mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
I've been thinking recently about Fan Factor, inspired to do so by it being mentioned in the TV++ discussion.
Lots of people have a problem with Fan Factor, and the current implementation is unsatisfactory. Who wants their team to have high FF. No-one. How wrong is that? No-one wants their team to have lots of fans? I think the current working of FF falls down in several areas:
- FF isn't worth it's cost in TV
- Higher FF doesn't guarantee you get FAME
- Getting FAME doesn't always provide a bonus
So FF costs a lot of TV, if you lose the initial roll it's useless, and if you win the roll doesn't guarantee it has any effect on the game.
When looking at how to make FF better then, you can work back and change some or all of these areas.
TV & FF
FF in it's current guise works almost like a 'success tax'. But is this supposed to be part of it's role? It was mentioned during the TV++ discussions that FF works in a similar way but to a lesser extent. One suggestion has been to remove the TV cost of FF. This though would almost certainly give a small bonus to the more successful team, the inverse of currently (where it's normally the lower TV team that benefits). I like the idea of removing TV cost from FF as it feels like something that should be external to the team. A small 'bonus' for success is that more people follow your team. This may not be 'fair' though.
There are other options I've considered too. Reducing the cost of FF/having it only count over a certain number (eg. 10k per 2 FF, or 10k per FF over 7) OR having a 'standard' FF that all teams start with, and TV is adjusted up and down from that point (eg. TV starts at 7, increases TV by 10k for every point over 7, reduces it for below 7). Both of these systems would reduce overall TV once teams had normalised towards the average FF (say 6-10).
FF & FAME
The second issue with TV is that it may not do anything at all. I feel that the team with a higher FF should have more chance of winning FAME than is currently the case, or that more things should be based on raw FF than FAME. The first and simplest option I think would be to go back to the old system of rolling a D6 per FF for gate. FAME can still work in the same way as now, but the team with a higher FF should have more chance or getting FAME than is currently the case.
The second option is to change the KO table options to make results dependent on FF and remove FAME. The dice rolled would have to be adjusted to account for FF being higher than FAME is (so Pitch Invasion could be 3D6<FF for each player, for example).
FAME & Bonuses
The final issue is that getting FAME doesn't always help. One way to work around this is to replace FAME with FF as above, but assuming we keep the FAME system there are a few other things we could do.
-Have FAME make a greater impact on KO table rolls (reduce dice type etc.
-Have FAME add some other effects (+FAME to crowdsurf injuries, or roll D3+FAME do decide the direction of crowd throw-ins).
I aren't suggesting any of these solutions is ideal, it's just a collection of ideas on where I think FF fails and should be improved. I'd be interested to hear people's thought on the Fan Factor problem. Do you think it's a problem at all? How would you solve it? With one of the above or a totally different idea?
Just a though for a lazy Friday....
Cheers
Josh |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
Last edited by mister__joshua on %b %18, %2016 - %16:%Mar; edited 1 time in total |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
 Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 16:53 |
 
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | | inspired somewhat by the interesting TV++ discussion. |
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
The only problem I saw with the whole LRB4 winnings/FF system was that you had to start with as high as FF as possible. If you didn't buy FF and started on zero (which would equate to FF9 in old (LRB4) money, I think the system is pretty good.
This is how I play, and I have no complaints. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
I always liked the old system too, but it was a lot of pre-game rolling which is why I assume they did away with it.
Also, for clarity, I meant the TV++ discussion made me think about Fan Factor, not that the ideas I wrote were inspired by it in any way 
Maybe I should remove that line  |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
harvestmouse
Joined: May 13, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 17:04 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: |
Maybe I should remove that line |
Too late unless you evil admin my post too. That my staffy friend is the path to the darkside. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| harvestmouse wrote: | | Too late unless you evil admin my post too. That my staffy friend is the path to the darkside. |
I've edited it for 'clarity' |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Matthueycamo
Joined: May 16, 2014
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 17:08 |
|
I honestly don't notice FF most of the time. I think there is a small positive as it is at the moment but nothing massive. Should it be more? I don't know, some games it's worth it some it is not. Just the nature of it being so random in what it effects. |
_________________
DLE College 7s |
|
Dalfort
Joined: Jun 23, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 17:15 |
|
Was FF erm... unfairness(!) off-set in LRB4 by having the redundant spp/5 rule for players towards TV? (Hope that makes sense) |
_________________
 |
|
Shraaaag
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 17:30 |
|
The most annoying thing about FF is that it's TV you can't get rid of.
You can fire players, assistant coaches, cheerleaders, Rerolls (and you should be able to fire your apothecary), but you can't get rid of FF.
It's kind of annoying that high FF might give FAME which gives you +1 to winnings, but the same high FF might also increase your spiralling expenses |
_________________
 |
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 17:31 |
|
Fan Factor should represent team popularity, and therefore should:
1) bring in more fans/gate,
2) increase gold for the host (winnings split between teams?),
3) be helpful during the match at times,
4) be purchasable between games ("marketing"), and
5) not be a factor in TV (because it makes no fluff sense).
Current rules get it right on 1, wrong on 4 and 5, and are too light on 2 and 3.
I like the idea of +FAME on crowd injury rolls. Would also be cool if something represented crowd noise, like the "12th man" effect at Seahawks games. So for example the team with higher FAME makes a d6+FAME roll before using team re-rolls, and if 7 or higher they get the benefit of the RR without using one up. (This might be too filthy!) |
|
|
Diddyboy
Joined: Dec 29, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 18:23 |
|
The goal of any team should bee to have as many fans as possible. At them moment it is lacking and should bee changed. I dont know how but one thing is that you should never ever bee allowed to lower the FF of the team by choice. The owners of a team does not have control over when the fanbase stop supporting the team ever |
|
|
bghandras
Joined: Feb 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 18:26 |
|
Fan factor is a serious rookie-team saving factor in blackbox. I agree with the success-tax statement. Actually i think it is a feature, not a bug. |
_________________
|
|
fidius
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 18:43 |
|
| bghandras wrote: | | Fan factor is a serious rookie-team saving factor in blackbox. I agree with the success-tax statement. Actually i think it is a feature, not a bug. |
Presumably if a FF change was implemented it would be alongside other rules changes which would address the ability to troll rookie teams with certain low-profile builds.
If you made FF impact winnings, and then split those winnings evenly between the two coaches, FF then becomes an incentive for lowbie players to play successful teams. So instead of punishing the overdog you reward the underdog. |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 19:07 |
|
I can only say that I 100% disagree that the current FF system is bad and would instead say it is one of the biggest and best design improvements done.
Why?
For all the reasons why you don't like it. |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
Well, that's me convinced! I'd like to completely change my opinion
 |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Mar 18, 2016 - 21:06 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | Well, that's me convinced! I'd like to completely change my opinion
|
Damn, as someone who always takes every argument seriously, no matter how ridiculous it is, I still find myself amazed how not arguing warrants these responses.
I guess explaining things is always the better approach. Just can be tedious at times.
Lemme first say:
FF isn't useless as it currently works, it's a comparative roll. Its effect isn't low either. If you have a lot of TV difference the bonus you get on determining FAME is quite large.
FAME is a very strong bonus.
But since you only have a probable chance to get a fame point added a point of FF isn't worth 10 TV.
In terms of team comparison your ability to gain fame and extra money for the match is now solely related to your relative FF compared to your opponent, which means the only case where this really makes a difference is when one team has so much more FF than the other that the probable reward in improvement on the FAME roll is no longer worth it.
In any other case such as:
Both teams have high FF, both teams have low FF, both teams have nearly the same FF, the only problem FF provides is that it can boost your team over a value of 1750 TV and trigger spiralling expenses.
However, in difference to the old system its now capped and can no longer grow beyond 18.
In fact unless you are very good it is unlikely to ever grow above 13 and when you do average or even poorly, you'll likely still be stuck at a FF around 9.
In the current system money isn't as big of a concern anymore. When something isn't broken you don't start thinking of ways to fix it. So this isn't something worth fixing.
And then on top of that all, anything that helps to give weaker coaches something of a chance to compete against better coaches, who know how to play better and how to build better teams, is in my opinion a really good idea.
I say this as someone who is technically more of a victim to the current FF rules who also wouldn't be happy if I got a super huge disadvantage for winning. But this is not what this is. This is a small balancer at worst and a nice bonus probability on fame at best.
To try to fix this, to put so much emphasis on this just feels like a super cheesy way to loophole more possibilities of min-maxing in to me.
I don't know how good of fluff this is, but from the mechanical side it's great. And sorry, mechanics come first.
I'd say if you like fluff spend more time on explaining the system and less time on changing it. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
