PDA

View Full Version : Blood Bowl Rules Review 2007



Darkson
16-12-2007, 20:58
As Andy Hall has finished for Xmas, Tom Anders (GalakStarscraper)
of the BBRC is hosting the 2007 Rules Review on his site, so if you're interested in looking over the experimental rules under consideration for LRB 6 (proposed date autumn 2009 at the earliest), check out these two links.

http://www.blood-bowl.net/LRB_PBBL/2007BloodBowlRulesReview.pdf


Also Paul and I will be working on a good article with lots of extras for the 3 teams the BBRC voted to approve when miniatures are available. The bare bones of that article are here if folks would like to start playing with these teams.
http://www.blood-bowl.net/LRB_PBBL/2007NewTeams.pdf

lorelorn
30-12-2007, 06:33
Thanks for posting this Mod_Darkson

th0r
30-12-2007, 15:44
Not a fan of the new teams, but I like the changes to Khemri and in general skeletons (zombies were always the best choice before).

lorelorn
31-12-2007, 01:22
What was the necessity for Clarification 5? I always thought the current wording for COMP was fine, but obviously this change was thought necessary. Presumably it stops some abuse, but I've no idea what.

On the other changes, I don't like the 40k skeletons, but this is from my point of view as an Undead player, it was good to have the 10k difference between skeletons and zombies. I assume this change is more for the benefit of Khemri.

The Tomb Guardian change is good.

I also like the price increases for the chainsaw players, IMO thy are currently too cheap and I guess I'm not the only one to think that.

Darkson
01-01-2008, 20:42
What was the necessity for Clarification 5? I always thought the current wording for COMP was fine, but obviously this change was thought necessary. Presumably it stops some abuse, but I've no idea what.

I believe it was something to do with Diving Catch, but I'm not 100% sure.

GalakStarscraper
01-01-2008, 21:22
I believe it was something to do with Diving Catch, but I'm not 100% sure.

Yes it was because an accurate pass caught by a player using Diving Catch is not intended to count for SPPs.

====

And th0r .... the 3 new teams are all 2nd edition teams that we wanted to bring back to the game. So they aren't so much new teams as old teams coming back.

Galak

ExquisiteEvil
01-01-2008, 21:34
Yes it was because an accurate pass caught by a player using Diving Catch is not intended to count for SPPs.

====

And th0r .... the 3 new teams are all 2nd edition teams that we wanted to bring back to the game. So they aren't so much new teams as old teams coming back.

Galak

I would have liked to have seen the chaos team with the option for at least 1 chaos warrior.

afterall whats chaos without its warriors!

Warsmith Strader
02-01-2008, 12:35
Not that much of a fan on the new teams, kind of what the chaos daemon teams to be made official along with the beastman team too. as to the LRB6 changes.... well at least its not a entire new system to play.

the anti santa
02-01-2008, 17:49
I like the Slann is nice to see them coming back again, some interesting skills too.

Good to see an attempt to make Khemri more interesting, at the moment they are a little dull and only good at hurting other teams.

The underworld creepers look fun, but why do goblins get mutations on normal rolls when the normal skaven team doesn't, keeping it to doubles would be fine.

The chaos pact team look ok, i don't think they should get mutations on normal rolls either, only the Mino and skaven should, cos otherwise why take the skaven. Passing access seems a bit too much on the marauders, G and S is easily enough for them with 3 big guys and the option of a dark elf as catcher.

I'm not sure about saws cost going up, with kickback and only playing a drive (unless you buy a bribe the ref) they have already got a bit worse in the changes from LRB4 to 5, though not having to start them is good.

Overall good changes, just not a huge amount. Haven't looked over all the new stars yet, there are a lot of them now must have doubled the amount from LRB4, which had too few for some races.

The change I'd really like to see is making amazons more interesting, they are amazing vs non dwarfs at low TR, but a bit rubbish once you get higher. Norse are so much cooler now, similar changes would be wonderful for zons and there are plenty of new skills to give them that no other races start with.

Darkson
02-01-2008, 18:46
The underworld creepers look fun, but why do goblins get mutations on normal rolls when the normal skaven team doesn't, keeping it to doubles would be fine.

The team is awful (in terms of w/l), and without the mutation access, it would be worse than every team out there. Iirc, it's w/l % in the MBBL was about 10-11%.
Fluff-wise, it's the Moulder clans team, and they forcefeed the goblins and troll warpstone.

Darkson
02-01-2008, 18:48
The change I'd really like to see is making amazons more interesting, they are amazing vs non dwarfs at low TR, but a bit rubbish once you get higher. Norse are so much cooler now, similar changes would be wonderful for zons and there are plenty of new skills to give them that no other races start with.

A change to the 'zon team is one of the most requested changes (alongside changing the dwarf team), but no-one can decide which way to change the team. Ask 10 BB coaches, get 10 widely different answers.

th0r
04-01-2008, 04:04
Well the dwarf issue is the most concerning to me. Rerolls need to be on par with other bashy teams (70k) for a start. I think dwarves are a bit broken in league and tournament play as :

A) high av, thick skull
B) cheap rerolls
C) decent star access
D) starter skills stock (block, tackle)

the anti santa
04-01-2008, 18:12
I've found that the dwarfs have a similar problem to zons, they are very good at the start, but once other teams start skilling they tend to struggle a bit. Of course AV9 and block means they can survive very well in a league, but in a 1 off game vs an equal team they are only a middling team at higher TR/TV.

With only 4 AG3 players they struggle to get loose balls so if something goes worng on offence then it's often game over for them, with their lack of speed they are one of the worst defensive teams, elves can easily run rings round them.

Orcs are vastly superior to Dwarfs at higher ratings as they are stronger, faster , can have almost as much guard and have at least 6 AG3 players on the pitch (assuming no stars or injuries) so they can pass and dodge if needed.

I'd agree with th0r that their re-rolls are a bit cheap, but would go with 50K or 60K as 70 is too much of a jump and unlike most other bashers they don't have any cheap players (chaos have just had a re-roll price cut).

I think they should have 0-4 blitzers, humans, orcs, zons and dark elves can all have 4 and this would allow them to play ball more.

I'd suggest blockers/longbeards lose block and gain passblock, but drop to 60K.

This would make them much less nasty at the start, but the cheaper cost would help offset the re-roll increase and would make dwarfs slightly better on defence, which from fantasy fluff is supposed to be what they specialise in.

Another idea would be a faster less armoured dwarf team, maybe norse dwarfs with mostly AV8 and MA 5-6, or a slayer team with some sort of rookie slayer with the same stats as a normal one but just dauntless and thick skull, and doomseekers as fanatics. :D

Personally I'd love to see a dwarf warhammers team, along the lines of goblins, with some nothingy linemen 5/3/2/8 with thick skull and 0-2 bombs, 0-2chainsaws and maybe some sort of fanatic or knife weilding model and of course a deathroller.

Flame Boy
23-02-2008, 01:07
Wow! What happened to the Lizardman Team? This Slann team bears pretty much no resemblance to the team I knew and loved. Well, at least they have some agility 4 players now. (I have been living under a rock for a very long time concerning Bloodbowl, sadly.

Darkson
24-02-2008, 16:54
Wow! What happened to the Lizardman Team? This Slann team bears pretty much no resemblance to the team I knew and loved.

Nothing's happened to the Lizardman team.
The Slann team is a completely seperate (and currently experimental) roster.