20 coaches online • Server time: 07:38
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post CBBA Newswiregoto Post Scaling Client on hi...goto Post CBBA 7's
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Tomay



Joined: Apr 26, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 15, 2018 - 13:15 Reply with quote Back to top

It’s pretty easy, bobs is the coach

_________________
Image
Join now and "Create a Legend"
Irgy



Joined: Feb 21, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 16, 2018 - 13:20 Reply with quote Back to top

So are we going to (eventually?) follow the rest of the site with reverting the inducements change? The impression I have is that it wasn't just not intended for open leagues, but that it was never intended to be a change at all in any setting.

My impression so far is that it's somewhat of a moot point, since mid-season treasury management seems to consist entirely of "save it". Even the horrors of Expensive Mistakes don't justify spending anything (unless you somehow get to 300k, in which case do at the very least dump to 290k). I found this whole situation quite lame at first, but actually I'm starting to appreciate the idea that I can do team management once per season and then just forget about it in between.

The only difference seems to be just that you can choose to sacrifice your whole next season for a small boost in one game of the current one, which in very particular circumstances might even be worthwhile.

Which I actually really, really dislike as a design. Imagine the prototypical case, it's the deciding game for premier. Both teams have the opportunity to spend all their reserves to buy inducements for the game. It's in each of their interests, individually, to do so, and so they will. But since they both do it, the end result is no better for either team. And the consequence is they both have to sack half their players afterwards. It would actually be far better for both of them if they simply agree beforehand not to spend their treasury. But why put everyone through this prisoner's dilemma? Instead we can simply all, enforcably, agree not to spend our treasury, by using the old and currently-intended system.
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 16, 2018 - 13:47 Reply with quote Back to top

I think the inducement rules are a good fit with the re-buy rules. It lets each team weigh short term gain (e.g. getting a star for 1 important match), versus long term (keeping money for the re-buy). This adds another complexity level to the team management (which is always good).

I don't agree that one team splurging on inducements in a decider categorically wins it, nor that two teams splurging means they must even each other out.

That being said, the same rule was utterly hopeless for open TV matched environments like Box and Ranked. To be frank, I suspect Christer was happy to see rumors of a rule change, which let him go back on the (bad) decision of introducing that rule by itself in the first place.

Caveat: this is my personal opinion, and not necessarily of swladmin.


Last edited by Balle2000 on Aug 16, 2018 - 22:03; edited 2 times in total
D_Arquebus



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 16, 2018 - 14:37 Reply with quote Back to top

It is not the currently intended system.

GWS have released no official FAQ to that effect. They explicitly changed the wording to not at all reflect the old CRP rules.

FUMBBL jumped the gun on reverting based on a whole lot of hot air being blown about the internet.

_________________
NAF Regional TT Tourney Organiser (AUS/ NZ)
TT Bloodbowl in AUS - www.ausbowl.com
Ausbowl on FB
NZ BB Community on FB
Irgy



Joined: Feb 21, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 01:38 Reply with quote Back to top

Balle2000 wrote:
I don't agree that one team splurging on inducements in a decider categorically wins it, nor that two teams splurging means they must even each other out.


Sure but my argument's not about how big the advantage is. If the advantage is low, then no-one's going to choose to do it anyway, and the whole system is just a gratuitous trap for short-term thinkers and misclickers. If you think the costs are low as well, then the stakes are lower overall, but the nature of the system is still the same. And sure, the other team doesn't have to respond, but the situation you get when they don't isn't especially pleasant either.
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 02:09 Reply with quote Back to top

Irgy wrote:
then no-one's going to choose to do it anyway, and the whole system is just a gratuitous trap for short-term thinkers

This is but a guess on your part.

Are you saying you wouldn't spend extra money on a game that would win you Prem?
Bobs



Joined: Feb 26, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 02:30 Reply with quote Back to top

Tomay wrote:
It’s pretty easy, DRUNK bobs is the coach


Fixed it for ya.

The dirty cheat brought knives to a football game.

Well played that man.

_________________
si non modo numquam pragmaticam

Image
Irgy



Joined: Feb 21, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 03:05 Reply with quote Back to top

Balle2000 wrote:
Irgy wrote:
then no-one's going to choose to do it anyway, and the whole system is just a gratuitous trap for short-term thinkers

This is but a guess on your part.

Are you saying you wouldn't spend extra money on a game that would win you Prem?


It's not a guess. I'm not saying either way whether it's worth it or not. I'm saying both cases are bad. You can decide whichever case you think is reality and then go to the part where I say what's wrong with it.
Foad



Joined: Sep 02, 2007

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 03:15 Reply with quote Back to top

I remember the days of LRB4 when good coach management was make sure you had enough money to induce Luthor for all 7 games...

Times have changed and with it so does the meta, for better or worse...

The current SWL rule set still seems fresh, so I don't hate running with it further to get a better look of how it exists...

P.S. I would have probably dumped my treasury to guarantee a maiden Premier win, but after that I'd probably back my chances and look for a stronger position for the following season. Everyone has different priorities.

_________________
They see me Trollin', they hatin'...
ImageImage
D_Arquebus



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 06:51 Reply with quote Back to top

The system is as written in the book: DZ1.

It is incorrect to say that both teams spending money above and beyond for inducements would "cancel out"... Because different teams have different strategies and have different uses for the various inducements they could utilize.

I actually feel the advantage lies with the underdog (should they have money on hand) due to being able to 'top up' their existing inducement total to get over a threshold (e.g. 80k inducement + 20k from bank to get an Apoth) an get an inducement for much cheaper then before (e.g. having to spend the whole 100k to get the same Apoth, wasting their inducement cash). Due to the bank pressure on Rebuy it makes this form of spending on inducements more common and more likely.

I don't see why "short-term thinkers" should be protected from themselves? I have unofficially shared information about how the rules work with others as not everyone knows. I also enjoy unofficially discussing strategy and tactics with people about league development and team and player ideas. But who is anyone to say if given information about how the systems work, that a "short-term thinker" is doing the wrong thing based on their own goals and objectives?

_________________
NAF Regional TT Tourney Organiser (AUS/ NZ)
TT Bloodbowl in AUS - www.ausbowl.com
Ausbowl on FB
NZ BB Community on FB
Dlock



Joined: Mar 08, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 12:56 Reply with quote Back to top

Hmmmm... I wouldnt like somebody trying to "buy" premiership, and therefore I wouldnt do it myself.

However, in this, like in everything in life, I only worry about what I do. So if you do feel you want to spend your money in inducements, it is yours to make that decision.

- D
D_Arquebus



Joined: Aug 02, 2003

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 13:16 Reply with quote Back to top

If by "buy" Prem, you mean get there, build a team capable of competing, play well enough against diverse and solid opposition, and then have money in the bank to spend on inducements... then I solidly disagree.

That coach will be leveraging their accumulated benefits to win Prem. Under the combined, approved rules of both fumbbl and SWL.

Pre-emptively trying to shame someone/s who would use this valid, if potentially debilitating, tactic (for the next season's chances anyway) isn't something I would do. But that is your decision to make...

_________________
NAF Regional TT Tourney Organiser (AUS/ NZ)
TT Bloodbowl in AUS - www.ausbowl.com
Ausbowl on FB
NZ BB Community on FB
Balle2000



Joined: Sep 25, 2008

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 13:55 Reply with quote Back to top

Irgy wrote:
I'm saying both cases are bad.

But it seems to me that both of these scenarios involves a fair bit of prediction/assumption on your part, wouldn't you agree?

Anyway, for now I'll just say that there's still a lot of Blood Bowl to be played before we know how things in generally will play out around here. And I'm looking forward to all of that Blood Bowl Smile


Last edited by Balle2000 on Aug 17, 2018 - 14:11; edited 1 time in total
almic85



Joined: May 25, 2009

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 14:07 Reply with quote Back to top

As long as we are all playing with the same rules who cares?

The best thing about the current inducement rules for me is that I can plan out what inducements I want to buy well in advance and don’t have to spend 10 minutes before each game figuring out how much I need to throw into treasury.

Where in the old system I would just never put money into inducements as it was a waste of time as both the underdog and the overdog.

_________________
SWL the place to be.

If you're interested join the Fringe
Dlock



Joined: Mar 08, 2014

Post   Posted: Aug 17, 2018 - 21:42 Reply with quote Back to top

There is lots of valid tactics, that some of us would use and some other's might not.

My point is more on the line, that YOU, as a coach choose your tactics based on what is available and on your preference.

I, personally, dislike use of treasury to buy inducements. I also dislike clawbomb and fouling. But my dislike shouldnt stop you using these tactics if you want to.

And to finally clarify, my dislike for your tactics, does not make me dislike you or plating against you.

Hehe, pre-emptive shaming, you give my intelligence more credit than it deserves, I thank you for this compliment.

- D
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic