Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
 Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 16:47 |
 
|
| zakatan wrote: |
It'd be like deciding taking Khedira or Özil for the midfield depending on the requirements of the game  |
and I thought you were a barca fan, surely that should read, "between Xavi and Fabregas"! Tut tut  |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 16:49 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | zakatan wrote: |
It'd be like deciding taking Khedira or Özil for the midfield depending on the requirements of the game |
and I thought you were a barca fan, surely that should read, "between Xavi and Fabregas"! Tut tut |
haha not really. I'm a barça supporter, but barcelona midfilders aren't so clearly distinct as the two i picked for the exmample! |
|
|
WhatBall
Joined: Aug 21, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 16:59 |
|
I like it. I would suggest d3 instead of d6 for the games away roll though. SO it is either 1-3 or 3-5, depending on the injury type. |
_________________
 |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:01 |
|
How about instead of reinventing the wheel bring back 2ED injuries, bench warmers and a the old 2ED apoth rules. |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:08 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | How about instead of reinventing the wheel bring back 2ED injuries, bench warmers and a the old 2ED apoth rules. |
could you enlighten us, the young ones who started at the 3rd edition? |
|
|
LtSpeed
Joined: Jun 25, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:31 |
|
| the_Sage wrote: | Reserves:
Injuries:
I like the longer injuries idea, but would prefer that they have a -Stat for a number of games, rather than (or in addition to) missing them. For instance, roll on any all stat penalties: 1-3: the player loses the stat for this many games (no MNG). 4: MNG; and add 4 games stat penalty. 5-6 MNG and permanent stat penalty. I suspect we'll see wounded players on the pitch more often, because non-permanent means less carreer end. A new rule for niggle might be 'add 1 to the duration of any MNG and long-term injury).
|
I really like this idea with stat penalties being temporary in many cases. Stat penalty w/o a mng shows the player playing through the new healing injury- perhaps add a niggle during the temporary condition. A permanent is its own condition.
I also like stej's idea of injuries affecting players during that game but they can still play. Currently players are either at full power for the whole game or totally out, with only KO in between.
I'm not a fan of the reserves box, with it adding another whole new phase at startup on top of inducements. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:40 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | PainState wrote: | | How about instead of reinventing the wheel bring back 2ED injuries, bench warmers and a the old 2ED apoth rules. |
could you enlighten us, the young ones who started at the 3rd edition? |
Bench warmers- I think he is refering to the way in 2nd ed you could bring players on in game, You would wait until the start of your turn and you could bring substitutes on in designated areas then move them as normal. It meant having a deeper bench was important. But it wouldn't work too well now because it would be exploitable. If your opponents cage is next to a substitute zone you could bring a player on in the middle of a cage.
Injuries were much the same tbh there were just extra stats that could be effected etc... |
Last edited by Garion on %b %17, %2012 - %17:%Jan; edited 2 times in total |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:41 |
|
After some thought, I think I would amend reserves bench to the following.
You may have a limitless amount of injured players in the reserves (i.e. out to injury), but a maximum of 4 fit players. Once an injured player becomes fit, he will take up one of the 4 reserves spots, be moved to the roster or discarded.
| LtSpeed wrote: |
I'm not a fan of the reserves box, with it adding another whole new phase at startup on top of inducements. |
This would be done in the post game sequence for open games (however I like The Sages idea for tourney games. And would be a 1 minute job. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:42 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | PainState wrote: | | How about instead of reinventing the wheel bring back 2ED injuries, bench warmers and a the old 2ED apoth rules. |
could you enlighten us, the young ones who started at the 3rd edition? |
In a nutshell here is how 2ED handled this.
All SI rolled on a d66 chart for injury. You could miss from 1 to up to 36 matches, depending on injury, perm damage was also part of this.
Most injuries you missed from around 3-6 matches.
Apoths were a pre match thing. They would brew diffrent types of potions for your team. One of them was to heal players from missed games faster and so forth. They could also make potions that revied KO players and such.
In 2ED you had 16 players but you could also have 4 benchwarmers...players who were on the roster but could not play in the game. It allowed you to mix and match 16 players for any game and have 4 in reserve.
The point I was bringing up is that the old injury system allmost never had a player missing just one match but multiple, which is why I brought it up. Of course 2ED rules are polar opposite from the current rules that do not mesh well together. |
_________________
Comish of the:
Last edited by PainState on %b %17, %2012 - %17:%Jan; edited 1 time in total |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:44 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | How about instead of reinventing the wheel bring back 2ED injuries, bench warmers and a the old 2ED apoth rules. |
I think the 2nd ed post match sequence was too conveluted and time consuming. This is much simpler and can be done quickly.
What's more, 2nd ed was the king of bolt ons. A rule set with expansions through WD, Star Players and The companion. When the Companion came out, the full rules were way out of control. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:50 |
|
| Smeesh wrote: | I like it. But i am not shure the swap in/out is so great. Maybe just increase from 16 to 20.
In general it will mean that outnumbering by hard hitting will be much harder because of massive reserves.
That may mess up some teams strategies and balance. (BB is not all about elfballing).
And KO´s beeing more variable with rolls for temporary injuries would be coulerful. Players that come back might have some minor bruises giving a disadvantage for the current match.
Greetings
Smeesh |
I think complicating things with different injuries, and different injuries in game is nice on paper, but a pain to actually do. Keeping rules steamline I think is more important.
I think increasing the roster size to 20, isn't the way to go. This wouldn't help anyway, in a TV environment. I also don't think this is pro elfballing. Teams will have more players injured with this formula than normal. However they will be able to retire less players. So although they will have more players, they'll likely have less or have the same amount of players on the roster. |
|
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:52 |
|
| zakatan wrote: | | the_Sage wrote: | Make the players define their selection for the next match in the pre-match sequence. So both coaches enter the client with their whole roster, and get to choose which players they put in reserve. Only when both coaches have chosen this do they get to see what the other coach chose, and move on to petty cash/inducements.
This way neither can fully predict what he will have to face, avoiding a back-and forth. |
I was going to type this when i read the OP. Having a pre-game sequence where you decide how many players you can bring and which ones could allow you to develop specialists, and to decide the number of reserves you bring. So you can decide if the blodge, side step blitzer or the mighty blow, tackle blitzer is more suitable for the game, or bring 11 or 14 players depending on the bashiness of the oponent (provided that you have enough reserve slots and the final roster is still legal).
It'd be like deciding taking Khedira or Özil for the midfield depending on the requirements of the game |
I love this concept. It isn't something I thought about. A definite no for open games and blackbox.
However the unconfirmed roster for tourney games would be beautiful. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:57 |
|
I don't think it would be that bad for black box either really. It would just take the tactical edge off your idea. But it wouldnt be detrimental to it either, people would just play with their best 11 or 13 every game. |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 17:58 |
|
Good idea for any league would be to combine 2nd ed with 3rd somehow but a lot of work to make it work well and as with all real life leagues not worth the effort because ppl lose interest quite quickly. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jan 17, 2012 - 18:05 |
|
Well the basic idea, I think is good for box. It has subtle anti minmaxing measures. However I don't think The_Sages/Zaks hidden roster idea should be implemented for box style format. It goes against box philosophy.
Everything should be up front for match making.
I'm as big a 2nd ed lover as any other guy. It also appears that I've subconsciously taken the basic idea from 2nd ed. However you know.......I hated team management in 2nd ed, it was just a chore. Maybe not so bad in a computer format, but doing it on paper back then, I hated it by the end. |
|
|
|
|
Elf Draft Coach
Search
