AzraelEVA
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
 Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 20:44 |
 
|
too low compared to a game with piling on. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:02 |
|
| AzraelEVA wrote: | | too low compared to a game with piling on. |
And? Thats it? |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:03 |
|
| AzraelEVA wrote: | | too low compared to a game with piling on. |
Well, have faith. Dirty Player will enter a new golden age and bring that attrition rate back up. I know, I know......
CRP DP was gimped but it was further gimped by coaches just not taking DP any more. Now with PO removed you will once again see the glory of the dirty foul as even elves are carrying 2 DP on the roster.
Trust me. DP will do just fine on culling the herd once coaches wrap their heads around BB2016.
DP BB2016 edition did get a boost with the purchase inducment madness phase...bribes galore!!!! |
_________________
Comish of the:  |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:08 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | purchase inducment madness phase. |
Once they got rid of transfer from petty cash phase this is my nomination for the new pre match phase name. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
Nightbird
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:44 |
|
| PainState wrote: | | PainState wrote: | | purchase inducment madness phase. |
Once they got rid of transfer from petty cash phase this is my nomination for the new pre match phase name. |
Quoting thyself is the 1st sign of madness sir, but you are already mad so....carry on 
Furthermore, after reading & digesting all this it seems, to me, that the main problem w/ this seasons rule, in R/B, may be that it punishes lesser skilled coaches the most. And that, to me anyways, is a big, big problem. Lesser skilled/ newer coaches score less & inflict less casualties & thus gain less gold throughout whatever length of games are decided to be a season. I truly hope this rule is not implemented on R/B. EM is dumb enough. I felt that SE & petty cash were sufficient enough to curb big teams. Both EM/Seasons, IMHO, will further fragment Fumbbl coaches/division, as a whole, & that is not good for the site. |
_________________
"If most of us remain ignorant of ourselves, it's because self-knowledge is painful
& we prefer the pleasures of illusion." ~Aldous Huxley
Last edited by Nightbird on %b %27, %2017 - %21:%Mar; edited 1 time in total |
|
Cyrus-Havoc
Joined: Sep 15, 2006
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:49 |
|
So the only benefit is attrition?
Players are killed off the pitch instead of on it.
I have heard that before it was called ageing. |
_________________
Not Undead but perhaps the oldest living coach! |
|
AzraelEVA
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 21:58 |
|
| Cyrus-Havoc wrote: | So the only benefit is attrition?
Players are killed off the pitch instead of on it.
I have heard that before it was called ageing. |
Where did I say that is the only benefit?
It also turns Niggling in an injury where you can consider to keep the player.
Also it isn't aging since you can choose which player you rebuy and which you don't.
Ageing was much more random and turned good players into bad ones without reason. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 22:29 |
|
Nightbird that's quite on the money - lower skilled coaches already struggle with taking more cas, and this double-punishes them
i like the idea for small tabletop league where it helps to stop existing teams getting way out of hand so that new teams can't compete, it levels everyone out so after a season or 2 a new team can get up to speed
but it just doesnt seem needed in a TV matching environment.
do we want teams to get huge? (i kind of do) |
|
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 22:35 |
|
| AzraelEVA wrote: | | Cyrus-Havoc wrote: | So the only benefit is attrition?
Players are killed off the pitch instead of on it.
I have heard that before it was called ageing. |
Where did I say that is the only benefit?
It also turns Niggling in an injury where you can consider to keep the player.
Also it isn't aging since you can choose which player you rebuy and which you don't.
Ageing was much more random and turned good players into bad ones without reason. |
I liked what aging did, although I agree that how it did it was very frustrating. The "want to retire" thing puts you in a place to decide wether you prefer to keep a certain star or to have a better team. I guess in a League with actual seasons this may be an actual problem, but it's silly in a perpetual league. Keep the star, get lower TV: win/win. |
_________________
 |
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 22:51 |
|
| AzraelEVA wrote: | It also turns Niggling in an injury where you can consider to keep the player.
|
Oh, Iam supposed to retire my Niggled players, never knew that...I always keep mine.
  
Dammit man, somebody needs to let me in the know on this stuff!
 |
_________________
Comish of the:
Last edited by PainState on %b %27, %2017 - %22:%Mar; edited 1 time in total |
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 22:51 |
|
The 'want to retire' is a TV hit?
Or just a rehire hit? |
|
|
PainState
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 22:52 |
|
| licker wrote: | The 'want to retire' is a TV hit?
Or just a rehire hit? |
Just a TV hit...he cost more in TV/Gold on reset. No player will just retire on his own, you have to hit the retire button.
Well, just pulled out my handy rule book and it is just a Rehire hit on gold and not a TV hit on the team once the new season starts. |
_________________
Comish of the: |
|
zakatan
Joined: May 17, 2008
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 23:39 |
|
| licker wrote: | The 'want to retire' is a TV hit?
Or just a rehire hit? |
He gets more expensive to rehire, so there is less gold available for other things (positionals, rr...). So basically, less TV on the resulting team.
I guess a team with multiple players that wanted to retire for several seasons will be eventualy forced to retire some of them in order to build an 11-men squad. |
_________________
|
|
Rabe
Joined: Jun 06, 2009
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 23:51 |
|
Possibly interesting thought:
I know myself, I'll probably create a spreadsheet that tells my how many games I have left and how many TDs and CAS I have to get (obviously taking treasury into account) to be able to rehire my players as they are, ranked by personal priority.
I'm looking forward to creating this spreadsheet - but not so much to the point when I realize I won't be able to keep my team anymore, looking at my winning, scoring and hurting rate realistically. And by that time I know that several of my beloved players will have to go... which isn't a great incentive to play the remaining games. It's not a good incentive to push for more SPP/skills, I might give the MVPs to players that will not skill... and once a player makes an improvement roll, I'm torn between the prospect of rolling something extraordinary (and I take 98% of those opportunities) and the hope that he/she doesn't roll something like that, just to make rehiring more affordable.
That's just me though. And it's just one scenario. It may very well happen that I just adept, build great fluff around it and live happy ever after (or until the next major rule change). 
"Rehire or retire?" will be the big drama of the (players') future. |
_________________
.
Last edited by Rabe on %b %27, %2017 - %23:%Mar; edited 1 time in total |
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Mar 27, 2017 - 23:51 |
|
| licker wrote: | The 'want to retire' is a TV hit?
Or just a rehire hit? |
Just a rehire hit.
His final cost on the team when TV is measure for matches (ie. when it's readied) does not include his "wants to retire fee".
It makes lean teams even leaner if they want. |
_________________
 |
|
|
|
Borg Invasion
Search
