PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
High TV Chess:
 |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
Matthueycamo
Joined: May 16, 2014
|
 Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 01:47 |
 
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | First i need to stop being lazy and have a devolved L 2020 thread, stick with me, ill get there.
Second, high tv BB is not dead. i expect teams to top out well over 2000 before the rebuy if they choose to.
third, if the cap and costs/benefits do not appeal, they can very easily be changed.
fourth, I think people wanting very high TV caps and rebuy levels, say 1700. have yet to see what sort of teams that would produce. And have yet to engage with the monstrous results it would generate.
fifthly, i REALLY think we need to play it and feel it played to see if the current cap/reward levels are correct. But as a place to start, surely the suggested cap (1300) or nearby is the right area to launch from? |
You can't get back players and teams lost if it turns out that it is too low, and you might not get back lost coaches. It's easy to go "ah yeah the cap is too high lets lower it a bit". It's not possible to remake all the teams destroyed by the change if it turns out the cap is too low.
I think my approach would be start with quite a high rebuy and every x number of months (maybe 2 or 3) reduce it by 50TV. Then hopefully you arrive at the sweet spot from the right direction and in a way that everyone's favorite players and teams are not instantly decimated. Less agro whilst people get used to the rules and less chance of a screw up that will never be lived down.
Because if this goes wrong in future it will be with changes "christer remember when you killed the site and didn't listen to anybody? We think you are about to do it again." I think the way it's being done is very high risk, there is a signficant chance of a large drop in site activity outside of league play. You could see a 40% drop in games or you could see a 40% increase. When things could be so easily turn either way that is a risky situation. And so in the absense of any real certainty I think that's why a shrinking rebuy cap over time that stops at a point that things seem to work ok would be the least risk to the site. |
_________________
DLE College 7s |
|
Mingoose
Joined: Jul 28, 2016
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 05:11 |
|
Solution: keep the old teams around in League, and start all new teams. Why chop down your favorite team? It is a new game, start it off fresh. |
|
|
Kondor
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 06:00 |
|
| Mingoose wrote: | | Solution: keep the old teams around in League, and start all new teams. Why chop down your favorite team? It is a new game, start it off fresh. |
And which league will they go to? Slann will go to SL. Can other teams transfer there too?
It is not a new game, it is the same old game with some tweaks. I'd rather keep most of my teams in the main Fumbbl division. |
|
|
Grod
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 06:21 |
|
We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division.
The only problem is BB2016 has Seasons as well, so it would really just continue to be a meta-fumbbl-division which was never supported by the official rules. But that's cool too, I get that some coaches prefer to play not-quite-bloodbowl to their own chosen rulesets. |
_________________
I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.
Oscar Wilde |
|
Uber
Joined: Mar 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 06:32 |
|
| Grod wrote: | | We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division. |
The best approach I think would be to meld R/B and keep that bb2016 while bb2020 gets tested in C. Hopefully someone can figure out some way to keep high TV going in a more balanced way than we currently have. |
_________________
Recovering FUMBBL addict. |
|
Kondor
Joined: Apr 04, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 07:26 |
|
| Uber wrote: | | Grod wrote: | | We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division. |
The best approach I think would be to meld R/B and keep that bb2016 while bb2020 gets tested in C. Hopefully someone can figure out some way to keep high TV going in a more balanced way than we currently have. |
Again, BB2020 can support high TV if the commissioner sets the season length in such a way that you can redraft most of your players.
Allowing a coach to end their season at any time allows all teams to sweetspot their chosen team.
It all comes down to season length and the cap. If the commissioner wants to allow higher TV it is very possible. |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 08:01 |
|
| Kondor wrote: |
Again, BB2020 can support high TV if the commissioner sets the season length in such a way that you can redraft most of your players. |
The problem is - this is what the rule set is designed to stop. If you redraft most your team then you might as well not bother with seasons.
Without the 15 game seasons rule teams will look ridiculous as you can now pick skills freely, and get stat increases as soon as you've accumulated enough tv.
15 games is actually pretty generous too. Most TT leagues have fewer games a season. |
_________________
 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 08:03 |
|
| Uber wrote: | | Grod wrote: | | We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division. |
The best approach I think would be to meld R/B and keep that bb2016 while bb2020 gets tested in C. Hopefully someone can figure out some way to keep high TV going in a more balanced way than we currently have. |
I'm pretty sure there will be a test division prior to launch anyway.
But once it goes live I doubt very much christer would split the user base like that. |
_________________
|
|
ph0enyx13
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 09:28 |
|
| Uber wrote: | | Grod wrote: | | We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division. |
The best approach I think would be to meld R/B and keep that bb2016 while bb2020 gets tested in C. Hopefully someone can figure out some way to keep high TV going in a more balanced way than we currently have. |
| Grod wrote: | We could keep a BB2016 division and a BB2020 division.
The only problem is BB2016 has Seasons as well, so it would really just continue to be a meta-fumbbl-division which was never supported by the official rules. But that's cool too, I get that some coaches prefer to play not-quite-bloodbowl to their own chosen rulesets. |
That would split the player base. The point of [C] is to unite the playerbase |
|
|
Mattius
Joined: Sep 03, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 09:40 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | Kondor wrote: |
Again, BB2020 can support high TV if the commissioner sets the season length in such a way that you can redraft most of your players. |
The problem is - this is what the rule set is designed to stop. If you redraft most your team then you might as well not bother with seasons.
Without the 15 game seasons rule teams will look ridiculous as you can now pick skills freely, and get stat increases as soon as you've accumulated enough tv.
15 games is actually pretty generous too. Most TT leagues have fewer games a season. |
If this was a league it would be fine. But it's actually an open play perpetual set up based on TV matching. It's really another world.
Looking at many of my teams, in some cases it took 40 games to get to TV2000. To give context, I'm referring only to box and most my teams are around the 60% win rate. Hence I really don't get this idea that 15 games is plenty? Yes some people have provided examples of teams that have got to high TV in very few games. But I can't help thinking on my own personal experience, that these are very much exceptions to the rule than the rule. It just takes one game where you lose 2-0, have 1-2 perms and gain only 4spp and the chance of getting your team to an acceptable state is nil. Removal of picking MVP on its own I think will make a huge difference to TV growth.
Fumbbl right now is the only place you can realistically play competitive high TV bloodbowl. Yes, high TV play gets a lot of criticism, but, nearly everyone here has at least one big team. In addition, nearly all of the most spectated games are big TV games. Who honestly goes on to spectate and picks a 1300 Vs 1300 game over a 2200 Vs 2200?? It draws in the crowds to say the least. Hence, picking a house rule (a cap is an optional rule not the rule) that essentially removes high TV play seems quite extreme. |
|
|
C0ddlefish
Joined: Sep 17, 2019
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 10:41 |
|
I'd chose to spectate on a game that looks interesting with factors like races involved, the coaches involved, is it part of a tournament I'm interested.
It may be that the best coaches and tournament games happen to have high TV sides, but the first two factors influence whether I'd watch, not the TV |
|
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 10:56 |
|
| Mattius wrote: | | Garion wrote: | | Kondor wrote: |
Again, BB2020 can support high TV if the commissioner sets the season length in such a way that you can redraft most of your players. |
The problem is - this is what the rule set is designed to stop. If you redraft most your team then you might as well not bother with seasons.
Without the 15 game seasons rule teams will look ridiculous as you can now pick skills freely, and get stat increases as soon as you've accumulated enough tv.
15 games is actually pretty generous too. Most TT leagues have fewer games a season. |
If this was a league it would be fine. But it's actually an open play perpetual set up based on TV matching. It's really another world.
Looking at many of my teams, in some cases it took 40 games to get to TV2000. To give context, I'm referring only to box and most my teams are around the 60% win rate. Hence I really don't get this idea that 15 games is plenty? Yes some people have provided examples of teams that have got to high TV in very few games. But I can't help thinking on my own personal experience, that these are very much exceptions to the rule than the rule. It just takes one game where you lose 2-0, have 1-2 perms and gain only 4spp and the chance of getting your team to an acceptable state is nil. Removal of picking MVP on its own I think will make a huge difference to TV growth.
Fumbbl right now is the only place you can realistically play competitive high TV bloodbowl. Yes, high TV play gets a lot of criticism, but, nearly everyone here has at least one big team. In addition, nearly all of the most spectated games are big TV games. Who honestly goes on to spectate and picks a 1300 Vs 1300 game over a 2200 Vs 2200?? It draws in the crowds to say the least. Hence, picking a house rule (a cap is an optional rule not the rule) that essentially removes high TV play seems quite extreme. |
I think this is perhaps where the problem lies in terms of people being worried, as I think your presupposition is somewhat incorrect.
I agree 15 games is tricky with some races to get to a high tv. However team building does not stop at 15 games, a team will develop to a certain Tv. Then they will hit the draft. Then on the second 15 games they will be starting from 1300 TV for example. Making it much easier in Season 2 to achieve a higher TV.
Further more there are a bunch of things you can do to get a higher TV more quickly -
* First of all money does not add to your CTV. So even after the cull you could well have 495k sitting in your treasury. On account of EM being less of a concern/less impactful.
* You can accumulate SPP on rookies, meaning after season 1 they are bought at a rookie price, but can skill up after the draft. If you want. Or you can gamble on some randoms and fire the ones that get rubbish skills, meaning your TV is kept down.
* FF is not a thing anymore, you can pretty much remove 100k from a teams value now. E.g. a 1400 TV team will be a 1300 in 2020 edition, plus if that team has random skills it could well look more like a 1400 TV team now is a 1200Tv team in 2020 edition.
* There are other "tricks" you could employee if you really wanted i.e. dropping rrs to 1 or 0 for 1 game post draft, dropping apothecary. Then with your huge treasury you can buy them back after game 1.
* Finally "Season 1 or 2" is not always the end of a teams run. Enter the team in to a tournament and the redraft will happen once the team wins or exits the tournament. I think this is perhaprs the best part of this new rule set as teams can still grow to high tv. You will still see 2200tv teams playing here. Yes they will be less frequent but there should in theory be a much healthier/larger number of teams competing in tournaments in the future, as this rule set is very much geared to making these more appealing.
All that said I am not claiming this rule set it perfect by any stretch, there are some big red flags for me too. But I think we really need to play it get a proper handle on it.
My concerns are -
* In an online environment this rule set will benefit power gamers more than ever in the actual competitive division (though not in majors), as they will quickly learn how to exploit this rule sets skill progression, I've mentioned some ways above ^
* Fouling is going to be a crap shoot with 2 sneaky git players on the pitch, you have slightly less than 1 in 6 chance of being sent off. Sure fouling is not that powerful but in real terms I think fouling every turn will be a really sound strategy and its just a bit too dicey for my taste as there is no Eye to make the chances of being caught greater.
* Sneak hiring inducements - This was a thing pre LRB5 and I didn't like it then, they re-introduced it in 2016 however it was quickly fixed in an FAQ and cash/the inducement phase was reverted to CRP. Sadly this means we are back in a position where the TV underdog can add just enough cash to give them an inducement they want (often a wizard).
* TV underdog having the advantage - This will never be true for all races, but some (skaven, Elves etc..) could really benefit from being the underdog now because of the way cash works in the inducement phase, because Star players are cheaper and wizard is always a powerful game changer.
These last two points really beg the question would anyone want to get to a high tv in this edition anyway? I'm not sure it is very advantageous to be honest? Sweet spotting will likely be the best way to play regardless of caps. |
_________________
|
|
BeanBelly
Joined: Nov 14, 2019
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 11:08 |
|
Our man Garion talks sense. |
_________________
Painting myself into a corner |
|
ClayInfinity
Joined: Aug 15, 2003
|
| Posted:
Aug 26, 2020 - 11:33 |
|
Agree... people equate TV in BB2016 and BB2020 as the 'same' which is not the case. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
