MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
 Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 00:15 |
 
|
Example:
my team is 1650 TV and 90 TV underdog, I decide to transfer to Petty Cash 100k in order to have 2 Babes.
At the end of the game should my team lose 10k from winnings for Spiralling Expenses because the 100 TV of the inducements changed temporarily the TV from 1650 to 1750?
The inducements' temporary 100 TV should disappear before the Spiralling Expenses calculation, or am I wrong? |
|
|
Kryten
Joined: Sep 02, 2003
|
The rulebook says to use the TV from pre-match step 2, which is where you have transfered money to petty cash. Yes, that 100k gold should count toward your TV when deciding on spiraling expenses. Your new TV for the team is not updated until post-match step 8, after you have paid the spiraling expenses. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 00:46 |
|
Thank you!
The rule is bad, on top of playing as underdog you have to pay for Spiralling Expenses. |
|
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 01:28 |
|
You're worried about 10k expenses when you're spending 100k to get 1 babe for 1 match. Just think of it as spending 110k instead. |
_________________
  |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 02:28 |
|
2 babes, not 1 babe.
Well if I'm 90 TV underdog I don't think it's a bad idea to spend 100k to have 2 babes if I'm playing Pro Elves vs Humans (you know, POMB vs AV 7).
Since my winnings were just 30k paying 10k for SE was quite sad. |
|
|
Semitence
Joined: May 18, 2013
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 02:48 |
|
If you didn't put cash in you still would have had 1 babe, so you're paying 110k to get the second. Probably not worth it given diminishing returns imo. |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 02:58 |
|
1 babe is quite useless.
There is a huge difference between 3+ and 2+ to recover from KOs, especially if you expect to have many KOs. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 04:52 |
|
is that diff worth 110k? if so, then no need to complain. it's just math |
_________________
 |
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 05:48 |
|
So let's say there's 3 drives. 1 long, 1 short, 1 medium, before a last gasp effort. They cause 6, 2, and 4 KOs, an extraordinarily large amount. How many babes did you buy, and how much did they help?
After drive 1:
| Code: | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 = number of players still KO'd.
33 40 20 05 01 00 00 = 2 babes, average 5 recovered.
09 26 33 22 08 02 00 = 1 babe, average 4 recovered.
02 09 23 31 23 09 02 = 0 babes, average 3 recovered. |
After drive 2:
| Code: | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
58 35 07 00 -- -- -- = 2 babes, average 2.5 of 3 recovered.
20 40 30 10 01 -- -- = 1 babe, average 2.67 of 4 recovered.
03 16 31 31 16 03 -- = 0 babes, average 2.5 of 5 recovered. |
After drive 3:
| Code: | 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 ...
48 39 12 02 00 -- -- = 2 babes, average 3.3 of 4 recovered.
13 33 33 16 04 00 -- = 1 babe, average 3.3 of 5 recovered.
02 09 23 31 23 09 02 = 0 babes, average 3 of 6 recovered. |
So, even with massive piles of KO's, the average number of people you end up short of is around ... drumroll, one less person on the field with 1 babe, and two less people on the field with 0 babes. With less KO's, or more drives, the difference will usually be smaller.
Interestingly, just having one or two rookies on the bench (to put on the line), does the same job, for the same price. Slightly worse for 70k linemen, slightly better for stunties, except you always have them even when playing smaller teams, and they also cover casualties.
Lesson for today: if you like babes, run a longer bench instead, it's much cheaper and more effective. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 06:36 |
|
^^, hey, hey. there's no excuse for math now. stop it. |
_________________
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 14:44 |
|
| tussock wrote: | So let's say there's 3 drives. 1 long, 1 short, 1 medium, before a last gasp effort. They cause 6, 2, and 4 KOs, an extraordinarily large amount. How many babes did you buy, and how much did they help?
After drive 1:
| Code: | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 = number of players still KO'd.
33 40 20 05 01 00 00 = 2 babes, average 5 recovered.
09 26 33 22 08 02 00 = 1 babe, average 4 recovered.
02 09 23 31 23 09 02 = 0 babes, average 3 recovered. |
After drive 2:
| Code: | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
58 35 07 00 -- -- -- = 2 babes, average 2.5 of 3 recovered.
20 40 30 10 01 -- -- = 1 babe, average 2.67 of 4 recovered.
03 16 31 31 16 03 -- = 0 babes, average 2.5 of 5 recovered. |
After drive 3:
| Code: | 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 ...
48 39 12 02 00 -- -- = 2 babes, average 3.3 of 4 recovered.
13 33 33 16 04 00 -- = 1 babe, average 3.3 of 5 recovered.
02 09 23 31 23 09 02 = 0 babes, average 3 of 6 recovered. |
So, even with massive piles of KO's, the average number of people you end up short of is around ... drumroll, one less person on the field with 1 babe, and two less people on the field with 0 babes. With less KO's, or more drives, the difference will usually be smaller.
Interestingly, just having one or two rookies on the bench (to put on the line), does the same job, for the same price. Slightly worse for 70k linemen, slightly better for stunties, except you always have them even when playing smaller teams, and they also cover casualties.
Lesson for today: if you like babes, run a longer bench instead, it's much cheaper and more effective. |
If you have a longer bench you risk to be paired with a team with more damage skills stacked, so the 2 reserves won't help a lot.
Any team has an optimal TV, if you want to win you need to keep its TV at that optimal TV.
2 Extra reserves would have increased my TV to 1770, that would have made my team paired with a nastier team and I would have paid for SE.
Lesson for today: Elves perform better if they don't play vs teams with lot of killers/Tackle.
It's better to play 11 vs a team not damage/tackle-heavy than 13 vs a team damage/tackle-heavy.
The higher the TV is, the more likely is you will find killers. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %22, %2015 - %17:%Nov; edited 1 time in total |
|
thoralf
Joined: Mar 06, 2008
|
| Posted:
Nov 22, 2015 - 17:19 |
|
| tussock wrote: |
Interestingly, just having one or two rookies on the bench (to put on the line), does the same job, for the same price. |
Depends what you mean by "the same job." A bench doesn't get an Eldril or a Wardancer back in the game. |
|
|
|
|
| |
anyone know how to c...
Search
