50 coaches online • Server time: 11:28
* * * Did you know? The most touchdowns in a single match is 23.
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Crown of Sand IX Fin...goto Post Got a weird one - Th...goto Post I'm a crybaby SJW an...
Shephard
Last seen 3 years ago
Necromantic Horror
Super Star
Necromantic Horror
Record
105/37/73
Win Percentage
57%
Norse
Emerging Star
Norse
Record
22/16/36
Win Percentage
41%
Overall
[B]
Emerging Star
Overall
Record
153/70/140
Win Percentage
52%
Archive

2009

2009-05-13 16:49:06
rating 2.9
2009-05-13 16:49:06
20 votes, rating 2.9
LRB 5 Implications
There's been a relatively good amount of activity on the forums with the alpha testing of the LRB5 client. I'll admit: I've been part of it. LRB5 appeals to me for a lot of the same reasons it doesn't appeal to some people. To me, LRB4 promoted two legitimate strategies for success: destroy your opponents team, or score quickly before your opponent could destroy you. The second strategy is a bit of work to build up to and play correctly, so most people (especially in Ranked) seemed to opt for the 1st strategy. Which is fine, but as I worked teams to higher TRs I started to get reluctant to play these Mighty Blow, Guard, Claws, Razor Sharp Claws laden teams. I look at the match up and think, "Playing this game is going to be a financial loss. Why would I do this to myself?" Which is more or less why I've recently confined my play to League tournament play. (Though I'll play a Ranked game every once in awhile if I decide I hate one of my teams, and want to punish them).

A friend of mine and I talked about this for a bit. Nerfing of various skills and the Apo aside, one of the major changes we see in LRB5 is that teams are rarely going to become out and out destroyed like they can be in LRB4. In LRB4 you can get a team into a position where recovering from losses can become a vicious cycle that only luck will break you out of, especially for the lower AV teams. Unless you just don't like the team, there doesn't ever seem to be a reason to retire a team from play in LRB5: between journeymen and the fact that money that you don't bring to the table doesn't count against you, a team can over time build a war chest that can insta-fund replacements when some critical mass has been reached.

Which got me thinking: is the new team building strategy to build a scrub team of linemen, throw that team into the mixer, not really caring if they win or lose, and pocket the team winnings until you have a big enough pile of money to buy your "real" team? What would happen is I had a team, built them with a handful of rerolls, no fan factor (and as I read the LRB5 rules, you _can_ start with a FF of 0), and 11 linemen, and let them wander in the wilds. Take the money from each game and pocket it until I have enough to buy all my positional players in one swoop. Throw away excess linemen (keeping a few, depending on skills acquired), and _now_ have a starting team. It might have a higher team value than a brand new team, but if done correctly it should be relatively low value and competitive. And heck, keep some extra money for later use...

Or am I overthinking this?
Rate this entry
Comments
Posted by RC on 2009-05-13 16:54:32
"To me, LRB4 promoted two legitimate strategies for success: destroy your opponents team, or score quickly before your opponent could destroy you."

I have never heard of the 2nd strategy. Thats what you do not want to do. Basher teams try and force the scoring teams to score quick so that they have more turns to score themself.

As an agile team player you try and stall, stall and stall in order to not give teams like i.e Khemri more then 2 turns at the end of the half to score.

Anyways, try your build in LRB5
Posted by maysrill on 2009-05-13 17:36:25
Without giving it deep thought, it sounds plausible. Without the LRB in front of me, I think there's a cap to your "free" storage though.

I'd like to point out that from having played tabletop LRB5, it seems bloodier than LRB4 to me. Fouling is more common, even if DP was nerfed. The apo issue will be a killer long-term for many players (though I prefer death-on-pitch to niggle-by-aging).

The nicest thing is the journeymen. Recoveries with 6-8 players left just don't happen anymore, which will be a relief to many woody and skaven teams.
Posted by Shephard on 2009-05-13 17:57:21
I just glanced at the LRB5 PDF, and I didn't see anything mentioning a limit to the amount of cash in the treasury.

I'll admit this has been more of a thought exercise on my part, with no real world experiment to provide any data. But the outcome of my imagining is that teams with cheap linemen (50k or less) could field a low-cost team in an environment that allowed unlimited games (like, say, Ranked), and use the procedes of those games to effectively reboot their teams with positional players. As long as you didn't build in something stupid like 8 rerolls that pump up your team value, you could have a "starting" team which wouldn't give up too much of an inducement advantage to other starting teams.

And you could do this with any team, but teams with a higher base player cost would take a hell of a lot longer to build up this way than, say, a Human or Skaven team.

I'm not even suggesting that this is a good idea: I'll give it the old college try if and when LRB5 goes live. But I think there's something to this, especially with the inherent reduction in FF value that LRB5 is dropping on us. Imagine a traditionally fragile team that has trouble getting traction due to injuries and high player costs. In a Ranked situation, as long as you can find games, you can let your team stew until you're ready to turn the "real" team loose. And hell, if it gets cut to shreds, you can start all over again. :-)
Posted by DukeTyrion on 2009-05-13 17:58:48
Sure, you can start with 11 linemen if you don't mind starting off with a pile of losses, but why not just start with a normal roster and build from there?
Posted by McVily on 2009-05-13 19:27:08
Don't forget most obvius improvement. No ageing when skiling :D

I also like new niggle better then old one
Posted by PainState on 2009-05-13 19:53:06
Well you are over thinking it in one respect. You dont have a large enough sampling to determine the effects of LRB5.

Table top players who have played LRB5 have a leg up in this area but still dont have a huge sampling of games to determine long term effects of LRB5.

Examples:
Does spiraling expenses trully restrtict a team with 250+ Games played.

How does the no ageing effect long term team development? are coaches going to be more inclined to keep injured and Niggle players?

Team development will be changed and over time we will start seeing new patterns of skill choices and options for teams.

The new rosters will take some getting used to for the new LRB5 coaches.

Some teams that were trash in LRB4 will get more desirable and vice versa thus changing the "normal" teams you see on gamefinder and such.


The best thing about Fumbbl compared to table top is the # of games you can get played in one week. Once a coach hits around 100 games in LRB5 I think they will be able to see all these long term effects and react accordingly.

Iam looking to LRB5 and everything that comes with it. I think it will breath new life into Fumbbl and we all try to figure out these new skills and rules changes. It is not all doom and gloom from my perspective.

And yes I have thought about these changes and discussed them but until I can get in 100 games on one team I will not jump to this conclusion over that one. I will just play it out and see how it plays. And then if it is inferior to LRB4, well then I will say so.

Posted by Wreckage on 2009-05-13 20:18:35
I intended to do exactly what you suggest: Aquire a hell lot of money and then build my team up... of course it would be a bit silly to start with a bunch of lineman then retire them all and get a bunch of positionals.... the positions would have no skills on their players and the team would be too expensive for their value....

but I don't mind if you just try it out.... I don't think any of this makes LRB5 broken. It makes money just a less important past of the game. Wich is good IMHO. As you say... you don't need to be that worried about team destruction anymore.
Posted by PainState on 2009-05-13 20:26:57
Oh team destruction will still happen Wreckage.
Posted by Shephard on 2009-05-13 22:38:01
Wreckage: I don't agree that a "rebooted" team would be too expensive for it's value. Think about it: the team value would be entirely dictated by the cash value of the players on it's roster, along with any FF, rerolls, and such. Your rebooted team would have a higher value than a starting team, true, but then there's no real way around it.

I'm starting to get the feeling that this is an interesting intellectual exercise that won't have much weight in actual play. I guess what really made me look at this was the fact that Fan Factor under LRB5 is no where near as powerful as it was under LRB4. On average it would have a +1 bonus for one team or the other for kick off rolls and money at the end of the match. In extreme cases, that kicks up to +2. That's it. In terms of the kick off table modifiers, coaches and cheerleaders are going to have a more extreme impact. Also, assuming you tank your team early on some quixotic quest for an all-positional rookie team, one you start winning games you're almost guaranteed to see your FF increase at a fairly stead rate until you hit the 7-11 FF range (depending on how often you win).

If I had to make a semi-intelligent statement out of this, I submit that the common wisdom of team building is going to change with LRB5. And I'm trying to figure out what that common wisdom is going to be (in fact, I'm surprised to not see a thread about this on the forums).
Posted by def909 on 2009-05-14 00:22:13
I only looked briefly at the LRB5 so the fact that you can save money without having a negative effect is new to me. Seems easy to exploit: Start with a new team (positionals and all) and keep the team in the lower brackets by replacing too experienced players. Repeat until you have a couple of millions, then start the real development of the team. Imagine Humans (Count, Morg, Griff,, Zara and Zug) or Chaos (Morg, Grashnak, Borak and Ripper) who can hire *all* stars plus wizard throughout a major...
Posted by gregory_n_white on 2009-05-14 01:17:44
One thing that may be missed here is that unspent cash doesnt count towards Team Value - but when you hire a star, wizard, any other inducesmets it does count towards TV. So your opponent gets the equivalent value in inducements.

I.e. you hire morg, they get 1-2 stars of their own.