Page 2 of 5

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 2:27 pm
by Fassbinder75
It's a shame really, because the Nurgle roster is a unique and beautiful piece of decaying matter unlike any other, but its talents are most often masked by predictable mal-investment in CPOMB, simply because it is easy. A bit like the domestic housing market really!

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:50 pm
by Woolfe
Yeah I actually considered them seriously for a while. I was looking for a team that would be very different from my human team. Lizards, Skaven and Nurgle were on my short list.

I honestly think if they lost the regen, that would probably be enough.. Altho the free rotters is still an issue.

You are right tho the issue is magnified by the CPOMB issue.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 6:06 pm
by cdwat
So, what are the proposals for nerfing CPOMB?

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 6:10 pm
by Nubs11
Dwarves are way too cheap

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 6:24 pm
by cdwat
I appreciate your input, but making Dwarves more expensive won't nerf CPOMB ;)

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 7:04 pm
by Greyhound
Woolfe wrote:I honestly think if they lost the regen, that would probably be enough.. Altho the free rotters is still an issue.
You propose to remove their resilience, I would offer to remove their "bite", take some "ST" access and you would have a really beautiful slow maturing completely crazy team. There aren't enough players with M and no ST access.

Make MB/ PO hard to get and in my eyes Nurgle would flourish into some none-sense wacko builds all over the country. There would still be some bashing ones with plenty of double, they would just give more inducements.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:15 pm
by Fassbinder75
A Nurgle team has to conceive of the idea of teeth, harvest the stem cells, implant them in a potentially willing subject and wait very, very patiently before any 'bite' occurs.

I'm baffled that I'm defending this side, they're a hard to play, expensive, slow and generally crappy team outside of a perpetual high TV environment - and even then the coach has to have gone down the CPOMB route to be a problem.
Elves? way bigger problem. Chaos Dwarves, you bet.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:11 pm
by Fortis
Dwarf blockers of both types are one of the bigger issue. There shouldn't be linemen that start with two relevant skills. Hell, most positionals don't start with two.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2014 10:19 pm
by Fassbinder75
Fortis wrote:Dwarf blockers of both types are one of the bigger issue. There shouldn't be linemen that start with two relevant skills. Hell, most positionals don't start with two.
Dwarves don't have linemen. It's a problem for stunties everywhere!

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:33 am
by burn
I'd suggest fix CPOMB by not including mighty blow in the claw role i.e a roll of 8 (before modification) always breaks armor.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:12 am
by Woolfe
Keep CPOMB convo out of here. This is about the specific teams. That is a across board issue.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:29 am
by Woolfe
Greyhound wrote:
Woolfe wrote:I honestly think if they lost the regen, that would probably be enough.. Altho the free rotters is still an issue.
You propose to remove their resilience, I would offer to remove their "bite", take some "ST" access and you would have a really beautiful slow maturing completely crazy team. There aren't enough players with M and no ST access.

Make MB/ PO hard to get and in my eyes Nurgle would flourish into some none-sense wacko builds all over the country. There would still be some bashing ones with plenty of double, they would just give more inducements.
The resilience is the core problem in my view. Your solution extends the time it may take to produce, and increases the cost. It might work, but someone would have to do some math to see if the rotter drop would be effective with that.

Fass the time taken is not enough of an issue to remove the problem. If there was a "time limit" on the teams then sure, but with an open ended system which BB is. Then it has no real effect. Nurgle can still be an effective 1 season team.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 11:41 am
by Fassbinder75
Woolfe wrote:Fass the time taken is not enough of an issue to remove the problem. If there was a "time limit" on the teams then sure, but with an open ended system which BB is. Then it has no real effect. Nurgle can still be an effective 1 season team.
Aren't we looking at teams in the widest possible context? Nurgle is a problem under a proscribed set of circumstances, which in the wider community don't really raise the pulse of anyone outside BABBL. Even then, it is CPOMB that turns the roster into a nightmare, not the roster itself. The team is supposed to be tough, mechanically and fluff-wise. Papa Nurgle outlasts everything.

You say they can be a strong one season team - which I can't really disprove, but I would argue that there are probably 15-20 rosters that produce stronger one season teams than Nurgle does.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:32 pm
by Woolfe
Whats your point Fass? Is this a my league is better than your league thing.
Your comment on the wider community is inane and pointless(Probably incorrect as well). The rules allow for it. If people don't do it then that doesn't make the rules any less valid.

Also I personally think Regen is broken as well. Not just CPOMB so having a Regen CPOMB team is even more broken.

The question was which team is least well balanced. I think Nurgle is it, because of the reasons described.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:59 pm
by Fassbinder75
Woolfe wrote:Whats your point Fass? Is this a my league is better than your league thing.
No, I"m playing Nurgle in my league - it is perpetual and I could very well tread the same filthy path as Rednick or bouf.
Woolfe wrote:Your comment on the wider community is inane and pointless(Probably incorrect as well). The rules allow for it. If people don't do it then that doesn't make the rules any less valid.
Sure it doesn't....but it takes AGES to do so, which serves as an retardant to table top players who can't turn over a large volume of games. My 'inane' point is that such activity doesn't seem to be very widespread. I've never contested you on whether Nurgle could be a vicious regenerating kill team,just that from my own limited observation that table top leagues don't suffer from a proliferation of horrible Nurgle teams sucking the fun out of the game for everyone else.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:51 pm
by Woolfe
Fassbinder75 wrote:
Woolfe wrote:Whats your point Fass? Is this a my league is better than your league thing.
No, I"m playing Nurgle in my league - it is perpetual and I could very well tread the same filthy path as Rednick or bouf.
ok... Cool.. Not sure how that is relevant.
Fassbinder75 wrote:
Woolfe wrote:Your comment on the wider community is inane and pointless(Probably incorrect as well). The rules allow for it. If people don't do it then that doesn't make the rules any less valid.
Sure it doesn't....but it takes AGES to do so, which serves as an retardant to table top players who can't turn over a large volume of games. My 'inane' point is that such activity doesn't seem to be very widespread. I've never contested you on whether Nurgle could be a vicious regenerating kill team,just that from my own limited observation that table top leagues don't suffer from a proliferation of horrible Nurgle teams sucking the fun out of the game for everyone else.
Still not really seeing your point.
In the high value mutation bash teams, Chaos, ChaosDwarves, Chaospact, Nurgle etc. The control mechanism for preventing them becoming totally dominating forces is the cost of running. That being the loss of income through spiral, and thus the inability to replace players that die/retire. A chaos team that is not earning money, and loses several key players is pretty much shagged. Unlike Elves or other high value Ag teams, they don't tend to be able to score with a minimum of players.
This causes a downward spiral that should result in a correction of the team eventually.
Nurgle is able to subvert that mechanism through its unique set of abilities. Hence broken.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 5:59 pm
by Moraiwe
I usually hate to put words in other people's mouths, but I think Fassbinder is expressing surprise that you think Nurgle is the most problematic roster, given that it's problems only surface once you reach high TV play. He probably feels that there are other rosters whose problems occur much earlier in their lifespan and thus are encountered far more often in Blood Bowl than the Nurgle issue you have raised. I suspect most leagues don't have teams that last long enough for that problem to become evident.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:06 pm
by Fassbinder75
Woolfe wrote:Still not really seeing your point.
I think we have different perspectives. I see Nurgle as a lesser impact (not widespread) because of the development time, but I agree with your high severity assessment. Like a disease that is relatively hard to catch, but with a high mortality rate.

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 6:12 am
by redcard
Nurgle is not that much of a problem in fact i think they are one of the things that contain the uber chaos and chaos dwarf teams. These two teams have the ability to score and beat elves.
A competent elf coach can beat a nurgle team by scoring quickly they just move around the dp and its not a problem. if you are building a killer team you dont start with tackle.
Not to mention once you take out a pestigor or 2 the nurgle ball handling becomes hard

Re: Whats the least well balanced/inappropriate roster

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2014 5:44 pm
by anc001
zons roster is like the most superficial and lame house rules teams,
"lets make a team where everyone has dodge" and no further thought was given to it.
all MA6
all Str3
all ag3
all av7
dodge everywhere
Boooooorriiiing, justlike norse was before the re-do.
Anyone who likes this roster should be playing checkers, not BB.
And also they should die in a fire.

I don't have a problem with woodies, just with wardancers.

RE Darkelves, how is that they just keep getting more positionals.
IIRC in 3rd edition they had 2blitzers, 2 witchelves and 2 throwers, since then they've now got access to 2 assassins, 2 more blitzers and had a very useful change from thrower to runner. I prefered the roster when the team was a challenge, its a violent elf team. ditch the runners- what do darkelves want with the ball anyway.

RE Orcs, even worse with positionals. Take the throwers off the team and it becomes more interesting, other options could include making some or all of their 0-4 positionals (BOs, Bzs, Gobs) 0-2.
Has anyone ever seen an Orc lineman on a bloodbowl field at the opening kickoff? LOL.

Chaos could possibly do with something additionally done to make it more fun- how about a starting mutation for each CW, a minor one, or a random one. A silly idea perhaps, but a fun one. Early games with a chaos team are such a chore.