Bendrig
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
 Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 11:59 |
 
|
Just curious...could you put a bounty on your own player?
Like when he costs you a game by getting three snake-eyes, to put a little preasure on him to perform better? 
(no, I'm totally not thinking of putting a bounty on a chump to draw the attention of blood-thirsty coaches towards him, so the good players can score more and I win... *cough*)
oh, seems I found a way to sorta abuse it, even if you need friends for it
personally, I'm not sure if I like the system. Can't quite make up my mind, though. I'm against it for the larger part, but that's probably because I like the scoring part of the game more then the hirtting, so I'm biased.
I wouldn't collect many bounties, so I'm against it, there. pure and simpel. *g* |
|
|
Mezir
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 13:39 |
|
I like bounties for one reason... My goblins used to have pots of cash ("used to") and had some severe grudges against certain Norse Blitzers. Of course a goblin team isn't going to take those fellows down any time soon. But putting a bounty on the bastards might see them dead.
Yeah!
Otherwise, I don't think many people will go after players just to kill them for cash. I know I wouldn't... Scoring first, killing second. |
_________________
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day; set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. |
|
Mnemon
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 14:13 |
|
| r3 wrote: | | (Mnemon's even talking about a PO Gobbo when he gets another doubles skill roll). |
Err - who of the two of us has a PO Ogre on his Gobbo team? :p
I just think a PO gobbo would be highly entertaining, and quite cute .
-Mnemon |
|
|
Sasquatch
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 15:07 |
|
If there is going to be a meta-game system for earning cash, it needs to not be geared towards the hitting teams, or at the very least be part of several options for gaining cash, like side bets, Sponsorship deals (can that Blitzer keep up 3+ SPPs gained per match for 10K bonus money each time), organised cups/leagues with cash prizes, and the like.
I think the ability for any team to earn cash over what the standard formula allows for "in-game" is risky and would need to be severely limited. I would probably suggest a separate Division for this, or the introduction in DivX only, rather than "Opt-in".
Maybe it should cost 50K, with 10K going to the player's owner when he is killed as "Life Insurance Money", 30K going to the player's killer, and 10K handling fee, with a limit of one placed per team, and a limit of one targetted player per team. To be allowed a chance to earn a bounty in a game you'll need to spend 10K before the game to fund a Witness who makes sure the fatality is all nice and legal. |
|
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 15:13 |
|
I can picture in my mind a PO gobbo hugging a troll's leg about knee height, trying to tip the troll over and end up on top! Definately cute!!! |
|
|
samaey
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 17:15 |
|
I'm against bounties unless you ditch the cash reward.
It's more like a roleplay element involving HONOUR ...
The player who actually did the kill could get a title like 'slayer of PantsyElf' instead of just money for the team. |
|
|
AlphaX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 17:19 |
|
| Calador wrote: | | with only one way to lower it... Buy a new player and make him assistant coach. |
You can also buy rerolls and discard them, or fire coaches, or retire without getting a coach.
Is the person with the hit going to know who made it? if you require that you have played the other person that will give them a clue as to who it was. On the other hand -- why couldn't I put a hit on a coach who refused to play my dwarf team (or insert other bashy team race here) ?? (Which will be very popular with dwarf coaches, esp after the dwarven wizard is in.) |
|
|
AsperonThorn
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 19:09 |
|
Grudges, rivalries, and competition are all part of the game. While I also don't like this trend of Chaos assassin teams behind every corner, it is already happening. Not in anticipation of the bounty system, but just because people want to have one. The bounty system would not contribute to this problem, but in no way will it prevent it.
I like the idea of Bounties, but I also like the idea of grudges and rivalries. By Grudges, I don't make a new team, who's goal is to destroy the team that beat my favorites, but to adjust my current roster in order to prevent such a beating again. By rivalries, I mean games in which one of my teams had repeated close matches, or a split record vs. one team. I don't carry those rivalries to my other teams, nor carry those rivalries to other teams of the opposing coach. That rivalry is simply between those two teams.
I like to think of fumbbl as a tabletop league, a really large tabletop league, but one nonetheless. And I like to see as many aspects of a tabletop league in fumbbl as I can. Bounties is one of those aspects. I can't imagine playing in a tabletop league that didn't have them. But I also understand some concerns (like this trend of assassin bashy teams.)
So to address:
| Mr. Klipp wrote: | | What would you suggest to balance that? |
I have three suggestions, available for modifications, but to start the discussion.
The first being, no matter how the player is removed from the game, the coach removing him is rewarded. If an opposing team kills him, then the opposing team gets the money, obviously. But if the bounty on some High Profile player gets absurd, and the coach that owns him decides to retire him, give him the money, or half at least. This has the benefit of helping revive some of those High TR teams that have 1 good player and tremendous financial difficulties. This is susceptible to obvious abuse. But you know what, who cares? If someone is going to come up with some "gentleman's" agreement abusing it, let them. It is not the spirit of the game, and ultimately they are hurting thier own gaming experience doing it.
In order to counter absolute ridiculous fragrant abuse, I have my second suggestion. If a team issues a bounty, and then retires, the bounty is also retired. The front office of a team that does not exist, can not honor a bounty. This prevents people from "playing 10 games, issueing a bounty and retiring." It also prevents someone from putting a bounty on thier best friends niggled player, right before they retire thier own team, with all thier remaining money.
Lastly, my third suggestion. In order to prevent teams from getting an immediate benefit for your misfortune. Put a "processing period" or "Collection period" on bounties. After the player is deceased, there is a waiting period of a week, or so, before the collecting team recieves the money. If either the collector, or the issuer retire during this period, no bounty is recieved.
Between those three suggestions, and the 10 game min for issueing bounties, it would mean that only serious long standing teams could issue and recieve them, Assassin teams would not get immediate benefits from them, and may meet thier demise before they could collect, (or worse, the issueing team meets one of these prolific assassin teams and retires), and a bounty has the possibility of backfiring, by helping the team you were trying to hurt. |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 15, 2003 - 19:39 |
|
I voted pro bounty (assuming you can opt out).
Now that I've read all these posts, I'm no longer certain a bounty sytem would be such a clever thing, especially since it might be too prone to abuse. |
|
|
AlphaX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2003 - 03:08 |
|
how about this for thought - a vast majority of the teams have 0 or 1 game played. if putting in this system inspires people to try to play the game great. who cares if they play 10 games and then retire the team, or never play another game. at least they played, and they sure as hell didn't conceed match after match - or they wouldn't be able to post a meger bounty.
keep it simple.
I like the idea of the owner getting a percent if he retires the player - not to a coach. Quietly taking the player out and killing them for the bounty... <evil laugh>
Who cares if it is a gentilemens agreement. but - if you allow it, a coach should never be allowed to take team A and use it to fund a bounty against team B. (likely that should never be allowed regardless.)
I also agree with the comments about charging a fee for collection. But, I suggest the fee should be a sliding scale. (Kind of the way taxes should be?) 10% for bounties up to some figure, then 10% of the figure + 25% to some figure, then that cap + 50% to some figure. Maybe have a 75% and 99% rate too to effectively cap a bounty.
What happens when 100 coaches all put a bounty on Alexander Lurkman ? they should be added up. And the progressive fee applied. |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2003 - 03:28 |
|
OK. I thing everyong is getting a bit too overexited about what will be, most likely, am occasionally used system. First, It costs *money* to place a bounty. That money is immediatly removed from your treasury. How often do you have a load of extra cash to throw away over a vendetta? If you do, I'd love to know your secret. Second, you will only be able to place a bounty after you have played some fixed number of games, say 10-15, and you have to have played the coach with that team. A team that has played that many games will have a high enough TR so as not to be have overflowing coffers in the first place. Third, everyone is talking about how it will encorage more bashy play. You already aren't going to play some team with PO and DP all around, the bounty system isn't going to change this. Fourth, I don't feel that opting out is needed, for the simple reason that this is an *open* league. You don't have to play anyone you don't want to. If someone asks for a game with his chaos team Head Taker$ that has rsc and piling on every chaos warior, just say no thank you, *the same as you did before the bounty system*. Half of the complaints here are not against the bounty system, but against bashy teams, and thats completely irrelevant. As for this being a cash earning system for the bashy teams, *it's not free money*. Someone had to pay to place that bounty, and quite simply, money is tight enough in this game that if your player gets a bounty on his head, he probably earned it. Here is what I am planning to do at this point. I'm going to write up a detailed workup of how the bounty system will work, and post it in the forums as a poll. I'll also be posting a news story about it so the maximum number of people can speak their mind. If you have any questions about how it would work that have not already been asked, please post those here soon so I can include the answers in the writeup. Then the plan is to go by the results of the poll, and see how it works out. |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
cjohnsto
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2003 - 04:03 |
|
And a good point is that if the system is ound to have flaws they can be fixed later. It is not like anything will be set in stone. |
|
|
Frankenstein
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2003 - 04:29 |
|
Just a thought:
Maybe restrict the amount of bounty-cash a team can place not depending on games played but rather on TR (numbers only to give an idea what's meant here):
-150 TR: 0k
-200 TR: 10k
-250 TR: 20k
-300 TR: 30k
Maybe too tight, but a system like this could perhaps make manipulation really hard.
So with this numbers, a team with TR 230 could have placed 20k. They only could place another 10k by reaching TR 251. Dropping TR would have no effect. |
|
|
Christer
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
Another system I've seen in use is to have the bounties pay out half of what has been placed.
For example, the team 'Kreepy Stuntz' feel a need to put a bounty on 'Razor-Sharp Bob'. They go to the Office of Bounties and Assasinations (OoBA) and place a 40k bounty on said player. Now, 'Bounty-Hunter Jim' manages to kill Bob and goes to the OoBA to collect where he is handed 20k. The other 20k would be a handling fee.
Ok, so you all knew what I meant, but I couln't resist
-- Christer |
|
|
Mr-Klipp
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Apr 16, 2003 - 06:16 |
|
But what problem would that be fixing? You already don't have to worry about bounties being an effective method of transfering money between teams, because it is quite hard to to get an actual kill result, and you can't play a coach twice in a row, so the odds are just as good of some other coach claiming the money you were hoping to transer. Does this solve another problem I am missing? |
_________________
Looking to get your minis painted? Look no further.
The Finishing Touch |
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
