30 coaches online • Server time: 16:00
Index Search Usergroups Profile
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Mighty Blow/Pile Dri...goto Post SPP Buggoto Post NBFL Season 28: Baza...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
How do you feel about Min TV + Max Inducements
It's all part of the fun
47%
 47%  [ 34 ]
It's a little unethical
14%
 14%  [ 10 ]
It should be banned
11%
 11%  [ 8 ]
Morg ate all the pies!
26%
 26%  [ 19 ]
Total Votes : 71


Kinks



Joined: Feb 28, 2007

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 08:45 Reply with quote Back to top

Hi, sorry if this has been discussed before, I've not been back long and couldn't see a thread. It did get raised in the "game finder / match maker" thread, but I feel this is a distinctly different topic.

I think everyone has seen/heard of starting the snot teams with Morg & Hakflem, Norse linemen and Morg or similar. It's fairly new to me, but I've been away for a long while.

Inducements in general
I think they work really well. Generally they are slightly more expensive than, like RR's are 100k or merc's have loner, etc. So having them over actual players RR is a disadvantage, but still getting them makes for a much more even game.

Clearly some teams, are designed to play at lower TV to get "necessary" inducements like Bribes or Chefs. This also seems to work pretty well.

I also really like slightly more quirky uses, as discussed in this thread, trying to keep Helmut as a regular in a team. I think this adds fun and variety to the game.

If a 1,400k TV teams plays a 1,800k TV team, you would think the higher TV team would have advantages and options to deal with Morg and make it a competitive game.

Max Inducements
Where I'm less sure is players like Morg being used in starting line ups. Actually, like the match maker thread I just dismissed is a different topic, it actually discussed not match making based on TV to avoid rookie teams facing well min/max'd experienced teams. This seems to be the same issue, except, rather than a rookie team being put against a experienced team it has little chance against, its a rookie team vs a rookie team and a star it has little chance against.

Tactics?
Is it simple case of tactics? Morg & Haklem have been defeated many times. Is it unfair or is it that a lot of people haven't yet adapted to dealing with it. Min TV teams obviously have few RR's and 7-10 weak-average players fielded. Obviously, some races have a better chance than others, that's always the way.

Exploiting the rules?
Is this simply a taking advantage of a gap in the rules? I tend to think it was not an intention of the initial design (but clearly I don't know).

I tend to think that a Star Player would not play for a team that has a TV less than say 3-4 times their own value. E.g Morg would only play for team 380x3=1140TV or 380x4=1520TV.

Have any of the leagues had issues with this or is generally a phenomenon in RRR's other tourneys? If so, are the leagues (and the coaches) happy with it or has their been any rulings made?

_________________
Better lucky than good
maznaz



Joined: Jan 26, 2004

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 10:27 Reply with quote Back to top

I proposed a while ago adding a minimum games for each star to reflect their ego and status . Morg would only play for long established teams, but there would ideally be still some of the cheaper stars available even for rookies.

Edit: forgot to answer the question. I think it’s garbage in rookie tournaments and needs preventing somehow
C0ddlefish



Joined: Sep 17, 2019

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 10:48 Reply with quote Back to top

I think the issue is simply Morg and Hakflem were (and probably are still) too good for their costs, exacerbated further as they can plug gaps in some specific teams to devastating effect e.g. a fast reliable ball carrier for slow teams, or a pure removal machine for squishy teams.

It's those two that needs addressing (maybe Griff too as I understand it), rather than significant changes to the rules, or trying to impose an 'ethical' usage policy.

I've definitely seen leagues in here where MorgFlem Snotlings were dominating which feels thematically wrong, but it not against the rules
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 10:52 Reply with quote Back to top

maznaz wrote:
I think it’s garbage in rookie tournaments and needs preventing somehow

This would be easy, just say teams need to have played 0 games and have a value between 950-1000k

Is it a problem though? Does min tv + stars often win rookie rumbles? Do people even go for that?

I understand that tabletop tournaments often allow stars on their squads, maybe some of the tabletop guys could input how balanced it is there?
Kondor



Joined: Apr 04, 2008

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 11:26 Reply with quote Back to top

I does not matter simply because it will not happen very often on Fumbbl.

In the open division, matches are based on TV or you choose which matches you take. If you don't want to face this you don't accept an offered match. Once the black box gets started in the Competitive division it will probably be based on TV AND you will see more dwarfs. The combination of these two items will cause all kinds of problems for people running this tactic.

For leagues, it is even less of an issue because each commissioner can set rules for the group to live by.

This site endeavors to implement the rules as written so without an official change from GW, this should all be allowed.


Last edited by Kondor on Dec 17, 2021 - 17:05; edited 1 time in total
argos_72



Joined: Mar 02, 2007

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 13:39 Reply with quote Back to top

There are many questionable rules seemingly created to increase fun, probably simply thought lightly and generating a lot of drawbacks

Some of the rules such as the possibility of buying SPs 'cheaply' have been underestimated by GW so much so that they have had to take action by making an 'errata' and increase the cost of M'g'T by 40k for instance.

Having said that, I think a cap is necessary to avoid certain extreme cases such as those often seen in RRR leagues (just last example
https://fumbbl.com/p/match?id=4351585
Very Happy Very Happy )
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 17:54 Reply with quote Back to top

That match was crazy! 1 player left in the first half
Both of the stars are now price increased, but that's not yet implemented here is it, which would have toned it down a bit

But yea easy fix for RRR if needed, is just put a minimum TV
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 18:17 Reply with quote Back to top

For myself, I think star players are best when they cost 10-30% more than a player you could homegrow on your team with the same stats.

So, using Hakflem as an example, we have a gutter runner (85k), with str 3 (165k), with two heads (205k), with extra arms (245k), with prehensile tail (285k), with a special ability (arbitrarily making that worth a chosen primary, total = 305k). Then add 10-30%, and Hakflem should come in around 330-400k as a star.

However, arguably he should get mutations on chosen primaries due to underworld, so that would drop him to 245k + 10-30%, which would be 270-320k.

In this case, I'd try and pick something that kind of matches both, which would mean 310-340k.

This is why he's seen so much and has such a huge impact; even after the update, he's still INCREDIBLY undercosted.

For Morg, I would try to use a chaos warrior as a base (because that's the cheapest thing that could get those stats, that also doesn't have a negatrait) - 100k. Str 6, 260k. Block, 280k. Mighty Blow (+1), 300k. Throwteammate, we'll assume is a chosen primary, 320k. AV 11+, 330k. MA 6, 350k. Thick skull, 370k. Mighty Blow (+2) - this is about 25% better than mighty blow is, so I'm going to cost this as a chosen secondary, in addition to Mighty Blow +1, 410k, special ability (chosen primary cost) 430k.

From here, we then add 10-30%, bringing Morg to 470-560k.

If we base it on an Ogre instead, the price is a little bit lower, assuming that losing the negatrait is worth a chosen secondary. 140k+20k+80k+40k+10k+40k+40k+20k, brings us to 390k + 10-30% = 430-510k.

Therefore, Morg should probably be in the 450-480k range.

Again we can see, even after the increased price, that Morg is still very underpriced, although not as badly as Hakflem.


Griff also comes into this; a human blitzer (90k) +Str (170k) +Agi (210k) dodge (250k) fend (270k) sure feet (310k) sprint (350k) special (370k) +10-30% = 410-480k

Here we can see Griff is as underpriced as Hakflem.
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 18:54 Reply with quote Back to top

While I understand the point of the math you are doing the reality is at those prices (which are in Morg's case roughly his CRP/BB2016 price) no one would (or did under previous rules sets) ever take them.

Arguably 'as costed if they were a home grown player' is way over priced
Note loner and lack of access to in game return to play through an Apothecary makes a star player less effective then an equivalently skilled rostered player. I think most players agree the BB Second Season pricing of strength upgrades is too high (not worth selecting on most players as opposed to almost always worth taking at 50K in older rules sets.)

Also I think in some cases for example prehensile tail on Hakflem, or Dirty Player on Borak the skills on many stars aren't what you'd pick for a home grown player who already had the skills otherwise in the package. Pricing them at the price you would for a selected primary or secondary may not reflect their utility. Hakflem would probably love to have sprint/surefeet/fend/sidestep over prehensile tail.


So while I'm not disagreeing they are underpriced at their original rule book price that mathed estimate of price is too high.
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 19:12 Reply with quote Back to top

That's completely fair. And I'd be fine with a bit of a discount for the non optimal skills. But, with someone like Morg, +2 is a HUGE buff; and I think even with the discount for doing things that you wouldn't normally choose on your own player, 430k would be a good price. Things like loner and not getting an apo? Not a huge deal to me; that's the negative to being able to get it on demand, and so shouldn't affect the price - you don't have to spend 20-50 games building such a player, just 4-10 games collecting money (or 0 games if you get inducements!) Hakflem, I could see at 280k; Griff at 340k.

Edit: Basically i'd knock off 10k for each 'non optimal' skill.


Last edited by Nelphine on Dec 17, 2021 - 19:23; edited 1 time in total
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 19:23 Reply with quote Back to top

Loner on a Block ST 6 player able to easily 3d-block with 1 assist most opponents is not a big negative, and not being able to use an Apo on a Star Player is not that bad either, considering that Apo is worse in BB2020 because the D16 CAS table leans towards SI and Dead.
Garion26



Joined: Nov 28, 2021

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 19:56 Reply with quote Back to top

I hear you both - but seriously would you take Morg at say 430K? While he's added MB+2 he was otherwise never taken with an otherwise similar skill set at that price in previous editions.

Maybe he'd rarely be taken now at 430K with MB2 for a few teams with very low priced players (snotlings?) but stars in previous editions were too highly priced and individually rarely seen with some like Griff, Karla, Slibli, Roxanna etc being exceptions in the otherwise large population of almost never seen stars.

Again not arguing price shouldn't have been changed - but 300-450 K of inducements is a wizard, and maybe a bribe or maybe a merc dirty player. Or maybe wizard+merc positional with skill and a babe.

I think there's a reason pre BB2020 we didn't usually see stars - other inducements were generally better for the price. When we start talking about 300-500K range of inducements in a single player it's a lot of 'eggs in one basket' not easy to make it worth it.

EDIT for spelling and adding a phrase or two


Last edited by Garion26 on Dec 17, 2021 - 20:34; edited 1 time in total
MattDakka



Joined: Oct 09, 2007

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 20:10 Reply with quote Back to top

I would not hire Morg at 430k but I don't play teams/tournaments where inducements are essential and common.
As an aside, I think that Wizard is too cheap, especially considering that now you, as underdog and with a TV gap lower than 150k, just have to add the gold difference to hire him.
200k could be a right price.
Nelphine



Joined: Apr 01, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 17, 2021 - 22:59 Reply with quote Back to top

Yup, I agree; the problem here is the wizard. It should be 200k.

For me, the decision about whether to take a star or not should be a decision. For instance, in 2016, the pair of skinks was a valid decision; I could hire 3 normal skinks and get no inducements, or I could induce the pair of 2 skinks, and they came with JUST enough skills that I had to think about my next opponent. If I ALWAYS choose that pair of skinks instead of hiring 3 skinks, then they are too good.

Morg was the same way, and in 2016, I do think he was overpriced, but he wasn't vastly overpriced. I did actively take him, and win games, because of him, on rare occasions. He should probably have been 380 or so instead of 430k, but he was still phenomenal.

Now, with +2 MB, he's far far better. If I can afford him, it's ALWAYS better to induce him than to build a killer blitzer. Since that's the case, he MUST be expensive enough that I don't do that regularly; I have to have some other choice, whether its a different inducement or whether its a player I build.

At 380k, that's simply not true; he's arguably worth 380k with only +1 MB. At least with +1 MB, its a decision, and as you mentioned, many times he may not be chosen. With +2 MB? It is now 'how can I drop 380k, so I can get Morg?' That becomes a legitimate team building strategy. Which isn't team 'building' at all. It's team 'unbuilding' so that I can ensure my TV is low enough to always choose him. Any team who can build a killer player (such as Chaos??) now has to compare that killer to Morg. For instance, a 5 skill killer chaos warrior costs 200k. If one of those skills is +strength, its 260k. That warrior + 2 rookie beastmen.. is 380k. Morg is, every single time, better than those 3 players combined. That isn't good game design, and it means every single chaos team who considers building a killer chaos warrior, should instead retire that warrior, and play with less players, and induce Morg.
Sp00keh



Joined: Dec 06, 2011

Post   Posted: Dec 18, 2021 - 00:16 Reply with quote Back to top

Well put

But Morg being good means they can sell a mini for £23
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