Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Vorian wrote:
Surprised to see much negativity, people are talking as if blood bowl were a perfect game. There were problems with it and most changes seem pretty good.

The biggest seems to be the passing, but allowing Agility players to be Agility players and throwers to be throwers just seems sensible.

On almost any team that had throwers available they were at best a mediocre choice and at worst never to be taken. Now they have a role.

Changes to kick off events just tone down how much of a swing they introduce and given how much they are complained about, I can't imagine many people don't like this nor the fact they will stop having their players killed by rocks.

Outside of those, the changes (that we know about) aren't particularly big. The core of the game will remain pretty much the same.

Tweaking things like the kick off table and balance adjustments to certain teams / positions, etc. would be fine, but adding a whole new stat is a big deal, as it completely invalidates all previous teams, including ones that still haven’t had a formal update (or even an official release for things like Slann, Bretonnians, etc.). It’s not like there wasn’t plenty more to release for BB 2016 and this just smacks of trying to break up the community and force everyone into a buy-arbitrarily change-buy again cycle like 40k.

And it takes the power away from the community, as now official events will have to use GW's newer rules.

It's so bloody cynical of them.

This new edition is definitely a cash/power grab by GW, somewhat similar to what is going on with 9th 40k and GW wanting to dictate/control the tournament scene. I really hope that the NAF and FUMBBL hold off on quickly adopting this new ruleset, and instead run sufficient test/trial games and tournaments to see how the new rules and team balance play out. We sure know GW has not done extensive playtesting . . .

How anyone can have faith in GW anymore to do what is best for the game boggles me. Look at changes like the new Underworld team roster - changes solely made based on selling two pre-made plastic sprues of goblins and skaven, and not based on what is good for the balance of the game.

Vorian wrote:
Surprised to see much negativity, people are talking as if blood bowl were a perfect game. There were problems with it and most changes seem pretty good.

I don't think that anyone thinks that BB is a perfect game, however the community has been playing broadly the same game for nearly 25 years now. They know the faults of the game but everyone has learned them and how they affect the game. The meta is based around it. Also most people haven't gone through a radical rules change. The last major change was in the early 00s (4th/Gold) and most of the radical stuff from that was ultimately dropped because people didn't like it. Ever since then it's been balancing changes mainly.

Radically changing BB isn't like the regular new editions of 40k. It's like creating a 2nd edition of something like Settlers of Catan.

I still maintain that if they'd actually finished BB2016 and updating the teams then people would have less issue with this. Then BB2016 would be a 'complete' game which people could play independently if they didn't like BB2020. Now if BB2020 flops, 2016 will remain somewhat incomplete (you can play Vamps etc but they haven't been redone with the design team/philosophy of 2016). It's particularly frustrating as there was only about 18 months worth of teams left to go - ignoring springing anything random like Snotlings again. Actually what edition are the Snotlings even going to be?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And it takes the power away from the community, as now official events will have to use GW's newer rules.

It's so bloody cynical of them.

Wondering if GW will C&D the living rule book guys.

Love the new book art style and the Passing stat is much needed. I hope there is more worthy updates to this now ancient game.

Didn’t BB 1&2 have a passing stat back in the day?

The rules were tested, several of the top players (in BB2 and tabletop) were under NDA to test the rules for quite a while now.

I don't mind new edition per se, it's just a shame that existing Team Cards and whatnots are not compatible with the new edition. I can't say that I'm surprised though.

 montanhas18 wrote:

The rules were tested, several of the top players (in BB2 and tabletop) were under NDA to test the rules for quite a while now.

But did these playtesters have any say in the stats and costs of the team rosters? We've heard that 40k 9th edition was the "most playtested" version ever, yet the playtesters supposedly had no say in points costs which are a crucial element in balancing the game and it shows in the skewed early 9th edition tournament data.

Was anyone really clamoring for a new BB ruleset? Do we really want to get onto a cycle of new "best, greatest, improved" editions that 40k is stuck on that just end up milking money from fans?

WarCom article is up!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And from FB -

The video is superb.

Nearly had me saluting a flag.

"New Season" "Bigger" "Better" "Very best edition to date" "polished to perfection"

Mark these words for 3-4 years from now when they are repeated and you are asked to open up your wallet again. We are now on the GW never-ending edition cycle that has resulted in such perfected games like Warhammer 40k, Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar.

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing changes to team and player names, like "Orruk" instead of Orc, "Ogor" instead of Ogre, "Gits/Grots" instead of Goblins, "Troggoth" instead of Troll, etc. GW is going to protect that IP and sadly probably stomp down on any unofficial "Blood Bowl" tournaments using the old CRP.

I may have to pick up the Baron's

 Gnarlly wrote:
"New Season" "Bigger" "Better" "Very best edition to date" "polished to perfection"

Mark these words for 3-4 years from now when they are repeated and you are asked to open up your wallet again. We are now on the GW never-ending edition cycle that has resulted in such perfected games like Warhammer 40k, Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar.

People whine when the game is in production.

GW takes it out of production, and people whine.

GW puts it back into production, and people whine.

Do you want a living game or not? Because this is the market. This is how it works regardless of whether or not you or I agree with the business model. And it is not unique to GW. Like, at all.

Miniatures and the artwork style are nice but I really doubt a new edition with rule changes was that necessary. BB was doing good while abandoned by gw. Since they got back in and now introducing significant changes like a new stat creates a rift that would not exist otherwise. Whether the changes are necessary is up for debate but what is very clear is the intention of gw of putting BB into the endless 3-4 edition recycling (like their other games) with small changes here and there to promote adoption of the new rules because these are the official rules, hence many people buy in the recycling cycle.

The consequence isn't a necessarily a better game (opinions....) but probably a division between the fanbase, some prefer one edition to the other (like in any game) instead of using long standing unified rules. This at the expense of ensuring constant sales through each cycle. In other words: cash grab.

Been skipping the last season of BB, this new one doesn't look very appealing.

And Griff look like some Karl-Franz wannabe, just replace the ball with Ghal Maraz.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 Gnarlly wrote:
"New Season" "Bigger" "Better" "Very best edition to date" "polished to perfection"

Mark these words for 3-4 years from now when they are repeated and you are asked to open up your wallet again. We are now on the GW never-ending edition cycle that has resulted in such perfected games like Warhammer 40k, Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar.

People whine when the game is in production.

GW takes it out of production, and people whine.

GW puts it back into production, and people whine.

Do you want a living game or not? Because this is the market. This is how it works regardless of whether or not you or I agree with the business model. And it is not unique to GW. Like, at all.

In my opinion the game was "living" just fine for years without GW's involvement. While I definitely give credit to the GW of years ago for creating the game, the game really came into its modern day iteration through the Blood Bowl Rules Committee and the Living Rulebook - not from GW releasing a new edition every four years. I said earlier that the 2016 edition was very good overall as it kept the work that culminated in the Living Rulebook/CRP and helped bring new players into the community. But this edition really strikes me as an attempt to do away with those years of work by the community in order for GW to gain control of the tournament scene with its "Official" rules.

Personally I’ll never forgive GW for forcing teams to start already in BtB, or adding those dumb custom dice! What was wrong with adding up everyone’s strength, rolling a dice and adding the difference between the attackers and defenders, then looking up the result on a table? Eh? Total cash-grab!

https://scontent-lhr8-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p960x960/117167313_1217795711919534_4711927957736000148_o.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=Ps30Hhtcuo8AX8P1EHi&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&_nc_tp=6&oh=2524f1ba5b08d8c4515ac7d701673493&oe=5F4EAF27

Nice new models, I love them

The Blood Bowl community seems like a pretty strong one, I don't think they need protected from anything, if they like it, it'll last, if they don't, they'll play what they want. With no great disrespect meant, these aren't modern 40K players, they can think and do for themselves without a permission slip from GW. "Official" tournaments or not.

Bah, if the new rules suck, the community will just play with the LRB as they did for so many years.

But yes, I expect the things like the cards will be invalidated with the new edition. Gotta buy all this new material, after all.

I played BB for quite a long time, and I don't mind the new changes honestly. It's true throwers were always kinda left on the side. This way, we can have some new possibilities for some players...for example, there is now a better difference between zombies and skeletons in the undead team...since the zombies can't pass at all, while the skeletons can. It's not just about who can take blocks better anymore.

Wonder if GW was forced to make the preview sooner because of the leaks or if the product will be out soon (september ?). I would have thought that box is more intended for end of the year, but who knows ?

I am not unduly troubled by the prospect of new rules. To be honest, I was a bit bemused that 2016 was broadly the same as 1994. GWs flaw as a games company is that they rarely do much game design (possibly because they aren't very good at it), but at least in the new era, they are experimenting with the concept and not relying solely on decades old rule sets.

It may well be rubbish, but I will give the new edition a shot.

The model duplication seems a shame, one does miss some aspects of multi-part kits sometimes. Usually there is some tiny variation in bits for a head or an arm, but these look entirely 1:1. Not the biggest deal, but seems something they could have rectified easily as they have with other similar kits.

That and I really wish they stuck with the painted artwork instead of line art, it's just part of GW DNA to me, odd to see comic style artwork. Though it is nice comic style artwork.

Other than that new models look awesome, I can't wait to see the other teams -

Alot of it is quality of life improvements, which will make it easier to pick up for new players. Example agility stat, it's just "3+" now. Instead of AG 3, cross reference on a table to 4+, then look up another table to find a +1 modifier for most actions in the game...

Glancing through there's nothing that unduly concerns me. The game will play very similar to now. Big change is the passing stat, but that's good, separating "good at dodging" and "good at throwing" i'm down with.

Take the cynical glasses off and it looks pretty good TBH.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Personally I’ll never forgive GW for forcing teams to start already in BtB, or adding those dumb custom dice! What was wrong with adding up everyone’s strength, rolling a dice and adding the difference between the attackers and defenders, then looking up the result on a table? Eh? Total cash-grab!

And adding plastic models to the box, how dare they. Cardboard standees were good enough back in the day!

New team for the work blocked.

I think the Arbites are going to get some more senior judges...

is there a price increase?

Ernster wrote:
is there a price increase?

Is the Pope Catholic?

H.B.M.C. LOL, you wouldn't happen to know the price would you?

Oof. So glad I just bought the box set and Head Coach's Handbook bundle three weeks ago...