Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 08:19:47

Punishment? Tell me little prince, does your whipping boy have a name or is that beneath you?

I'm on the same page but to internalize this as punishment...please...no...for the collective dignity of humanity.

Posted by King_Ghidra on 2017-03-16 08:28:57

I don't understand why it's being removed. The skill remains in the BB2016 rules. It costs a Team rr and maybe if changed to that behaviour it gets used once in a blue moon, but that's infinitely more often than never.

Posted by Antithesisoftime on 2017-03-16 08:44:21

Guard would end up with the same issue as MB as a skill to change it to in a lot of cases.

Personally, I think PO should be a grandfathered skill, but use the current "house" rule of taking a team RR to use.

Or, barring that, remove the skill, and the player gains a new skill after their next match.

Posted by Kondor on 2017-03-16 09:03:30

I found another positive about this. If people keep PO players there are more opportunities to get a badge for killing a grandfathered player. I will be keeping the few PO players that I have just for that reason.

Posted by Purplegoo on 2017-03-16 09:20:02

@King_G, it's been moved to the super optional bit that FUMBBL traditionally ignores. It's consistent for us to delete it (whatever your view on the skill is).

I actually think the RR cost thing is an interesting wrinkle. It would have been interesting to see how good coaches approached the question of whether to take an extremely destructive skill that was very expensive to use. I would certainly have taken a PO on a high TV team for those situations where an opponent had to stay down. For those that follow the fashion of minimal RRs it might not be any good, but for those of us that still value RRs in the bank, it would have been interesting. Perhaps we'll see in L in the end.

Having never built a ClawPOMB player (and having shied away from PO generally) myself, it's kind of nice to see BB come back to me. I'm sure the next route of least resistance will be identified in no time at all and we'll need a megathread for complaints. ;)

Posted by bigbullies on 2017-03-16 09:20:40

is this true ?
if so that sucks ive almost got my first legend and now his greatest asset will be 2xMB ??
i like anti's idea about skill after next game

Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2017-03-16 10:13:08

Yeah replacing it with MB is just dumb seeing as everybody with PO will have MB. At least some wouldn't have Guard. Hell even turning PO into PRO would be better!

Posted by Harad on 2017-03-16 10:13:49

I have suggested changing it to grab or juggernaut. I understand that it is necessary to make the change with a simple rule but think the overlap between piling on and mighty blow is so high as to make it almost redundant. Grab and juggernaut should be weak enough but at least do something.

Posted by easilyamused on 2017-03-16 10:16:10

There is already a precedent set for this type of situation.

When RSC were removed the skill was changed to the nearest equivilant which was claw, that meant some players ended up having claw/claw on some of their players.

Guard is not an equivilant to PO, the closest match would be MB as both are damage skills. Of course that will mean some players end up with MB/MB. But hey, thats how the cookie crumbles.

You've had plenty of time to deal out pain with ClawPOMB and enjoy squishing pixels, you'll just have to find another way to do it now. Not an ideal solution but like I said, there is already a precedent in place for situations like this.

Posted by m0gw41 on 2017-03-16 10:36:42

I personal feeling is that Juggernaut is the closest equivalent from a fluff point of view: following through after a blitz, just in a different way than piling on.

It also has the advantage that only 6% of players with PO have it already and its not as OP as giving all those players guard.

To all those talking about writing scripts and/or taking skills away, I am guessing that this is not a good use of Big C's time, a direct replacement must be the most efficient way.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 11:15:40

Ok, punishment comment was stupid. But I dont see why it have to be equivalent to PO. razor sharp claw claw was very rare in lrb4 and today we have a lot more mb po combos.And i see through comments there are alot of pixel huggers here (as myself). So, why we dont make it to be fun for majority of people and left aside equivalent arguement which is highly questionable. It could be any of str skills, but Mb. People will anyway make claw mb guard players so i dont see :"its too powerfull: as valid arguement.

Posted by Burnalot on 2017-03-16 11:21:56

Poor PO players. Hehe

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 11:22:24

Even from fluff point of view maybe not the worst solution is to players keep their existing skills until they retire. Norse teams could have keep their 4 beryerkers when lrb4 was changed into crp.

Posted by Burnalot on 2017-03-16 11:41:35

Why let them keep it when they can't use it anyway?
Also players and skills are two different thing iirc.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 11:45:01

I thought keep and use it, just u cant take it as new skill. And players and skills are same in matter that it wasnt by the rules.

Posted by Scarlak on 2017-03-16 11:49:24

As soon as the new blood bowl came out I stopped taking it on players with new skills as this was going to happen.

I do agree though that replacing it MB seems a bit wrong as all those players will already have MB. Seems a bit harsh.

Posted by Burnalot on 2017-03-16 11:50:40

RSC could not be used further after it was obsolete, so why could be PO be used?

Posted by JimmyFantastic on 2017-03-16 13:10:13

Yeah RSC was changed to Claw... but that needed a player to have two doubles for it to be rendered obsolete.
There will be far far far far more players with MB MB than there ever were with Claw Claw. Really bad decision imo.

Posted by Wreckage on 2017-03-16 14:55:06

I just think, if the goal is to make Piling On useless, might aswell save everyone some time and just leave it as a useless skill on the players as it is. It's a counterproductive move for anyone who wants to keep the skill under LRB 2016 optional rules anyways, one that can't be undone, nobody profits and its just unnecessary work to make it happen.

Posted by bancobat on 2017-03-16 15:11:07

speaking for myself I would have most of the time took guard if PO would have not existed
Not MB cause players already had it
The argument saying that MB is the closest skill is for me less relevant that considering the logic of team building

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 15:50:59

I dont see anyone complain that PO convert into guard, so why just dont do it that way? I

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 15:56:07

Just counted 34 mb/po players on my teams at this moment. I had in all my 3year lrb4 carrier one claw rsc combo...And i am not a heavy clopomb abuser here...

Posted by Roland on 2017-03-16 16:14:27

It should be replaced by pass block instead.

Posted by thoralf on 2017-03-16 16:24:36

"Just counted 34 mb/po players on my teams at this moment."

Poor snowflake.

Sad.

Here's a hint: get on Discord and try to plead your case instead of whining here.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 16:28:41

Its far from whining, its just common sense..

Posted by easilyamused on 2017-03-16 16:41:42

The decision has been made, I can't see it changing to be honest.

Posted by Verminardo on 2017-03-16 16:50:06

Replacing PO with the most redundant skill possible seems a bit... spiteful. It's really the closest you get to just wasting the skill slot (which I gather would not work technically, if you leave the skill on the player it would still work in the client). If y'all just wanna say "yeah, let's waste as many skill slots as we can, serves them right for playing POMB in the first place", well, that's your privilege but it's poor form to my mind.

I like the suggestion of Juggernaut. My own first idea would have been Dauntless. Grab I think won't work because you could end up with players that have both Grab and Frenzy. But eh, whatever, I don't mind much, I gave only three of the buggers and two of them will be auto retire due to perms / JU bloat. The other could use Guard but I do see that Guard feels a bit too generous, besides, there are quite a few POMBers that already have it.

Posted by Balle2000 on 2017-03-16 16:59:15

I'm popping down to the store to buy more popcorn. Anyone need anything?

Posted by ArrestedDevelopment on 2017-03-16 17:14:53

from forums:

Here's some basic problems that Christer will be facing on this:

Treemen start with: stand firm, strong arm, mighty blow
Deathrollers start with: stand firm, juggernaut, break tackle
Dwarves/Cdorks, Ogres, Minos etc etc start with: thick skull
All big guys: Mighty blow (and also increasingly likely to have juggernaut etc too)

Nobody starts with guard or grab, but a pretty significant percentage of that pomber player-base is going to be Norse or other frenzy players, so grab isn't really an option.

Nobody really wants multiple block since for a large percentage of the players with PO it'll be just as useless.

[edit] Basically, there is *no* "nice way" to do this short of deleting the skill from everyone and having them reroll the pick next game played. If that's not an option for Christer, I'm sure he has his reasons for it (something as simple as breaking replays may well be one).



I'm getting hit by this too, but seriously guys, there's very few nice ways to do this.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 17:26:15

I am far from expert to technical subject, but to me it seems the same to change one skill to another. So if he can change po to mb, why is harder to change po to guard? If that is the answer i rest my case.

Posted by Bakunin on 2017-03-16 17:36:13

My Squigs cry in the corner to "The Ballad of Piling On", but this is for the greater good. Clawpomb as come the an end!.

Posted by thoralf on 2017-03-16 17:37:15

"Its far from whining, its just common sense.."

Here's what looks like common sense to me:

1. Going on a forum, e.g.:

https://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=28865

2. Offering your suggestion:

https://fumbbl.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=703784#703784

You can also go on Discord and ask about it.

Here's what doesn't look like common sense to me:

- Standing on your soap box
- Asking rhetorical questions

The Big C ain't an idiot.

Don't act like he is.

If feature requests were made by Fummbl supporters, that'd be great.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 17:52:59

Ok, i am asking questions on wrong place, you are right about that. Never thought anything, but all the best about the guys that are running this site/client. I didnt tracked this theme until yesterday when i was stunned with all the changes. My fault anyway. But still! My questions have some point! Some of you put it like it some kind of heresy..

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 17:57:30

It's not heresy it's just kind of a myopic opinion informed mostly by the adverse effects you are going to contend with. It's not like I haven't wished for the exact same thing (but with tackle instead of guard) but when you start going through the motions of doing bespoke replacement skills on a per player basis, it becomes mechanically impossible to satisfy everyone while keeping the workload sensible for Christer.

Posted by thoralf on 2017-03-16 18:02:02

They don't feel like questions at all, Vaclav. I understand that your teams are hurt quite a bit by that change, but it's *really* hard for me to have much sympathy for griefers.

I mean, 36 POMBers!

Most of these gentlemen will be washed down into Expensive Mistakes anyway.

I've PMed the Big C. We'll see what he can do.

Godspeed.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 18:29:35

Tackle is excelent, but tackle is general skill and its problem. I dont seee why guard, or any other str skill would be. And guard seems the most reasonable choice.. My damn english is not so sophisticated and it may sound harsh when trying to explain..

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 19:07:11

But see Vaclav, most of my PO is on elves and guard is not a substitute in their role on the team. So your one size fits all solution would leave me in the lurch and it might be me making this blog post instead ;)

Posted by Kondor on 2017-03-16 19:10:52

A guy a few posts up said change it to pass block. I know he was not serious but I would rather see it changed to pass block rather than MB. Most POs already have MB so it offers no consolation in changing it to MB. But even if you chose to make it Pass Block at least you would get something out of the deal. How about Thick Skull or Dauntless? These at least offer something.

Posted by ArrestedDevelopment on 2017-03-16 19:24:32

Thick skull on an ogre? Dauntless on a troll?


Nice one.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 19:59:52

Mrt my mate... You convinced me! Best substitute for PO is MB! Your double mb elves will be much more eficent now! Guard is so stupid thing when u can have double mb...

Posted by the_Sage on 2017-03-16 20:06:01

Changing it into mb is an awful call as by far most of them will have it already. Letting the coach pick a new normal (if S access) or double (if not) skill would be the way to go.

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 20:20:43

vaclav - when there are limited options sometimes the best option is still very unsatisfying.

Posted by MattDakka on 2017-03-16 20:27:14

"Changing it into mb is an awful call as by far most of them will have it already. Letting the coach pick a new normal (if S access) or double (if not) skill would be the way to go."

I agree with the_Sage, it's the best solution.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 20:30:08

So you know more than me. Why are the options so limited?

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 20:46:56

Because I have experience trying to do this kind of thing in a business environment and it's always bloody and never satisfying to the majority of stakeholders.

Either Christer takes a blood bath creating a one time solution to sort this out or we take a blood bath having sub optimal skills on a small % of our players. If I was in Christer's position, which I have been numerous times at my job, and who I ultimately have the most empathy for in the situation, I would distribute the blood bath among the users rather than taking it all on myself and still having dissatisfied players howling at me for it to be different.

From the user's position everything thing is cut and dried - either it satisfies me or it doesn't. From a programmers position it's a question of how can I do this while balancing several competing needs including my own.

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 20:54:39

And if you want to collaborate on a exhaustive heuristic to allocate PO to best fit skills based on a few factors, I'm all elfears. My hunch is you'll see just how overwhelming it is to get it right especially if the big gripe after implementation is redundant skills not to mention X replacement skill at the top of the hierarchy being a poor fit in common but specific instances.

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 21:02:58

Maybe its complicated like you stated, doesnt look that to me. Its not the end of the world to play or retire 20up tv player anyway.

Cheers!

Posted by Tricktickler on 2017-03-16 21:13:17

It's quite simple actually. Replacing it with Stand Firm instead of MB will affect a lot less players negatively so it's a better choice (given our goal is to reduce as much harm as possible of course).

The best solution is the one that the_sage proposed though unless there is some technical problem with that solution that I'm not aware of...

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 21:28:31

vaclac, I directly addressed that

"From the user's position everything thing is cut and dried - either it satisfies me or it doesn't. From a programmers position it's a question of how can I do this while balancing several competing needs including my own."

Posted by vaclav on 2017-03-16 21:31:36

Completely agree with you Tricktickler.

Posted by mrt1212 on 2017-03-16 21:35:24

Tricktickler, Christer would likely have to develop a completely new method for mass unreadying of teams, skill revocation and triggering the teams to be in a skill selection state. From everything he's said in Discord, some of these tools don't seem to exist. It seems like a trivial task in a strait up DB but Fumbbl is more than just a DB, there's a lot of dependencies and a baked in sequential mechanisms to how the DB accepts data.

Posted by aboigor on 2017-03-16 22:01:11

For me, the best option is to get all those players with PO automaticly retired just like they were killed in action, so no TV is affected with repeated skills. then grab some popcorns as someone suggested above and enjoy the riots from a safe place. :-P

Just kidding guys, don't get mad with me but this is just a game...

Posted by Jeffro on 2017-03-16 22:39:02

For the record - Vaclav is an admitted whiner, and I have seen him whine on more than a couple occasions. This is not one. He made a legitimate argument in a blog and immediately was roasted for not having "read up" on what had already been discussed in circles of which he wasn't aware.

Ease up on him... he's about to lose 38 POMB'ers ;)

And I'm with you, Vaclav. Double MB is a waste and hardly anyone takes PO before MB.

Posted by fidius on 2017-03-17 00:37:10

Maybe make another player?

Posted by BillBrasky on 2017-03-17 01:36:35

They can take my pombers from my dead clawed hands!

Kamakazi time!

Posted by thoralf on 2017-03-17 03:22:14

I would donate to Fumbbl to see a C/POMB Ragnarok.

Posted by Kondor on 2017-03-17 09:24:15

Arrested Development - Yes. Thick skull on an ogre and dauntless on a troll is better than swapping MB for PO. At least there is some small consolation over a redundant skill.

Stand firm is probably the strength skill that would be useful but is not on many PO players so in my opinion it would be the best choice.

Still I say any skill outside of Block, Claw, or MB would be better than nothing.

Posted by thoralf on 2017-03-17 17:48:35

"skill outside of Block, Claw, or MB would be better than nothing"

Sneaky Git there always is.