PDA

View Full Version : Blood Bowl - Better on PC or Xbox?



Tom_Violence
2009-12-16, 06:59 AM
Title says it all really. Can anyone give me an accurate picture of the significant differences between these two versions, and a judgement on which is better?

Ta!

potatocubed
2009-12-16, 07:34 AM
PC

The Xbox version is lacking almost all of the decent features of the game. If you head over to the forums at www.bloodbowl.com, you can read long threads about how hacked off Xbox players are.

Anonomuss
2009-12-16, 08:05 AM
I'm going to play the devil's advocate here for the Xbox version, simply because it's the one I'm going to get.
It doesn't lack all the features that the PC has, nor all the decent features.

What the Xbox Version lacks is:
-The ability to customise the character models of your team.
-The ability to create an Online League
-The ability to accrue Star Player Points in Online Games.
-Currently, no Dark Elf DLC.

It has everything else. It's still possible to create your own team, name them, colour them, take them through the whole tournament. It's got both Blitz and Classic modes also. It also doesn't need to be installed. If you aren't online it's almost completely the same.

That being said, if your PC can handle it, the PC version is better because it has all of the above (I'd get it if my PC could handle it). However, as you can customise the character models, the load times for getting into a match tend to extend beyond the 2 min load time.

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-16, 09:56 PM
However, as you can customise the character models, the load times for getting into a match tend to extend beyond the 2 min load time.

As of the Dark Elf patch, they're not as bad as they used to be. You're still gonna be waiting for a couple of minutes or so, but at least you won't be staring at a load screen for longer than five minutes any more.

Lord of Rapture
2009-12-17, 03:29 AM
I'm going to play the devil's advocate here for the Xbox version, simply because it's the one I'm going to get.
It doesn't lack all the features that the PC has, nor all the decent features.

What the Xbox Version lacks is:
-The ability to customise the character models of your team.
-The ability to create an Online League
-The ability to accrue Star Player Points in Online Games.
-Currently, no Dark Elf DLC.


So basically, it lacks nothing important.

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-17, 07:14 AM
So basically, it lacks nothing important.

Unless you like the idea of persistent online leagues, which many do. Really, it depends how important multiplayer is to you. If you don't care about multiplayer, then the 360 version is fine. But if you want to take a team from fresh recruits to veteran Blood Bowl stars by taking on other coaches, rather than the AI, then you'll need the PC version.

darkblust
2009-12-17, 09:18 AM
Isnt blood bowl tabletop?Since when have they made console (or whatever) game of it?

Brother Oni
2009-12-17, 10:04 AM
Depending on where you lived and what format you got it in, it was available since June this year.

Most of the world had it in November though.

darkblust
2009-12-17, 10:12 AM
Oh.I had no idea:smallredface:.I should get it :smallsmile:

Anonomuss
2009-12-17, 12:48 PM
Unless you like the idea of persistent online leagues, which many do. Really, it depends how important multiplayer is to you. If you don't care about multiplayer, then the 360 version is fine. But if you want to take a team from fresh recruits to veteran Blood Bowl stars by taking on other coaches, rather than the AI, then you'll need the PC version.

I agree wholeheartedly that this situation would be awesome for the xbox, however, is it not hindered by the absolute lack of dedicated servers? Cyanide are too small to be able to afford something like that. Forgive my ignorance if that's not what the problem with implementing that is. I'm rather technologically ignorant when it comes to online games.

I just really dislike the opinion over on the cyanide forums that seems to be entirely "WTF dis game r teh suxxors!", when in practice there's no game-play difference.

In truth, it just suggests to me a different type of online tournament, which I think is more in tune with the pick-up and play mentality of console gamers. Pick a set team (Presumably any race, or even a single race tournament), play 'x' number of games, and the most wins is the winner overall. A lot of records would have to be kept online but with a decent community, it could be interesting. It lacks the challenge of developing a team, but would focus a lot more on optimising a starting build.
Not entirely sure how great that's be overall though, as I haven't played much myself, lamentably. :smallredface:

Tom_Violence
2009-12-17, 03:07 PM
Am I correct in assuming that on the Xbox two players can play on just the one system?

Anonomuss
2009-12-17, 03:33 PM
Yep. Certainly by hotseat.

Not sure about the real time mode. Haven't had a chance to try it yet.

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-17, 08:18 PM
I agree wholeheartedly that this situation would be awesome for the xbox, however, is it not hindered by the absolute lack of dedicated servers? Cyanide are too small to be able to afford something like that. Forgive my ignorance if that's not what the problem with implementing that is. I'm rather technologically ignorant when it comes to online games.

I don't think dedicated servers are needed for Blood Bowl beyond storing ranking information; there's only two people in each game so it's probably just a straight connection between you and your opponent.


I just really dislike the opinion over on the cyanide forums that seems to be entirely "WTF dis game r teh suxxors!", when in practice there's no game-play difference.

I think most of them are complaining about the lack of online leagues. There's a certain satisfaction in taking a bunch of rank amateurs and leading them all the way to winning the Blood Bowl. Preferably while climbing over the corpses of your opponents, but that might just be my Chaos team.:smallbiggrin:


In truth, it just suggests to me a different type of online tournament, which I think is more in tune with the pick-up and play mentality of console gamers. Pick a set team (Presumably any race, or even a single race tournament), play 'x' number of games, and the most wins is the winner overall. A lot of records would have to be kept online but with a decent community, it could be interesting. It lacks the challenge of developing a team, but would focus a lot more on optimising a starting build.

Perhaps, but a lot of people who were waiting for the console version were probably people who played the tabletop game and wanted to set up a league for their friends, like they would've done with the tabletop version.


Not entirely sure how great that's be overall though, as I haven't played much myself, lamentably. :smallredface:

Well the pre-made teams in the PC version don't seem all that crash-hot. Plus you end up learning that team's playstyle, rather than learning the race's and then building up your team to make your own style.


Am I correct in assuming that on the Xbox two players can play on just the one system?

The PC version's got hot-seat as well if you're playing turn-based.

DranWork
2009-12-17, 08:52 PM
having picked this up for the pc, and never playing the table top version (gosh shock horror i know) I must admit im having a hard time grasping what kind of team id want to field. I've now compleated test matches with most races (every one bar skaven and goblin, neither of which intrest me much) and I cant get my head around why some teams that should be stupidly strong (chaos im lookin at you) when it comes to knocking people around just arn't. The Warriors are pathetic... Is it cause its a noob team or is Chaos generaly a weaker race in blood bowl?

Also is it just me or is the Computer in this a cheating bastard? Seems like even in the lowest of the low competitions the computers players all have atleast one skill where as my noobs have nothing...

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-18, 12:32 AM
Those skills you're seeing on enemy players are probably the stuff they start with. If a skill is green on the list, then it's something they got from levelling up, if it's white then they started with it. Dark Elf Runners, for instance, start with Dump-Off.

If Chaos feels weak it's because there a slow-to-start race. They're tricky to use at first since none of their players have any skills, but with the right skills down the road, they can be damn scary.

Anonomuss
2009-12-18, 03:03 AM
If you want to see how to play Chaos moderately right, there's a let's play of a Chaos Team up on Youtube, that's currently at about 170 videos, and is just about onto the Chaos cup.

Cheesegear
2009-12-18, 03:13 AM
So...This thread is turning into the designated Blood Bowl thread? Neat.


If Chaos feels weak it's because there a slow-to-start race. They're tricky to use at first since none of their players have any skills, but with the right skills down the road, they can be damn scary.

I found that once I levelled all my Beastmen up, just to level 2 (and by that time, some of them were level 3 and 4, mostly my ball carriers), things started happening. Simply because Beastmen aren't cornholed into a position from the get-go (this is the reason they're hard to play from the start). Once they have one skill that you actually want them to have, they start coming up trumps.
A Beastman can evolve any way you want it to and 'free' access to Mutations. This is their strength. It's a pity they don't have 'proper' access to agility or passing though.
(But, it says in the manual in the first place that Chaos isn't suited to a 'Passing Game', so, don't be surprised when you fail all your Pick Up, Pass and Catch rolls)

...Chaos Warriors start at Strength 4. Beastmen at Strength 3, and 4 on the Blitz. This is awesome. Once they get 'proper' skills like Mighty Blow and Claw, and even Piling On...Things start dying. Fast. But, Level 1 Beastmen and Chaos Warriors, just aren't that good.
A Chaos team's first levelled-up Beastman should be a ball carrier (Extra Arms first). And a starting team should think about purchasing lots of re-rolls thanks to relatively low agility (yeah...You can't even pick up the ball half the time) and terrible passing.

A rookie mistake is buying the Minotaur first. The Minotaur is like a third-season purchase when his badness doesn't quite stand out so bad when you have other things to blitz with. A Minotaur is a Blocker. Not a Blitzer. Some people don't know the difference.

...People who think Chaos are too hard, should try Orcs. Who have the same play-style, but, are a little bit more new-player friendly. Or, try playing Lizardmen, and be ecstatic when you return to the 'easiness' of Chaos.

...I love my Chaos team. The minotaur stays on the bench though unless one of my 'real' players gets hurt though. He just doesn't compare to a properly skilled blocking Chaos Warrior or a Blitzing Beastman.

Dran
2009-12-18, 07:51 AM
ahh.. I see, i made that noob mistake with the minotaur and used him as an attacking force. Big mistake damn wild animal! yeah re-rolled my chaos team and their doing better just need more exp on my warriors and ill have a killer team!

Cheesegear
2009-12-19, 06:53 AM
ahh.. I see, i made that noob mistake with the minotaur and used him as an attacking force. Big mistake damn wild animal! yeah re-rolled my chaos team and their doing better just need more exp on my warriors and ill have a killer team!

Here's the end-screen for a game I played just ten minutes ago (I even have all my re-rolls left :smalltongue:);

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e202/Cheesegear/Smashed.jpg

My team is between level 3 and 4 (with a few level 1 and 2 stragglers like the minotaur who I never let on the pitch anymore...). Look at those dwarves. Supposedly they're the hardest team to play a Bash Game against...ORLY? Most of those injuries were done by a Beastman (who obviously wound up getting MVP). Not a minotaur or a Chaos Warrior.

Yeah...Chaos start weak. By the time you're in the second cup, or even the Playoffs for the first cup, the game should be getting a lot easier.

Anonomuss
2009-12-19, 05:09 PM
Ok, so I've finally scraped together enough money to purchase Blood Bowl for the Xbox, and I was thinking about starting with the Humans with my roster as below. Any advice/criticism you could give me would be really helpful.

3 Blitzers,
2 Catchers,
1 Thrower,
5 Linemen,
Apothecary,
4 Re-rolls,
2 Fan Factor

The Blitzers will be up on the LOS, generally to delay the opponent's basher pieces, and against squishier teams, to break lanes open for the rest of my pieces to move into.
Skills; Might Blow, Guard, Tackle.

The Thrower will start off as my ball carrier, because of his sure hands, and he can always hand it off or pass it, should his path be blocked. However with 3Ag, I won't be attempting any thing longer than a short pass with him.
Skills: Block, Accurate, Nerves of Steel, Kickoff Return, (Dodge?).

The Catchers
will start as runners, maybe one as a safety, and one lining up to take a pass/hand off from my thrower. They will eventually become full blown catchers, when the thrower advances enough.
Skills: Block, Sure Feet, Diving Catch, Nerves of Steel.

The Linemen
will set up as follows, 4 on the wings, and 1 acting as a blocker for my thrower. The wingers will take Wrestle (To get through Block) and Tackle, to make them harder to get around. The blocker will get Kick, Block, Tackle.

Notes
I'd take Ag and Mv boosts on my thrower and catchers, but not St or Av, as I'm going to avoid letting them get hit wherever possible.

I'd take St, Mv, Ag or Av on my Blitzers or Lineman. St makes them better at holding the line or making a hole. Ag can make a blitzer a very decent scoring piece (Next stop dodge?), Mv is always helpful, but I would probably favour Av unless one of the blitzers becomes my scoring piece.

Purchases will be Catcher, Blitzer, Catcher, Thrower/Ogre.

Johnny Blade
2009-12-19, 05:15 PM
Forget fan factor. At least, that's what you should do in the tabletop. No idea if the game makes it more important somehow, but I'd wager it doesn't.

And you need 4 Blitzers. I'd recommend starting without an apothecary and 30k banked to get one after the first game, but some people also say that catchers are too much of a liability early on and only take one in the beginning.
It makes scoring harder, obviously, but only one Strength 2 dude and an apo means you won't be hit quite as hard when the dice are against you.


EDIT: Oh, and I'd generally take every single offered stat increase as a human player.

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-19, 08:28 PM
Forget fan factor. At least, that's what you should do in the tabletop. No idea if the game makes it more important somehow, but I'd wager it doesn't.

Yeah, buying Fan Factor was a good idea back with LRB4 (Living Rulebook version 4), but with how it works in LRB5 it's a waste to buy Fan Factor at the start.

Asheram
2009-12-26, 08:42 PM
By the way... What is Wrong with the Lizardmen? I've started to hate Skinks with such a passion I'm going out of my way Not to play against them.

Cheesegear
2009-12-27, 03:22 AM
By the way... What is Wrong with the Lizardmen? I've started to hate Skinks with such a passion I'm going out of my way Not to play against them.

Huh? Wrong? :smallconfused:

Sounds like you don't have enough guys with Tackle. Stay away from Sauri. Blitz the crap out of skinks - literally. Skinks have little strength and less armour. If you've got Tackle and use your Blocks/Blitzes right the Lizards don't last that long since Sauri have Ag 1 and can't pick up the ball to save themselves (although I have seen one Saurus pick up the ball and nearly TD except he Went For It and botched it with his Ag 1).

ShadowFighter15
2009-12-27, 05:22 AM
...and nearly TD except he Went For It and botched it with his Ag 1).

Go For It rolls aren't affected by Agility; it's a straight Not-1 roll with a D6. I remember hearing a story where a lizardman player's Kroxigor somehow got the ball and scored.

I will agree with you on the skink-killing. Those little buggers can really dodge thanks to their Stunty skill, but it's not as useful* when they're getting a knuckle duster to the face.

*I'm pretty sure it does affect Armour Rolls, but I don't think the skills impact there is as noticeable as for dodge rolls.

Dixieboy
2009-12-27, 06:12 AM
In the realtime version of the PC game I won a great number of matches with the majority of my many, many goals scored by an ogre. (Real time matches will often end 10-15 to 0)

Question:
How do you guys name your teams? I find that to be the hardest part, mostly due to lack of creativity on my part.

Cheesegear
2009-12-27, 07:16 AM
How do you guys name your teams? I find that to be the hardest part, mostly due to lack of creativity on my part.

Naming teams? I don't know. Find a map of the Warhammer World (http://whfb.lexicanum.com/wiki/Warhammer_world), find a place name that you like. And use an alliterative noun that sounds cool (probably cribbed off of a real-world football team).
Example; Reikland Rangers. *shrug*.

On the team selection screen at the start of a game/campaign/whatever, I found that if you click on a team more than once, a new default motto comes up. I clicked 'Chaos' a few times, and eventually "The Pack Always Wins!" was one of the default mottos. So, I named my Chaos team The Bloodpack.

Or do you mean naming individual players? Nah. It's too hard and I really don't care that much. It's too hard to keep track of, say, more than 6 (the amount of controllables in Baldur's Gate) characters.

Anonomuss
2009-12-27, 02:54 PM
Well Blood Bowl players tend to veer to one of about 3 ways of naming a team;

1. Straight up (Much as Cheesegear described, within the canon of the setting)

2. Themed
(Pick a theme and that becomes the name of your team, and your players get named after the theme. My Human team are called "The Legal Eagles", and are all named after legal terms. My blitzers, for example are called Cerciorari, Mandamus and Habeas Corpus.)

3. Garbagepail
(Pick a real-life sports team or a sport generally, and alter the names of the most famous players. Examples, Rhett Cavre or Bavid Deckem).

Any of which are ideal for the game.

Dragonus45
2010-01-03, 12:38 PM
So a dwarf blocker just leveled and i can chose to increase either his armor or his movement by one. I want to do movement but i also don't want to gimp myself by taking the wrong choice. Which should i do?

Anonomuss
2010-01-03, 05:13 PM
Well, Dwarves already have very high armour class, what they lack is speed. Any and all they can get is beneficial. I don't think increasing the AV from 9 to 10 is worth losing the ability to get what is in essence an Ag busted Blitzer. I think you'd make the right choice with the move boost.

Eldan
2010-01-04, 06:02 AM
I've had two names for my Skaven teams so far... the first one was named after I saw suggested names for a few players: three were named "X of Mordheim", so the team became the Mordheim Manglers. The second team was named after a Skaven hero after I had got the new codex: the Head Takers. Also nice because one of the skaven team signs is a rat head.

Cheesegear
2010-01-04, 06:27 AM
I really hate Wood Elves.

On another note, my Minotaur got MVP (I swear it's random. Because my Minotaur was never even on the pitch because I hate it so much), it levelled, I rolled doubles (Holy Crap!), and got the Minotaur Pro.

Now he's actually useful since he doesn't crap out on his Wild Animal checks half as much.

He has a 26% chance of farqing his Wild Animal roll (I never not Block or Blitz with him if I can help it).
...He has a 50% chance of re-rolling if he fails. Of course, he can still fail twice in a row. :smallfurious: