Dude, is it me or are Vampires bad?

Jural · Post by **Jural** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:45 am

GalakStarscraper wrote:That idea creates a skill like the old old Wild Animal where folks delibrately re-rolled Wild Animal to try and fail so they could get a 2nd blitz during a turn.

Galak

Anything was better than when the Rat Ogre had to go first, got surrounded by opposition, and ended multiple Skaven turns with 2 or 3 die down blocks!

Big-Bad-Bear · Post by **Big-Bad-Bear** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 3:52 am

That idea creates a skill like the old old Wild Animal where folks delibrately re-rolled Wild Animal to try and fail so they could get a 2nd blitz during a turn.

Galak

I think it's still better than the Wild Animal rule we have now, which took some serious fun out of the game for me. If it was changed so you couldn't re-roll the success I'd really like that rule to come back.

In my league we always counted that there was no extra blitzes. If the WA went, then that was your blitz. Led to a lot of unpredictability, which made it quite enjoyable.

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 3:15 pm

Big-Bad-Bear wrote:
That idea creates a skill like the old old Wild Animal where folks delibrately re-rolled Wild Animal to try and fail so they could get a 2nd blitz during a turn.

Galak
I think it's still better than the Wild Animal rule we have now, which took some serious fun out of the game for me. If it was changed so you couldn't re-roll the success I'd really like that rule to come back.

In my league we always counted that there was no extra blitzes. If the WA went, then that was your blitz. Led to a lot of unpredictability, which made it quite enjoyable.

Ah, we ruled that it was the blitz action too. But our coaches were using 2 Rat Ogres. So if the first one went nuts, the second was a second blitz when he went nuts too. 1 in 6 chance everytime that first one failed, which was 1 in 6 rolls on average.

Did you guys not have two Rat Ogres on a team, or did you negate the blitz portion of the 2nd Rat Ogre's negetrait ?

Big-Bad-Bear · Post by **Big-Bad-Bear** » Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:02 pm

Mad Jackal wrote:
Big-Bad-Bear wrote:
That idea creates a skill like the old old Wild Animal where folks delibrately re-rolled Wild Animal to try and fail so they could get a 2nd blitz during a turn.

Galak
I think it's still better than the Wild Animal rule we have now, which took some serious fun out of the game for me. If it was changed so you couldn't re-roll the success I'd really like that rule to come back.

In my league we always counted that there was no extra blitzes. If the WA went, then that was your blitz. Led to a lot of unpredictability, which made it quite enjoyable.

Ah, we ruled that it was the blitz action too. But our coaches were using 2 Rat Ogres. So if the first one went nuts, the second was a second blitz when he went nuts too. 1 in 6 chance everytime that first one failed, which was 1 in 6 rolls on average.

Did you guys not have two Rat Ogres on a team, or did you negate the blitz portion of the 2nd Rat Ogre's negetrait ?

Only one big guy per team. And it was Minotaurs for my Norse (back in the day when Norse got Minotaurs haha)

Skipper · Post by **Skipper** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:10 pm

I'm not sure, but I think a simple speed increase on the vampires would elieviate a lot of the problems. Besides, in legend and literature they are fast. I believe an increase to speed 7 would work great, 8 might be a little much.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:58 pm

Skipper wrote:I'm not sure, but I think a simple speed increase on the vampires would elieviate a lot of the problems. Besides, in legend and literature they are fast. I believe an increase to speed 7 would work great, 8 might be a little much.

That's actually not a bad idea. Then you'd be tempted to field more Vampires...

Wouldn't solve the problem. But it would be a nice band-aid.

PubBowler · Post by **PubBowler** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:07 pm

Skipper wrote:I'm not sure, but I think a simple speed increase on the vampires would elieviate a lot of the problems. Besides, in legend and literature they are fast. I believe an increase to speed 7 would work great, 8 might be a little much.

Well, if we're going to allow such threadromamcy...

You mention legend & literature but not Blood Bowl literature.

Vampires have always been described as not being very good. They have been designed as Tier 2 as a result.

I'd like a change to provide more long term survival.
Or even one which would allow more Vampires (less of a thrall team) to be fielded without boosting the team (difficult I know).

But just to make the team better from the get go.
Not for me.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Tue Jan 29, 2008 9:14 pm

A better player doesn't necessarily make for a better team. Costing, skill access, negatraits... all these can render inferior a player with a better statline or more skills.

PubBowler · Post by **PubBowler** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:04 am

mattgslater wrote:Costing, skill access, negatraits... all these can render inferior a player with a better statline or more skills.

None of these were suggested to compensate the boost to MA.

Better player with no down sides=Better team

PubBowler · Post by **PubBowler** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:05 am

mattgslater wrote:Costing, skill access, negatraits... all these can render inferior a player with a better statline or more skills.

None of these were suggested to compensate the boost to MA.

Better player with no down sides=Better team

Ans they are already undergoing playtesting for a boost.
And one that frankly, I prefer.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:05 pm

Frankly, though, so long as there's a crippling negatrait, the player with that trait is unusable at any reasonable price, and the team that relies on that player is consigned to competing with the Halflings and Ogres.

PubBowler · Post by **PubBowler** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:00 pm

mattgslater wrote:and the team that relies on that player is consigned to competing with the Halflings and Ogres.

Which is where they have been designed to be.

And, personally, I think they should remain.

mattgslater · Post by **mattgslater** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:18 pm

So buff the Vamp. There's no reason not to make him a GREAT (not unbelievable, just awesome) deal, but... to paraphrase some annoying chick from the '90s (Alanis? Can't tell 'em apart), it's the good player that you just can't take.

Wouldn't change much. They'd surprise you sometimes, but they do now anyway. If you take the aardvark off the scale but leave the elephant....

Mad Jackal · Post by **Mad Jackal** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:05 pm

This team is a good team. With the 'new' changes to allow both regen and apoth on the vamps, and the injury from bites not exceeding BH I think this team is above tier 3..

And the vamps are fine like they are in my opinion.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 6:17 pm

mattgslater wrote:Frankly, though, so long as there's a crippling negatrait, the player with that trait is unusable at any reasonable price, and the team that relies on that player is consigned to competing with the Halflings and Ogres.

Oh wow do I SO not agree with this statement.

I've found Vampires actually very easy to win with in LRB 5.0 (on a scale of challenging teams as a comparison). Much easier than Ogres or Halfling (and I do mean MUCH easier).

There is no way I'd every call a Vampire player unusable. The Vampire team just requires a good coach who thinks beyond his next turn to play out the map to win. The Vampire team is all about visualizing your options .. "if I can blitz the ball free next turn ... I'll want to be able to move Vampire #2 to X location" and then making sure your Thralls are there to make it happen. For a good coach ... that's not a problem.

Grumbledook was very good at this and I've seen other coaches as well.

Its not a forgiving team to inexperience or seat of the pants play ... but it sure as heck win more than it losses in the hands of someone who knows how to actually play it.

Galak