opusthefowl
Joined: May 28, 2007
|
 Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 17:41 |
 
|
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! |
|
|
NickNutria
Joined: Jul 25, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 17:43 |
|
Hi Opus,
you didn't missunderstand anything, the TV never goes down even if your player is hurt. So you should fire injured players as soon as possible. |
|
|
maysrill
Joined: Dec 29, 2008
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 17:59 |
|
-ST is almost guaranteed to make the player worthless (or at least a horrible cost/benefit). Murkier examples are -av and -ma, which many times are worth living with for an otherwise exceptional player. If you have a +ST/Block/Guard Kroxigor, -MA probably won't get you to fire him. Likewise, a +AG halfling with -av is still both a valuable baller and a free cas to the first guy to hit him. |
_________________
Author of Firehurler (Twinborn Trilogy Book #1), Aethersmith (Book #2), Sourcethief (Book #3) |
|
KenThis
Joined: Jun 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 18:00 |
|
with jouneymen i would humbly suggest that "as soon as possible" is immediately.
unless you can live with the crippled player, that is his function on the team hasn't been severely compromised by the injury.
for example los fodder can usually still get punched in the face with -ma or -ag
throwers and catchers can sometimes still do alright with -st
and i've even seen blodgy ballcarriers still do their job with -av
it very much depends on the skills the player has in relation to their injuries
i would say this is less clear cut for keeping a player who loses the stat that he has previously gained
a st3 vermin is good.
a st4 vermin is great.
a st3 vermin who was a st4 vermin is a waste of 50TV even though his skills still let him smack stuff in the face |
|
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 18:03 |
|
There was a time where TS (unique to Fumbbl) did reduce as players got injured, but in all honesty all this did was create lazy team management.
In fact for some teams, -stats would even be of benefit, to allow cheap DPs and such to be fielded. Now you have to make a more realistic decision after a player takes a permanent injury, as to whether it's worth paying over the odds to keep him. |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 18:20 |
|
It works that way because that's how it is suposed to in the BB CRP rules, wich this site follows as close as posible nowadys.
And the reasons for these ruling are probably those stated by DukeTyrion and KenThis... "If my TV is decreased with injuries, I'd probably like to have some -ag Longbeards on my Dwarf teams"
and welcome to Fumbbl
PS: don't worry too much about injuried players, there you can play enought games with a team to make individual players unimportant. |
|
|
opusthefowl
Joined: May 28, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 18:50 |
|
Thanks for the quick replies everyone.
Seems to be a common consensus on both why you would want to ditch an injured player and the what-if scenarios of when an injured player might be kept.
I disagree with the rational though as at the end of t he day, with no decrease in TV caused by injury, the majority of the time the decision of what to do with that player is made for you. Unless you have a injury that doesn't really effect the main characteristic of a player (ie AG for an bruiser), why would you keep him...you are being penalized twice, once for the reduced AG/ST/AV and again for the TV remaining where it is. Even with that bruiser, if you have the cash, why would you not replace him...other than the money, it won't hurt your team...
In my mind, I'd rather see more damaged players on the field than pristine teams...variety is always a good thing.
The bottom line is if you GAIN +ST on a SPP role your TV goes up 50pts. If that same player gets injured and receives a -ST, your TV stays the same...no logic there...for me at least...
Thanks again! |
|
|
Electric_Wizard
Joined: Oct 09, 2010
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 18:58 |
|
Ever thought about a -ST Snotling? Beeing worth -30.000 gc?  |
|
|
clarkin
Joined: Oct 15, 2007
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 19:02 |
|
Or a -AGI -AGI human lineman worth -30 TV. Gimme some of those! |
|
|
Hitonagashi
Joined: Apr 09, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 19:05 |
|
The worst one has to be a trollslayer.
A trollslayer with -st was actually the same cost as a goblin, despite being more durable, having block and G access and due to dauntless, almost as effective as he was before he got his injury.. |
_________________
http://www.calculateyour.tv - an easy way to work out specific team builds.
 |
|
Grim04
Joined: Oct 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 19:38 |
|
|
Alf115
Joined: Aug 17, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 20:01 |
|
|
nin
Joined: May 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 21:31 |
|
@opusthefowl: the issue is not coaching decisions, you can still keep the niggled +ag star Wardancer or the -av Clawpomb killer or other injured players...at your own risk. That's a coach decision, your player has an injury that reduces his value but not the TV and you still keep him because you think he's good enought or your team needs him even cripled.
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...) |
|
|
Grim04
Joined: Oct 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 22:10 |
|
I'm going for the Injuries Larson record.
Only need -MA. |
|
|
pythrr
Joined: Mar 07, 2006
|
| Posted:
Sep 07, 2011 - 22:32 |
|
bah
2st DP zombies are worth keeping
 |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
Gnome Roster - how a...
Search
