PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jun 16, 2017 - 17:26 |
|
paradocks wrote: | I was still unsure how the current inducements worked, I see it was just a suggestion now Not being able to download the rules for free anywhere is causing most of the confusion I suspect |
Well you do not need to download the rules for free. You just need to print out my cheat sheet I presented a few posts above, cut it out into a nice little box and stick it to your computer.
You have all the info you will ever need.
|
_________________ Comish of the: |
|
MrMagic
Joined: Jun 09, 2017
|
  Posted:
Jun 16, 2017 - 17:29 |
|
Ah, yes. That makes much more sense. |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jun 16, 2017 - 17:34 |
|
MattDakka wrote: | It's a quite simple suggestion actually, but thanks anyway. |
Simple? That was the CRP version of how inducements worked and it was confusing as all get out to most coaches it seems.
Plus that system discourages to almost make it pointless for the TV favorite to actually spend his own gold in the inducement phase. Which is the #1 issue with gold under CRP.
The new system is perfectly fine if you think gold should have value and be an asset, which I do. So I have no problem if the TV favorite transfers 100K and the underdog does not get a freebie 100K in return. |
_________________ Comish of the: |
|
MattDakka
Joined: Oct 09, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jun 16, 2017 - 18:00 |
|
PainState wrote: |
Simple? That was the CRP version of how inducements worked and it was confusing as all get out to most coaches it seems.
|
There is a small difference though:
with CRP system, when you were TV 40 underdog, if you wanted to get a babe you would have to spend 50,000 gold from your own Treasury.
My suggestion allows to add only 10,000 gold from your Treasury to buy a babe if you are 40 TV underdog.
About gold: I disagree about the gold being an asset, because the bash teams tends naturally to be richer than agility teams just because they have higher AV, not because their coaches are great tycoons.
The competition in BB should be tactical, not economic. |
|
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
  Posted:
Jun 16, 2017 - 20:27 |
|
PainState wrote: |
The new system is perfectly fine if you think gold should have value and be an asset, which I do. So I have no problem if the TV favorite transfers 100K and the underdog does not get a freebie 100K in return. |
This isn't balanced at all when it allows coaches on this site to "circumvent" the tv-gap protection/restriction in both ranked and box.
And even outside of widening a TV gap to one that the site wouldn't normally let you play outside of a tournament, spending your cash freely as overdog also creates match-ups that either people might not have accepted or the box might not have drawn (may have preferred other teams etc). |
_________________
|
|
razmus
Joined: Jun 23, 2017
|
  Posted:
Jul 19, 2017 - 03:00 |
|
MattDakka wrote: |
There is a small difference though:
with CRP system, when you were TV 40 underdog, if you wanted to get a babe you would have to spend 50,000 gold from your own Treasury.
My suggestion allows to add only 10,000 gold from your Treasury to buy a babe if you are 40 TV underdog. |
I have to agree. It would be nice if the 40k 'free gold' were actually useful/usable. Is there a petition somewhere?
If I'm the TV 40 underdog... I can't even add that to my treasury to hire a mercenary... I only have access to the money in my treasury. |
|
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
  Posted:
Jul 19, 2017 - 05:01 |
|
That's not true, razmus.
As 40k underdog, when you spend 50k on inducements, it takes 10k from your treasury. |
_________________
|
|
razmus
Joined: Jun 23, 2017
|
  Posted:
Jul 20, 2017 - 13:31 |
|
In this game https://fumbbl.com/p/match?id=3919250, I was 40k the underdog... and went into the game with 50k in my treasury. I bought one Beer Babe, won 50k in the game and at the end of the game my treasury was 50k. (I thought 'I'll only be paying 10k for beer? That's a bargain!' I thought it was a mistake until I started reading here that what I encountered is known, and apparently the way things work.)
I think MattDakka described experiencing the exact same situation on the 16th.
I think what you describe is the way that I wish it worked. |
_________________ OWRR20 is recruiting Rookie [SL20]
OWB is recruiting [SL20] Teams
BB2020 badges |
|
Sharper
Joined: Nov 22, 2006
|
  Posted:
Jul 20, 2017 - 14:03 |
|
The 50,000 includes the 40,000 underdog inducements.
You would have only had 10k in your bank before the game.
It tells you the total amount you have, then it tells you how much of that was underdog indeucements. |
|
|
tussock
Joined: May 29, 2011
|
  Posted:
Jul 20, 2017 - 14:20 |
|
Nope.
You transferred 50k from treasury to petty cash.
You received an extra 40k for being the underdog.
So 40k of the 50k you transferred from treasury, you had because you were the underdog. You had 50k to spend, not 90k. Your pre-game treasury must have been 10k, which makes sense when you just purchased a Thrower.
And yes, you won 70k the previous game, after transferring 10k from treasury as the bigger team. -70k for a new thrower, leaving 10k in treasury.
So it's working fine, just not that easy to read. |
_________________
|
|
razmus
Joined: Jun 23, 2017
|
  Posted:
Jul 20, 2017 - 14:32 |
|
You must be right then... sorry, I was mis-interpreting what I was reading. (*whew* That means I didn't waste money I didn't have, nor not use inducement money I could have.)
Thank you for your patience. |
_________________ OWRR20 is recruiting Rookie [SL20]
OWB is recruiting [SL20] Teams
BB2020 badges |
|
|