentially achieving such a change via scheduling permissions.

In terms of "what should GW do" I'd rather see a hard rebalance pass on all stars than adding to the Mega-star category for similar reasons.

_________________
Image
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 03:34 Reply with quote Back to top

Nelphine FTW!

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! ----- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 10:43 Reply with quote Back to top

AD makes a good point, particularly "I don't think making Cindy a megastar is really the hill to die on when it comes to diverging from GW rulings"

But it's hard to overlook the Cindy/Bomber direct comparison. There's no good solution for this really


"In the beginning the [Blood Bowl] was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move"
MerryZ



Joined: Nov 28, 2005

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 10:48 Reply with quote Back to top

I hope this is not a poll for getting her banned in fumbbl.

No Pie option makes all halfling fans vote NO here, big mistake.

_________________
Kaptain Awasoam, Dicer of All Men and Women and Children and Puppies.
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 11:02 Reply with quote Back to top

I voted yes also because if we decided to ban Bomber Dribblesnot I do not understand why Cindy should be not banned from competitive (she is more or less the same)
So to be fair if Bomber Dribblesnot is MegaStar , Cindy should be a Megastar

but I think too that hard Megastar's ban from Competitive for all Teams independently from Race and Tiers is little bit too extreme.

In my opinion Megastars should be forbidden in competitive for Tiers1 and Tiers2 team, but should still be an option for Tiers3 team who will seems they will suffer still more with the future re-draft (*)
Just a question to make game more balanced (and maybe in this sense also a rebalance pass as suggested by ArrestedDevelopment is not a bad idea )

But this is something which should be decided by GW Design Commentary...

BTW do you know if there is a way to send suggestions/questions to G&W for the next Designer's Commentary?


(*) s.o could argue that Vampires and Khorne do not have access at all to Cindy or Bomber, so make available to Tiers3 will be a "gift" to Goblins, Ogre and Halfling only (Khorne can access Morg... but anyway.. from cost/benefit perspective I think Bomber is OP)
I agree that Vampires and Khorne are really the most penalized teams to play at low TV with few skills they perform really bad at very low TV
JanMattys



Joined: Feb 29, 2004

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 11:07 Reply with quote Back to top

Sp00keh wrote:
AD makes a good point, particularly "I don't think making Cindy a megastar is really the hill to die on when it comes to diverging from GW rulings"


True. But that's obviously an overlook on GW's part, and/or a move to sell a lot of Cindy miniatures. It hardly has to do anything with the rules or the balance of the game.
I dont see it as the hill we die on, more a fix to their inability to be consistent.

I don't think that making Cindy a megastar would mean that the statemente "we follow the rules as strictly as possible" is really thrown to the wind.

IF (and that's a big IF) BigC considers making Cindy a megastar THE stepping stone on which Fumbbl vows to diverge from GW when GW doesn't make sense, then I'd vote no. Because being true to the ruleset is more important than Cindy's status.

But in my opinion fixing an evident overlook / greed move is different from "diverging from the rules".

_________________
Image


Last edited by JanMattys on May 26, 2023 - 11:13; edited 2 times in total
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 11:11 Reply with quote Back to top

Ha ha!

We need another poll.

Yes
No
Let her play only for halflings
Pie
42

You can always run both Cindy and Bomber along with two Morgs and another Bomber if that is your thing Mr. Green

_________________
Image
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! ----- All Stars - Anniversary Bowl - Teams of Stars - 13th March
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 11:32 Reply with quote Back to top

I agree that ideally it would be better to re-balance the OP Stars (by increasing their cost, nerfing the bombs, nerfing the special abilities, giving -1 to Stunty passing) rather than banning them (I think bombers have a place in a game full of mayhem like BB, on the other hand they should not be able to massively affect a game on their own) but, considering the GW's inability to make balanced Star Players, then the ban seems to be the best solution.


Last edited by MattDakka on May 26, 2023 - 12:02; edited 1 time in total
RDaneel



Joined: Feb 24, 2023

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 12:00 Reply with quote Back to top

JanMattys wrote:

IF (and that's a big IF) BigC considers making Cindy a megastar THE stepping stone on which Fumbbl vows to diverge from GW when GW doesn't make sense, then I'd vote no. Because being true to the ruleset is more important than Cindy's status.

But in my opinion fixing an evident overlook / greed move is different from "diverging from the rules".


I agree here with JannMattys that if we want to use consistency, either we follow the G&W rules always or if we set a precedent then this will generate a lot of protests in the future (and why not then ban this? And why not then use the 8 face die for blocks instead of 6 faced die... etcc...).

I voted yes in the sense that I would like G&W to publish a new Designer's Commentary in which Cindy is considered a Megastar like Bomber Drib.
But also for me if the meaning of the poll is "let's create an exception to the regulation" then my vote is no.

Than of course the site admin can do whatever he want here. No discussion on this.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: May 26, 2023 - 12:17 Reply with quote Back to top

For sure FUMBBL wants to stick to official rules as closely as possible, but in this particular case an exception could be made.
The fact that Cindy is OP is crystal clear and, I think, most people agree about that. The other Star Players are not as cheap as Cindy. Cindy is in every game she can be hired.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic