pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
 Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 22:34 |
 
|
| nin wrote: |
Keeping a -ag Zombie with a discount in TV is a potential cheesy exploit (like in I have a couple of them and so, at the same TV I have some extra skills compared to a healthy team, with no real loss of efectiveness on the zombies...keeping the team healthy requires some effort...) |
um, what? -ag zombies are the same TV as uninjured zombies. |
|
|
opusthefowl
Joined: May 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 23:08 |
|
Well, as Pythrr is the only one that seems to get my point, I guess we are in the minority judging by the posts...
NIN
Could that be exploited? Yes of course. A coach could hope that a specific player randomly gets a injury and then keeps him to save a little TV/cash.
My point is purely mechanical...not looking at race/player/injury/what-ifs/exploits.
+ability = +TV
-ability = no TV change
Doesn't balance...
Any how...that's the way it is...
Was just wondering and question was answered...
Thanks again! |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 23:12 |
|
@pythrr
humm, yes...but opushthefowl, who is a new coach on Fumbbl, has a question about why, not just abot "it's on the rules" but also looks like he thinks it would be better otherwise, and I was discusing his arguments.
Mine is: "a bonus that encourages keeping injured players would be a cheesy exploit that leads to weird situations, like a team with injured Zombies that is better than one with healthy ones" |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 23:33 |
|
| Grim04 wrote: |
I'm going for the Injuries Larson record.
Only need -MA. |
Maybe it should be : -MA-ST-AG-AV,niggle for the Larson and get killed with all 5 for the perfect Larson.  |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
RogueBanshee
Joined: Jun 08, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 01:45 |
|
I fire the vast majority of my injured players. The only one I kept was a dark elf blitzer that was -ma. He had guard which is handy and requires doubles roll for the DEs so to me it was worth it. |
|
|
Enigma179
Joined: Sep 19, 2010
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 02:07 |
|
The point of the injuries is that some don't change your effectiveness all that much, and some do.
For my skaven, I (relatively) recently had a gutter runner who took a hit to AV in the same game he got his first skill, which ended up being +MA. In most situations, I would have fired him; gutters are extremely easy to skill up. However, +MA brings him up to MA10, meaning I'm one more normal skill (sprint) away from an easy one turner. Therefore, I kept him despite now being AV6; assuming I can skill him up to sprint I can also then keep him on the bench for the majority of the game, negating that -AV for the most part, and then just bring him out on turn 8 and 16 to win the game for me. I don't care about the injury and I shouldn't lose TV for it. Of course, now that he's AV6 and a one turner he's going to trip on a gfi, reroll fail, roll a 7 for armour, 12 for injury, die apo die. But c'est la vie.
Point is, while minmaxing your injuries to your advantage may not be a problem in a tabletop league, you have to keep in mind how often fumbbl players can play, making it that much easier to exploit the rule. |
_________________
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. And like that, *poof*... he's gone |
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
I had an idea like that for a houserule, a 10 TV discount per permanent injury. Only count those injuries that actually reduce a stat (none of that -AG on a troll nonsense). |
|
|
Qaz
Joined: Apr 28, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 03:03 |
|
| opusthefowl wrote: | Hi there folks...
New player here and I was wondering why a team's TV goes up if they get a player with, say +ST but it doesn't go down when you get a -ST.
Seems very, very counter intuitive and leaves coaches with just one option; dump that injured player as soon as possible as he's hurting your team. This would seem to limit options and when you limit options, you create stagnation...
Maybe I am seeing it wrong...let me know!
Thanks! |
It is that way so that you have no other option than to fire the player and thus players get fired and there is a greater turn around in players and thats what they aimed for with the CRaP rules as a balance to the no aging. |
_________________
Superstition brings bad luck.
"he who has relied least on fortune is established
the strongest"
Niccolo Machiavelli |
|
Arktoris
Joined: Feb 16, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 03:57 |
|
I think there will come a day when TS returns and there'll be negatives for stat decreases etc. but that day is off a ways from now. |
_________________
Hail to Manowar! The latest charioteer to DIE for bloodbowl! - Slain, by Ghor Oggaz |
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 04:35 |
|
The reason -stats don't give a discount is that it would have to be an overly complicated system for it to work.
Of course with an automated system to calculate and keep track of everything, complicated stuff isn't a problem but it wouldn't fit in the CRP tabletop rules which is so far what fumbbl have decided to follow. |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
the_Sage
Joined: Jan 13, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 11:24 |
|
One simple exception to the min/max problem would be when players have a +STAT and a -STAT on the same stat. Having them cancel eachother out for TV purposes could never be a problem as far as I can see.
The player is still a poorer one than without the +/- stat, because he is one skill-up higher than his stats, meaning he needs more spps to gain his next skill. (and has a skill max that's one skill fewer).
I could imagine a rule where a stat penalty cancels out a stat bonus for TV purposes being quite ok. |
_________________
Content: Twitch / Youtube ; Updates: Facebook / Twitter
(because big banners are compensating) |
|
Lill-Leif
Joined: Nov 17, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 14:08 |
|
I would love having all my BoBs roll -AG and have TV lowered accordingly. |
|
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 20:50 |
|
If anything, I would say: -Mv, -AV would be worth 10k. -Agi would be worth 10k if the player has an initial agi of 3 or more. -Str would be worth 20k.
Stat penalties on players with the same stat bonus would get the full value. (So my +S player who gets -S would have 0TV due to stats, as the_Sage suggested above.)
This would be fairly simple, and avoid most of the abusive situations (although it wouldn't avoid all of them; especially things like orc linemen with -agi.) |
|
|
Shraaaag
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 08, 2011 - 20:58 |
|
I see a players TV worth is how much they are payed and not necessarily how much they are worth 
So since Blood Bowl players have a great labour union, they can refuse paycut upon injury, or they get a paycut, but the team has to pay their medical bill (which is exactly the same. Coincidence?). Whichever option sounds most fair. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
Designer's Comm...
Search
