Galak's LRB7 test rules coming to FUMMBL

[Darkson]

teams dont have to be exactly even but the margin of difference is pretty big right now imo

And I'm glad about that. I think certain teams need nerfing/buffing within the tiers they're currently in (for example, humans up, undead down), but I din't think the Tier % need changing at all.

[garion]

The day the Tiers do not exist will be a sad day for this game IMO. I would have stopped playing Blood Bowl over a decade ago if not for the Tier system.

Tom

+1 The game would be so dull without them.

teams dont have to be exactly even but the margin of difference is pretty big right now imo

And I'm glad about that. I think certain teams need nerfing/buffing within the tiers they're currently in (for example, humans up, undead down), but I din't think the Tier % need changing at all.

+1 again, although I'm happy with those two races personally. I like humans because they are a challange to use. I love vampires, Lizardmen and Skaven because you play them like no other teams. Yes skaven are top tier, lizardmen mid-top and vamps low-mid but they all offer unique playing expereinces and unique challanges along the way. I have run very successful vampire teams, with a win/draw/loss record of 10/5/2 which I think is pretty good for them, and the sense of achievement I got with them was far higher than the one I got when playing with Chaos Dwarves with a record of 38/7/6.

As galak says - the day tiers go are day I stop playing.

[dodolulu]

but doesnt the underdog or tier experience come from bloodlust, bonehead, st2 across the board, etc?
if goblins had a 3rd troll you would nearly have the same gameplay plus you could still play with two if you think its dull to play with three, dont buy the rostered master chief or even refrain from using av8 on the human catchers. on tabletop everything is possible.

[garion]

but doesnt the underdog or tier experience come from bloodlust, bonehead, st2 across the board, etc?
if goblins had a 3rd troll you would nearly have the same gameplay plus you could still play with two if you think its dull to play with three, dont buy the rostered master chief or even refrain from using av8 on the human catchers. on tabletop everything is possible.

I dont get what you mean. The tiers are formed by the rosters yes. Each roster is designed in such a way so that a team is meant to perorm at a certain win percentage overall. However good coaches can usually overcome the weaknesses in a roster and play the team to the maximum of its ability.

[harroguk]

I dont get why everyone is so obsesive about keeping the teir systsm? Surely handicapping teams should be done on a personal level (by not buying rerolls or hiring certain positionals) otherwise you are simple saying the not so good players in Bloodbowl only get to choose from 10 teams and the best players get to choose from 22. Hardly fair on those people who love the game (and particular races) but cant play them because they are not good enouh.

[koadah]

I agree that some coaches can do amazing things with some of the odd ball teams, but I would guess those coaches are just that damn good. If two coaches of equal skill play and one is a top tier team and the other is vampire. My prediction would be that the top tier team would win a lot more then the vampires.

So what? That's part of the game.

It gives a different kind of variety.

The "So what" is the part I dont like about the game. Just because it was intended does not mean that it is good. I realize that was the intent of variety but many leagues are showing that it is having the opposite effect of intent.

It gives a different kind of variety.

well the same coach could handicap his halfing team to make it 'interesting" still. Having them not be little 2 spp running around the pitch would be a nice change of pace too

Yes they could. And in your league you can implement any house rule you like.

Though many people would like flings and gobbos to be a bit stronger they don't want them to be as strong as tier 1 or 2 teams.

It's a preference and many people like it.

[koadah]

I dont get why everyone is so obsesive about keeping the teir systsm? Surely handicapping teams should be done on a personal level (by not buying rerolls or hiring certain positionals) otherwise you are simple saying the not so good players in Bloodbowl only get to choose from 10 teams and the best players get to choose from 22. Hardly fair on those people who love the game (and particular races) but cant play them because they are not good enouh.

I don't see why you need 24 teams of identical strength. I see the 'joke' teams as a bonus.

I find it hard to imagine flings winning a championship over say a 9 game season against all those bigger races.

The game has a role playing aspect as well as the strategy aspect. That is part of it's appeal.
Winning is not always the primary reason for playing.

[harroguk]

I'm not just talking about the T3 teams, a lot of the T2 teams are out of the ability range of some coaches.

In fact i would go so far as to say IMO the whole system should be reduced to two teirs. The "joke" teams as you put it and everyone else.

[garion]

I'm not just talking about the T3 teams, a lot of the T2 teams are out of the ability range of some coaches.

In fact i would go so far as to say IMO the whole system should be reduced to two teirs. The "joke" teams as you put it and everyone else.

No definately not. The game would be so boring if that happened.

I play in a league with highly competative coaches. These are coaches that play for England in the Bloodbowl World Cup for example. Our league lasts for approximately 12 games and we have had flings win the league and goblins before and these are apparently meant to be joke teams. With good play and good dice anyone is capable of beating anyone in this game.

That you would say it is unfair that you have to be good at the game to play with the harder races and that it is unfair on bad coaches that want to play with those races is nonsesnse.

Have you ever played a game where that isnt the case? Look at Fifa for example if you master the game you will probably start playing with United Arab Emirates on the hardest difficulty and winning the world cup with them, that is the challange of the game isn't it? when you play Pro Evolution soccer with your friends, the best person usually plays with a weaker race to level the playing field too.

If you aren't good with say goblins or halflings or vampires, then practice with them and get good. That is part of the fun of the game for me. Learning how to play in different ways, how to think out side the box etc...

If all teams were vanilla then 3 joke teams, I think you would lose the vast majority of bloodbowl players very quickly.

[harroguk]

Look at WWE Smackdown on xbox people pick the guy with the moves they like as all are equally likely to win.

Your argument is flawed.

[garion]

I think you completely ignored everyones point there, I made the point that you can win with any of the races (except Ogre which are just too rubbish to even think about) it can just be trickier with some teams, by trickier I mean required higher levels of concentration, positional play and tactical awareness, learn to play with whatever team you like, if you lke flings play with them, so what if you lose a few games along the way, I guarentee you will become a better coach for it and you will probably win a season or two once you have learned to use them properly.

For example - I got good with flings a while back now and ran a team that had a win/draw/loss ratio of 32/9/9 Does that look like a bottom tiers win record to you?

Edit: - I'm moving my LRB7 to another thread. Because this one keeps changing topic too oten, so feedback on that thread guys many thanks.

[harroguk]

As you already said you play inn a league with some of the England Team, this would lead me to believe that you are one of the better players, not one of the worse players that effectively can't pick these teams.

It's no fun to get thrashed 4-0 every game.

Your counter of "So what" is the worst counter debate I have ever heard.

[garion]

As you already said you play inn a league with some of the England Team, this would lead me to believe that you are one of the better players, not one of the worse players that effectively can't pick these teams.

It's no fun to get thrashed 4-0 every game.

Your counter of "So what" is the worst counter debate I have ever heard.

So what you are saying is that you should - for the sake of people that arent good at the game make all the teams equal except for 3 or 4. So what about the people that are good at the game is it not unfair on them that they can only chose from 3 or 4 lesser teams to play with?

If you play in a league where one coach is amazing and the rest are not great, don't you think it is better that the great coach can pick one of the weaker races and the new people can take a toptier elite team and the middling people can take middling teams? That way creating a contest, if all the teams were about the same you would just get the same coach every time winning with ease. Which would be very boring too wouldn't it?

[Chris]

Is your arguement a coach wants to take a weak team because tey like them, but they want the team to be as good as, say, the Undead? Why doesn't your commissioner simply give that team a boost?

[harroguk]

No, I feel that it would be more beneficial to team variety in competitions and leagues if the best players handicapped themselves by not purchasing re-rolls or particular positionals rather than having some teams off limits to lesser players.