Blood Bowl

[job]

Sorry... poor writing starts again and I am not sure people understood what I was saying.

@JOB: you should be the Commissioner of the new MONDO league either you or Grim I rearranged my work schedule so I can make it to most every Mondo event so I will the first to support the league if it can get off the ground..


if Mie gets a league or dose not that is all up to them at the end of the day they it is their choice. I do not see why they would not do there own league.

As for events I really think BB should be its own thing. The Events organized by Prime are his events and I for one support him. mostly because I know how much work and energy goes in to an event. The last thing you want is some promoting some other event at the same time. Events are a lot of work and cost the TO money as well as time, and it is in most cases it is a labor of love with little thanks awarded.

I don't have a strong grasp of the game, so I don't think I could ever be the commish. How about we just have no commissioner until we've got at least 5 members?

If we just want to do a Mondo-centered league how about we play a standing within Mondo and opponents outside the league can count towards rankings, also?

[Primarch]

Regardless of who is commissioner, BB seems to be generating a lot of interest. I will have to dig out my models.

As I said, Winterblitz seems like a good time for a tournament and should show you the number of people to expect if you book a pure BB event.

I hope that it continues to be this popular in future.

[job]

I agree with most of what you've proposed, job.

Here are two points I'd reconsider:

• Point system: Something closer to 5- for a win, 2- for a tie, 1- for a loss. If the points for a tie and a win are too close, coaches have less incentive to risk their team to go for a last minute win, and that's boring.
• Length: Stick to 3-4 months for the first trial. Consider extending that for future seasons if people want.

Other points which aren't a huge deal but which we should agree on:

(1) How do we select each team's MVP from each game (for SPPs)? Here are some options
--Random die roll
--Pick it ourselves
--Pick it ourselves, but justify it to the opponent based on that player's actual contribution to the game
--Let the opponent pick, but give us the option to reject that and go for the random die roll instead.

(2) Can freebooters/mercs or players who died in the match win MVP?

(3) Does in-game mention of Komando Badruck's freeballing result in a) an automatic forfeit by the offending coach, or b) an auto-forfeit followed by the offending coach buying the next round of drinks?

I agree with you on the point that winning should be rewarded, but I want to balance that against how competitive we want the league. I would say a 5 vs. 1 result would be pretty hefty. Why not 4 points for the winner? It might be minor, but I think it would have significant difference in keeping the league from getting too competitive.

1-2) I think MVPs should nominated by your opponent. Also I think freebooters/mercs/KIAs should all have a chance at winning the MVP status. Does this effect their future performance game-wise?

3) Should I ask?

[me_in_japan]

I know this wont affect me personally, but in terms of ironing out league details, I'd say:

1) High points (say, 5) for a win is important. This may seem a lot to an inexperienced player (no offence, job), but that is because losing a game is NOT the worst thing that can happen in BB. You can win the game but still need to quit the league afterwards. This is because there are players out there (and I'm one of them, btw) who will gladly ignore the ball in favour of beating the crap out of the opposition team. This is essentially playing the long game, as if you screw up an opponent's team badly enough early on, they will never, ever recover from it, and later in the league you will hose them every time you play. This is not foul play or bad form, btw. It is actively encouraged by the rule book, and is the only way certain teams can do well in a league. In effect, encouraging players to actually score a few touchdowns now and again should cut down on teams getting banjaxed too early on.

2) I think MVPs should be nominated by the owning player. This is the system I've used a lot in the past and it seems to work. BB is a game which really needs people to not be assholes when they play, so showing a degree of trust in your opponent's choice of MVP is a good way to end a game. The choice should, however, be justified with an example of cool shit the player managed to pull off.

I absolutely do not think star players / mercs should be eligible for the MVP. These players do not improve or level up. In fact, they arent even permanent members of your team. If they were awarded the MVP the experience points are effectively lost, which is a bugger, as the MVP is a much needed method of getting a player over that last hump to a new skill.

3) b. definitely b.

[Admiral-Badruck]

OK no commissioner until we have at least 5 regular players at Mondo... I think that is fine... starting with what we have now is the most important thing we can do... basically Blood Bowl is the best Game GW ever put out if they could make people buy $500 a year in models for it I believe it would be there number one selling game... alas one can only ever spend about $500 and that would be like 2 sets of each team all the star players. add in paint and I think you may get some where close to the cost of two 1500 point 40k armies. so there is no way for it to make money for them.

that said if you are not playing Blood Bowl now you really should try it out.. I have to say I hated the idea of it until I played a few games and wow it is fun... I can't believe we all but stopped playing it for almost 3 years .... what were we thinking.

[Grim Ironjaw]

2) I think MVPs should be nominated by the owning player. This is the system I've used a lot in the past and it seems to work. BB is a game which really needs people to not be assholes when they play, so showing a degree of trust in your opponent's choice of MVP is a good way to end a game. The choice should, however, be justified with an example of cool shit the player managed to pull off.

You're saying owner nominates, opponent chooses? I like that.
But I also think the owner should retain the option to roll randomly instead to give the grunts of the team a chance to skill up. Otherwise, the positionals skill up easily while the grunts get left behind--unbalancing the team.

I absolutely do not think star players / mercs should be eligible for the MVP. These players do not improve or level up. In fact, they arent even permanent members of your team. If they were awarded the MVP the experience points are effectively lost, which is a bugger, as the MVP is a much needed method of getting a player over that last hump to a new skill.

Agreed. The 5 SPPs for MVP are huge, and can sometimes be the only bright light in an otherwise brutal loss.

3) b. definitely b.

Great minds....

[me_in_japan]

You're saying owner nominates, opponent chooses? I like that.

ha! no, i wasnt, but its a good idea, so lets roll with it

[Admiral-Badruck]

just a though what dose the Rule book actually say about it...

[me_in_japan]

it says

One randomly selected player from each team who was eligible to play during this match, even if they are now dead, is awarded a Most Valuable Player award at the end of the match. A Most Valuable Player award earns the player 5 Star Player points. Mercenaries and Star Players ARE eligible to receive the MVP, and if they receive it, it is lost to the team. IMPORTANT: A team that concedes a match must give its MVP to the opposing team (i.e., the winning coach gets two MVPs and the losing coach gets none).

but then it says

Awarding the Most Valuable Player during the Post-Game.
Instead of using the rules for Most Valuable Player on page 26,the following two options are offered as replacement text for the first sentence:

1) One player from each team, chosen by his coach, is awarded a Most Valuable Player award at the end of the match.

2) At the end of the match, one randomly selected player eligible to play during this match that was not induced and has not been removed from the team by death by the end of the match is awarded a Most Valuable Player award.

The reason these extra rules are available is because losing the MVP to someone who died can nix your team horribly. MVPs are extremely important, hence the different rules to suit different people. For the same reason, we give 1Exp for a KO, even though there's nothing in the rulebook about that. If you were playing every weekend you wouldnt need it, but since we play so infrequently, it's important to boost the rate at which people can level up.

[me_in_japan]

reading through the rules on page 34 (the optional-but-still-official ones) I think banning wizards would be good. I always hated them, and although I've used them myself, they basically cost 150,000 for the ability to cancel out an opponent's touchdown. This is poop.

I'm also not a fan of star players (believe it or not), but much as I disaprove of them (and moreover find them pointless) i dont think they need to be banned.

Special play cards should be optional. If both players want to use em, then fine. Otherwise, no.

Other than that, standard rules should apply.