After 10 years of playtest

David Bergkvist · Post by **David Bergkvist** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:48 pm

gken1 wrote:if you lower the av you gotta lower the cost...by 20k because they'll be takeing 100% more casualties with just 1 av drop.

Dropping AV to 6 but removing the +1 to injury decreases the number of casualties by 16% (from 11.6% of all knock-downs to 9.7%); it does not double it.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 9:05 pm

Hi David,
thanks for the math. Indeed, the change will increase stuns and KOs, but decrease number of casualties.

As for the AV9 elfs, I know it doesn't sit well with some people. But then again, others have been more positive. Maybe these miniatures will win you over. Very elfy, and very armoured. (they're from Chronopia).

Cheers
Martin

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 4:27 am

4 AG and 9 AV is a really, really good statline. I'd have to see it played long term to know for sure, but it doesn't seem like a good idea.

Xtreme · Post by **Xtreme** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 5:56 am

Dark elf Runners YEAAA!

I'm suprised that the strength skills for the dark elf blitzers hasn't become a problem.

DesTroy · Post by **DesTroy** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:40 am

gken1 wrote:don't like the lowering of skink av to 6... this makes them worse than gobbos and they already take enough cas as it is. if you don't want to play with stunty +1 inj modifier, don't play with it....no reason to lower skink av to 6. on that theor...gobbos should have 6 and flings 5

Hey, that's why you avoid conflict with the skinks and use your saurus and kroxigor instead! Skinks should be used for running the ball and assisting, not blocks!

Sure you're gonna lose skinks, but they're cheap enough to replace as long as you don't get emotionally attached like you would a pet snake or something...

And why not boost the gobs and flings, at least enough to make it more entertaining when they get squished! The way things are now, there's no incentive to use such a useless team even for comedy value! Giving the stunties some hope (only to be brutally dashed

) is a good way of keeping the gobs and flings relevant to the game. Otherwise it just becomes an uber-competitive bore on a regular basis...

DesTroy · Post by **DesTroy** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:46 am

plasmoid wrote:Hi David,
thanks for the math. Indeed, the change will increase stuns and KOs, but decrease number of casualties.

As for the AV9 elfs, I know it doesn't sit well with some people. But then again, others have been more positive. Maybe these miniatures will win you over. Very elfy, and very armoured. (they're from Chronopia).

Cheers
Martin

EGAD...gotta love those figs! Especially the colour of the armour...how'd you manage that?

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 2:10 pm

[quote="DesTroy]Hey, that's why you avoid conflict with the skinks and use your saurus and kroxigor instead! Skinks should be used for running the ball and assisting, not blocks!

Sure you're gonna lose skinks, but they're cheap enough to replace as long as you don't get emotionally attached like you would a pet snake or something...
[/quote]

Obviously that's the way you gotta play lizzies but if the opponent makes a concerted effort to kill skinks you're in trouble. a tackle mighty blow hitter will wipe you out. If you got some miracle offense that allow's skinks not to get hit please tell me.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:20 pm

Hi Skummy,
we've been using these high elfs for a long time in my league.
No balance problems here. They're considered a good team (as are all of the elf teams), but definately not in the top 5, (meaning to me: not broken).

We play 40-50 match seasons (per team). 4 conferences with 9 teams each.
We had 2 high elfs this season.
One finished 2nd in his conference, the other finished 7th.
It's one of the "homemade" teams that we've never had any balance complaints over.

Only potential problem is the shift to new piling on. Don't know about that yet.

Cheers,
Martin

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 5:40 am

Some 3rd edition leagues never had any problems with Dirty Player becasue the players never used it correctly.

The more leagues I see, the more convinced I am that a new concept - and especially a new team - needs to be playtested out in as many leagues as possible before it is declared okay.

grotemuis · Post by **grotemuis** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 2:55 pm

My problem is indeed a basic one, In the long run elves score more touchdowns and grab more spp's than bashing teams. This should be equalized by receiving more casualties. If you give them av 9 this is not going to be an equaliser anymore.

I'm surprised I seem to be the only one who think this is a big problem (other than the occasional "could be bad").

Andy-K · Post by **Andy-K** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:05 pm

gken1 wrote:liked to see rosters for those new teams.

http://home.worldonline.dk/nyskes/bbowl ... am%20Lists , but guess you might have found it already.

Always nice to see attempts to find new ways to play the game. AG4 and AV9 do sound a bit too powerful, but havent playtested it so cant tell.

Would say that the most important thing is that everyone in the tournament enjoys it. After all, it is a game and is supposed to be fun.

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:42 pm

what does this mean:
CTR special rule: The Chaos Dwarf team is arguably the best team on a low TR environment. To balance this out, the hobgoblin linemen do not get any bonus skills.--they never gain skills?

Andy-K · Post by **Andy-K** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:49 pm

I wouldnt say that Chaos Dwarves are the strongest low TR out there, Norse seem far better. Would also like to know what that means. As far as I know hobgoblins dont get any bonus skills.

Munkey · Post by **Munkey** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 11:02 pm

Only guessing but I would say this means that the Hobbos cannot gain a skill between rounds per the usual one skill per game tournament progression rule.

Only a guess though.

plasmoid · Post by **plasmoid** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:34 pm

Hi Gken and all,

>gobs + flings = joke teams
It's an old discussion. I made a poll about this a long time ago, and I think it went 50-50.
To me, the "joke" of looking at a weak roster isn't half as funny as the "joke" of playing against the stunties.
We've improved them to ensure that a few coaches will actually field them.
IMO, both teams can be improved quite a bit, and still be the worst teams in the game.
In our tournaments, no coach has yet managed to take one of the (improved) stunty teams into the top half of the tournament, which gives access to day 2.
To me, that signifies that they are still "joke" teams - the joke is just a little funnier

Martin

PS,
>yeah but they cost 70K!! if you lower the av you gotta lower the
>cost...by 20k because they'll be takeing 100% more casualties with just 1 av drop.

As pointed out, the skinks actually suffer less casualties under these rules.