Fixing ClawPOMB without hurting ClawMB or POMB

[dode74]

The problem with adjusting skill costs is that it will benefit high AV teams who need few skills to be effective - Orcs and Dwarves in particular. Lower AV teams often don't have the luxury of deciding who gets the SPP and how to spread them out, let alone who lives! It also doesn't take into account that while one player with 5 skills can be very effective and get good synergy out of those skills, so can 5 players with guard, and they remain effective even if one of them is injured. There are very few combos which people actually think are "too good" for what you pay - I can think of one

Better to pull SE harder and allow players to skill as they see fit, imo. I'd suggest 1700 with 100 steps if there is to be no bank.

[garion]

In my experience, once individual players start to combo-up, they get better than their price-tag.
I've also seen this with minmaxed teams on both Cyanide and FUMBBL, as well as some tabletop teams who have happened to take a beating and have dipped from glory to 11 starters with a few awesome players (I could link to one on MBBL right now).

I think this would solve that problem -

Maybe a good idea would be to bring back a similar mechanism to ageing, only not so evil. Make it so once a player reaches their 5th skill they gain Decay (call it something else though, like ageing). Then PO couod be nerfed. Teams would be built by skilling the players up evenly instead of 4 legends and the rest rookies, and it would add some extra strategy to team management.

[DoubleSkulls]

I've also seen this with minmaxed teams on both Cyanide and FUMBBL, as well as some tabletop teams who have happened to take a beating and have dipped from glory to 11 starters with a few awesome players (I could link to one on MBBL right now).

Do you think there is evidence these are better though? What I've seen seems to show that few stars backed up by low skill players is not that typical of the most successful teams.

[garion]

I've also seen this with minmaxed teams on both Cyanide and FUMBBL, as well as some tabletop teams who have happened to take a beating and have dipped from glory to 11 starters with a few awesome players (I could link to one on MBBL right now).

Do you think there is evidence these are better though? What I've seen seems to show that few stars backed up by low skill players is not that typical of the most successful teams.

It's largley race dependant really.

Skaven are an example of a team who can have 6 legends (4 GRs and 2 Blitzers) and then 8 rookies and do extremely well.

Other teams like High Elves tend to need a more even skill spread.

Chaos Pact can be very very effective as a min maxed team because of their super cheap linemen with amazing skill access. But they are one of only a few teams that can really pull it off.

But really min maxed teams is only a problem in the Fumbbl and cyanide arenas though really. It just isn't very effective in league play.

[plasmoid]

Hi Dode, Garion and Doubleskulls,
I didn't just want to do it to annoy minmaxed teams. Though I wouldn't mind seeing teams with 5 5-skill players and 6 blanks go up 15 points.
My 'real' concerns are an early runaway player, or teams bashed up so lots of blanks and a few stars. Both seem to be underestimated by the TV system. At least in my experience.

I know that 5xguard is also good.
But if any skills are too good, then that's a separate issue, IMO.
My thinking here is that guard is good. stand firm is good. and block is good.
But on a player with all 3, they all become even better: You get to block more, your guard can't be pushed off, and he can't as easily be knocked down either.

Oh well, I'll settle for tightening the SE's then.
I think 180 is a good starting point. I think 170 makes it a bit harsh on elf teams - they need room to grow.
I'd go 180, steps of 10. After 200, steps of 5.

Cheers
Martin

[mattgslater]

I don't get it. I think the bank is a much better mechanism than tightening SE.

[Steam Ball]

Easier to tell players that SE numbers are different (that's even suggested in the CRP itself), than convince everyone to use the full bank rules. If your full group agrees, give them a try, if someone wants "only CRP"... well, change SE.

[dode74]

I don't get it. I think the bank is a much better mechanism than tightening SE.

He's suggesting changing SE as opposed to adjusting skill costs at different levels. I think implementing the bank is a given.

[plasmoid]

Correct.
Bank (150K) and tighter SEs.
Make it less sweet for chaos and nurgle to be in their 'sweet spot', which just happens to also give them overdog advantage.

[Steam Ball]

OK, I was rather then.

And now in different style: so big difference for Chaos to have to float around... say 2150 (equivalent to current 2340)? From the examples around and threads about TV efficiency, it seems they would still be kicking asses (maybe using Bank is the tiping point).

[mattgslater]

At least down here, it's easier to implement rules changes that feel "old-skool" because the people you have to convince aren't newbies: if you lose the veterans, you can't get stuff done in your league. If you sway the veterans, the rookies will come along. People like what they know. Few hated the fact that Treasury applied directly to TR, given the relative weakness of handicaps over the first four LRBs and (to a lesser extent) 3rd edition. Yes, it led to silly hire-and-fire cheese for money-dumping, but it wasn't a big problem. Lots of people complained about the crazy relationship between late skills and TR, but I don't know anybody who thought it was a problem until a player was well into Rank 4. But back then, the "SE increment" (by another name) was 250k. So at least in the environment I play in, the Bank and the +TV for late skills are "easy" sells and the SE increment reduction is much, much harder.

Hey, a complement to the Bank would be a separate set of inducements that could only be had for cash, and that were generally better than the ones induced, like at marginal roster value.