Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
 Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 11:43 |
 
|
League customization options are always good. All a matter of time invested for Christer. On what, which well, he decides himself. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 12:12 |
|
| harvestmouse wrote: |
Yes, it's created an extremely artificial gaming environment. The longer we stay with it, the more the established gamers get used to it and see less of a problem.
2 reasons it's a problem is:
A. Avoiding SE (which is extremely artificial).
B. Playing at a certain weight with money to alter the roster how they wish to stay at that weight. This means the team can be extremely successful (bar the ff penalty).
Rather than moving upward as the progression should be and facing harder games.
It's not the main problem with TV, but how money is working with the current ruleset is helping to create an unrealistic environment. I.e. By not trying to create the strongest possible team you can.
Add to the fact that teams are sitting there with several million in the bank they have no interest in spending really is unsightly. Clearly money isn't working correctly if you have teams at 1200TV and 3 million in the bank.......right? |
In my opinon cash hoarding is a symptom of a problem, not a cause in itself.
I don't think altering the bank would affect the 11/12 man roster players in the slightest, and would have even less effect on a properly extremely lean squad - in fact, the sole effect would be to have them petty in a wizard or babes every 2nd game or so (hardly a big deal, when the worst offenders for minmax are usually playing at a TV deficit every few games anyway, since, that's their aim).
I mean, let's face it, if you're playing with 0 or 1 reroll and leader, do you really care if you end up having to use loners for a few games if you run out of cash? You can't/won't reroll most actions with stooges anyway. |
_________________
 |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 12:29 |
|
I don't see how the bank rule would make anything better (different, yes). It's only relocating the stink to a new corner. And yes, you might like it better in that corner, but it'll still be stinky.
I have a human team with 1.4 million gold. It does nothing to help my team play, but it does cushions the rebuilding phase. I see it as a plus since I find playing with totally gimped loner teams suck beyond all belief.
And the bank rule is unfluffy,there's not a bank in the world that would tell someone to please stop saving money with them. Oh and if you save your money with the bank, they won't even pay any interest. I mean what the hell?! Ghetto bank, no thanks! I'll keep my piles of gold in my sock drawer thank you very much!
Just my opinion obviously.  |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
Mr_Foulscumm
Joined: Mar 05, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 12:35 |
|
Also I earned that money fair and square. Is this Soviet Russia?  |
_________________
Everybody's favorite coach on FUMBBL |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 12:59 |
|
| ArrestedDevelopment wrote: | | harvestmouse wrote: |
Yes, it's created an extremely artificial gaming environment. The longer we stay with it, the more the established gamers get used to it and see less of a problem.
2 reasons it's a problem is:
A. Avoiding SE (which is extremely artificial).
B. Playing at a certain weight with money to alter the roster how they wish to stay at that weight. This means the team can be extremely successful (bar the ff penalty).
Rather than moving upward as the progression should be and facing harder games.
It's not the main problem with TV, but how money is working with the current ruleset is helping to create an unrealistic environment. I.e. By not trying to create the strongest possible team you can.
Add to the fact that teams are sitting there with several million in the bank they have no interest in spending really is unsightly. Clearly money isn't working correctly if you have teams at 1200TV and 3 million in the bank.......right? |
In my opinon cash hoarding is a symptom of a problem, not a cause in itself.
I don't think altering the bank would affect the 11/12 man roster players in the slightest, and would have even less effect on a properly extremely lean squad - in fact, the sole effect would be to have them petty in a wizard or babes every 2nd game or so (hardly a big deal, when the worst offenders for minmax are usually playing at a TV deficit every few games anyway, since, that's their aim).
I mean, let's face it, if you're playing with 0 or 1 reroll and leader, do you really care if you end up having to use loners for a few games if you run out of cash? You can't/won't reroll most actions with stooges anyway. |
Well I do agree it is a symptom, I do agree with that entirely. However not every problem is fixed by fixing one issue. Sometimes lots of small fixes can work.
It certainly would look better (with small rosters having less cash), rather than having a huge bank and not spending it. Is the negative effect of bank worth that..........on this site the answer will be no for sure.
The extreme min-maxers may not be effected either. However it's my feeling that most players are min-maxing to an extent, due to the TV rules. So these players may well spend money on players rather than lose it.
I must admit I haven't been following what's happening on Cyanide, it's certainly interesting though. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 13:06 |
|
Of all the recurring Internet Blood Bowl arguments, the whole treasury thing is the one that I understand the least. What physical difference does it actually make when a Blood Bowl team has 150 k or 500 k in the bank? I rarely have any real money floating about, but when I do, it’s nice to have a recovery buffer so when the inevitable happens, I don’t have to write off the next 3-5 games as a bunch of losses before kickoff. I’m constantly surprised by the support the Bank rule gets (I think much of it may be historical and / or political), and I’m bowled over to hear an apparently good coach took umbrage we have not house ruled to the point he left the website.
‘Symptom, not the cause’ is the right sort of line, for me. CRP is about as close to the perfect ruleset for tabletop or league Blood Bowl as is possible to produce. We all have our individual niggles with it, but generally it produces an interesting, fun game with the right sort of level of skill / luck. We have environments online which are as they are for very good reasons, but the ruleset is bent and stretched by how those environments function and are approached. I think the ‘cause’ of almost every ill in those environments is how TV is calculated (and we should not change that for very good reasons, we would have the inverse of the OP’s friend, for one), of which teams having millions in the bank is one of the least problematic ‘symptoms’. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 13:19 |
|
+ 1 to fouly and Purplegoo, they've hit the nail on the head. |
_________________
 |
|
Matthueycamo
Joined: May 16, 2014
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 13:42 |
|
No, it won't solve the actual problem anyway. |
_________________
DLE College 7s |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 14:03 |
|
which problem are we talking about? |
_________________
 |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 14:14 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | CRP is about as close to the perfect ruleset for tabletop or league Blood Bowl as is possible to produce. We all have our individual niggles with it, but generally it produces an interesting, fun game with the right sort of level of skill / luck. |
The fact that the whole perpetual meta revolves around having clawpomb or avoiding it tells a lot about how much close to perfection is CRP.
About the cash hoarding: having millions stored in the Tresury may affect tournaments.
For example I would have had more reserves on my High Elf team during a major if I could hoard cash.
Bash and some hybrid teams can hoard millions of gold while the teams suffering more attrition can't do the same to have a bench or buy inducements when they need them.
So, either all the teams must be able to store millions or there must be a Treasury cap for all the teams to make things more even.
It's true that AG 4 teams can earn SPPs faster than a bash team, but on the other hand the bash players can get 2 SPPs potentially for every block they make (bash teams' players generally spend the game by blocking), unlike Elves, and generally the bash players live longer because Piling On is a sort of protection, as it is decimating the opposing team through killstack. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 14:35 |
|
| buuface wrote: | | Garion where you say they could achieve their goals in the better way, what do you mean by that? |
Well the point of Bank rule is to make teams drop in TV dramatically after ruling the roost. That was its intent, in theory it stops the same team winning the league year after year, because it stops them being able to horde cash so it makes it harder to maintain the position as the highest TV team.
This was the theory behind it at least.
All I was saying is there are lots of other ways you could have a rule that achieves the same thing, without forcing teams to dump cash, which is counter intuitive and not very fluffy.
Also I do not think a rule that encourages team retirement is good for the game ever.
If you want to make life tough for teams at the top a simple rule change would be make spiralling expenses more severe. Or you could bring back ageing in some form, for players once they reach legend, say every so many games they roll for ageing and I am sure there are many other ideas out there. |
_________________
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 14:39 |
|
| MattDakka wrote: | | Purplegoo wrote: | | CRP is about as close to the perfect ruleset for tabletop or league Blood Bowl as is possible to produce. We all have our individual niggles with it, but generally it produces an interesting, fun game with the right sort of level of skill / luck. |
...clawpomb stuff... |
The important part of Purplegoo's post there was tabletop. CPOMB is not a problem there and the lack of bank rule even less of a problem. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 15:09 |
|
There were one or two subtleties in there regarding environmental concerns. Perhaps. And not just in the quoted passage.
It's a Blood Bowl forum. Don't let the actual conversation get in the way of the same rant, posted 4000 times before.  |
|
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 15:22 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | MattDakka wrote: | | Purplegoo wrote: | | CRP is about as close to the perfect ruleset for tabletop or league Blood Bowl as is possible to produce. We all have our individual niggles with it, but generally it produces an interesting, fun game with the right sort of level of skill / luck. |
...clawpomb stuff... |
The important part of Purplegoo's post there was tabletop. CPOMB is not a problem there and the lack of bank rule even less of a problem. |
CPOMB is not a problem in tabletop because you don't play hundreds of games and don't spam it.
Where it can be spammed it is a problem. |
Last edited by MattDakka on %b %25, %2016 - %15:%Jul; edited 2 times in total |
|
Edowardo
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
|
| Posted:
Jul 25, 2016 - 15:23 |
|
| koadah wrote: |
Do Cyanide commishes have the option to NOT implement the bank rule?
|
No they can't. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
