21 coaches online • Server time: 03:04
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Etiquette...goto Post What's the right pit...goto Post Bugs with BB2020
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
In the next rule set
Re-drafting will be the same
19%
 19%  [ 9 ]
Re-drafting will be adjusted slightly
36%
 36%  [ 17 ]
Re-drafting will be adjusted a lot
12%
 12%  [ 6 ]
Re-drafting will be scrapped
10%
 10%  [ 5 ]
Why can't I just eat pie?
21%
 21%  [ 10 ]
Total Votes : 47


Kinks



Joined: Feb 28, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 23, 2021 - 23:42 Reply with quote Back to top

uzkulak wrote:
I should add some people do like having big teams that stomp everyone else - but those people probably shouldnt be in charge of designing the rules.

I tend to see big teams playing other big teams in epic exciting games.

koadah wrote:
Cutting to 2000 is one thing. 1350 is something else.

It's not even really 1350 (as in 1.35 mil), as you have to pay an extra 20k to retain a player. So if you've spent all season getting block on your blockers, you're gonna have to pay a premium to keep them, which may be ok for one season, but at some point you'll have to drop them. Not because they are "stat-monsters" or in any way unbalancing the game, just because you've kept them a live longer than most.

mekutata wrote:
But in general leagues will likely profit from a system that enables new teams to join and compete.

That probably makes sense for small groups of 5-10 friend playing table top. A lot of the leagues I see on here have several divisions and a process for new applicants, so this doesn't seem relevant.

Also, if you are playing in a small group and want to try out a different team one season the 1350 thing would help people to start over. However, that's not an issue on FUMBBL, most of us have many teams on the go simultaneously.

A think a lot of the all-time records will be untouchable for a long while.

_________________
Better lucky than good
moph



Joined: Sep 16, 2020

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 00:49 Reply with quote Back to top

Redrafting neglects the roleplaying aspect of the game. There is storytelling going on in the game for a lot of players. Not only on tabletop also here on fumbbl. People write about their teams and players. Although the digital versions of blood bowl tend to lean to the competitive side of the game. It is not fun to have to dismiss your players like that and just replace them with another name. I would opt for an ageing system. I don't know the old one. But I imagine having to dismiss players because you rolled a -str on an ageig roll or because you don't have the gold to pay their extra cash demands, would ad a story to that. Also i would keep the gold you can earn low, to slow team growth down. It should be really hard to get a big and rich team and really hurt to get a player killed. Maybe allowing credit if you go under eleven.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 01:09 Reply with quote Back to top

They don't care about that. You don't have players. You only have pixels.

_________________
Image
[SL]2020 Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - Always recruiting!
ClayInfinity



Joined: Aug 15, 2003

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 01:43 Reply with quote Back to top

I've been playing since the 1980's when the game was 2d6 based. So to say "block dice" will never change in the OP is a fallacy. You never know what may happen. I know MattDakka goes on about d8s and the like. Maybe one day the whole dice mechanisms will change. Doubtful though as I believe the iconic Block Dice are now a branding / IP money generator for GW.

Re Redrafting - was introduced in BB2016 but not implemented on fumbbl's B or R divs.

The SWL has been running all through BB2016 with Redrafting. Wanting to Retire rolls and age of a player expressed in Seasons has been running very well. The SWL has different caps for its three tiers (essentially gives a +200k, +100k, +50k to its three tiers) and then the normal maths applies (TDs, CAS's etc, Treasury etc).

It has in all, allowed a very balanced and even competition with very few teams / races going on to dominate.

The core rules that Christer will adopt is as per the book (the 1350k TV cap and +20k agent fee).

Personally, I feel that is low particularly for non-skilled teams such as Vamps, Nurgle etc.

But Christer has said that he will run it as per the book's recommendation and is open to a tweak (I believe 1500k is a nice cap spot after 15 games plus 20k agents fees, but thats just my gut feel).

The SWL will be running 2020 style Redrafts with some adjustments.

Given our seasons are 7 games long, the Agents fees will be amended. The calc is 15k (not 20k) for each season a player has played minus 3. Therefore, the first three seasons are free of agents fees, but Season 4 players attract 15k but the kicker is that for each season thereafter, its an ADDITIONAL 15k. So 30k for Season 5, 45k for Season 6.

The SWL also has an amened Expensive Mistakes table and to explore all this, check out the SWL Guide on the SWL page (https://fumbbl.com/p/group?op=view&group=647)

My point is... the rules are customisable. Christer has made his stance and we will abide by that as its a great site to play with. Howevever in the League space, all things are customisable and I would encourage people to play around with the maths.

TV does need to be curtailed. The Era of Bloat hasn't been great. We have always had mechanics to trim TV be it Ageing Rolls or High Kill Stacks (ClawPOMB) to get rid of players. BB2020 (as per BB2016 before it) is using team management choices to keep a cap on TV bloat. The good thing about 2020 is that its 100% customisable for League play so you can run what you like. Christer however is making it "by the book" and thats OK too.
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 02:28 Reply with quote Back to top

The rules for Competitive are not as per the book. The rules for SWL are not as per the book.

Is anyone actually doing it as per the book?

It is all customisable. That's great as we can just turn seasons off and just use TV caps if we wish.

_________________
Image
[SL]2020 Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - Always recruiting!
C0ddlefish



Joined: Sep 17, 2019

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 08:30 Reply with quote Back to top

moph wrote:
Redrafting neglects the roleplaying aspect of the game. There is storytelling going on in the game for a lot of players.


Not sure I agree with that. Nearly all sports teams make changes to their squads each season due to financial restrictions, especially the sports that BB is loosely based upon. If anything redrafting is another layer of narrative for the team. The struggles to decide who to keep, who has earned their place etc.the player lost can be given little back stories as to what they did next - I still remember Premier Manager 2 retiring your players mid season 'so they could run a country pub'
mekutata



Joined: May 03, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 09:05 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
Well, if you want to enable new teams joining a league to compete the Commissioner can allow coaches to artificially "build" them to the desired TV from scratch (maybe without allowing to take Secondary skills and stat+).
No need to have a Season Re-Draft system.


Sounds too artificial. Redraft is much more organic. If i want a team build like you described i rather play a naf resurrection and gud.

_________________
Image
koadah



Joined: Mar 30, 2005

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 09:31 Reply with quote Back to top

C0ddlefish wrote:
moph wrote:
Redrafting neglects the roleplaying aspect of the game. There is storytelling going on in the game for a lot of players.


Not sure I agree with that. Nearly all sports teams make changes to their squads each season due to financial restrictions, especially the sports that BB is loosely based upon. If anything redrafting is another layer of narrative for the team. The struggles to decide who to keep, who has earned their place etc.the player lost can be given little back stories as to what they did next - I still remember Premier Manager 2 retiring your players mid season 'so they could run a country pub'


You don't cut a team down from Premier League level to League Two level each year.

mekutata wrote:
MattDakka wrote:
Well, if you want to enable new teams joining a league to compete the Commissioner can allow coaches to artificially "build" them to the desired TV from scratch (maybe without allowing to take Secondary skills and stat+).
No need to have a Season Re-Draft system.


Sounds too artificial. Redraft is much more organic. If i want a team build like you described i rather play a naf resurrection and gud.


Not artificial at all. The NFL boosts new franchises or they'd go bust before they could compete.

I've been after this feature for years. Seasons ain't it.

_________________
Image
[SL]2020 Rookie Rumble - New teams ONLY - Always recruiting!
Kinks



Joined: Feb 28, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 10:38 Reply with quote Back to top

I don't dislike the having a redraft limit as such. 1350 is kinda low, but as mention will simply be adjusted to fit each league. I like the idea of your budget increasing/decreasing if you get promoted/demoted.

It's the accumulative agents fees that don't sit well for me. It seems like an arbitrary amount that will punish teams very unevenly. I think I would prefer an agents fee based more on the players status, e.g. Rookie = 0, Legend = 100k, or something along those lines.

_________________
Better lucky than good
stej



Joined: Jan 05, 2009

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 11:19 Reply with quote Back to top

I feel the cap should maybe have started higher and gradually come down on the site. Not that I play much,but I have no incentive to play any of my favourite teams as I would have to cut so many long lived players.

Imo, the redrafting process, and limit suggested, heavily favours teams with good access to core starting skills (e.g. Dwarfs). Not only can they draft useful rookies, they can gamble more on random skills as they have a lot of the useful ones.
To that extent, it's a shame they didn't rework a few of the rosters who lack starting skills. E.g. maybe chaos could do with an extra positional that has some useful starting mutations or block / wrestle, so they are a bit more friendly out of the box.
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 12:10 Reply with quote Back to top

Of course the rules can be customized to fit the coaches' preferences but, if you are a coach who wants to play more than 1 league game per week or month the only option is the Competitive division.
This is why the Season Re-Draft is annoying. It's official and we must suck it up in Competitive division.

mekutata wrote:
Redraft is much more organic. If i want a team build like you described i rather play a naf resurrection and gud.

If for you is more organic to pay +20k fee for a rookie player with 0 SPPs just because the Season is over, even if he is still a clueless rookie, then yes.
It sounds ridiculous to me. Very Happy


Last edited by MattDakka on Nov 24, 2021 - 12:23; edited 1 time in total
mekutata



Joined: May 03, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 12:22 Reply with quote Back to top

Kinks wrote:
It's the accumulative agents fees that don't sit well for me. It seems like an arbitrary amount that will punish teams very unevenly. I think I would prefer an agents fee based more on the players status, e.g. Rookie = 0, Legend = 100k, or something along those lines.


I'd support that idea, but can imagine it becoming "too much" for some players. Especially without digital assistance of fumbbl.

Also you probably would need to define the fee based on SPP and not status, otherwise you can sneak in unusued skills.

_________________
Image
mekutata



Joined: May 03, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 12:23 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:


mekutata wrote:
Redraft is much more organic. If i want a team build like you described i rather play a naf resurrection and gud.

If for you is more organic to pay +20k fee for a rookie player with 0 SPPs just because the Season is over, even if he is still a clueless rookie, then yes.
It sound ridiculous to me. Very Happy


Just buy a new rookie with no fees. The other player simply wasn't gud enuff to make the cut for a new season.

Regarding C, as said before, I doubt this is the topic here. Christer is the "commish" for that environment. There are anyway ongoing debates about C division.
We all know about your personal preferences for that by now. Right now it is anyway not active. But I can guarantee you that it would be possible to play more than one league game per week. Simply by joining more leagues or minors.

And the different leagues can define any caps or agent fees as they wish.

_________________
Image


Last edited by mekutata on Nov 24, 2021 - 12:29; edited 1 time in total
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 12:28 Reply with quote Back to top

I know, but my point is that the Re-Draft cost increase should be based on the SPPs/skills acquired by the player, not on the number of games played.
Otherwise it's exploitable by not skilling up a player who banked some SPPs at Season Re-Draft and then taking the skills after game 1 of the new Season.


To be clear: I'm not against Christer implementing the official rules, he has good reasons to do it.
I'm against bad official rules such as Season Re-Draft.
Not asking to remove it because it's impossible, just saying it sucks.


Last edited by MattDakka on Nov 24, 2021 - 12:32; edited 1 time in total
mekutata



Joined: May 03, 2015

Post   Posted: Nov 24, 2021 - 12:32 Reply with quote Back to top

MattDakka wrote:
I know, but my point is that the Re-Draft cost increase should be based on the SPPs/skills acquired by the player, not on the number of games played.
Otherwise it's exploitable by not skilling up a player who banked some SPPs at Season Re-Draft and then taking the skills after game 1 of the new Season.


See my reply to Kinks. I tend to agree with focus on SPP rather than player status.
But at the same time I feel like it should be a possible reward for a coach to build up a player for the future by letting him play and not gain new skills (yet).
I think both can be fine.

_________________
Image
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic