What would be the effect of 16 players

[Chris]

1 & 2) Yes - though would that not be a boost to the teams that have a more expensive positional set (Necro's for instance) who normally aren't seeing a full range of beasties till the other teams have started to skill?

3 & 4) Would it be easier to discount linemen? Either a straight -10k accross the board or something race specific. Teams have typically 9-11 positionals including big guys so it would add up.

[neverworking]

The trick with #2 is to keep the amount of the boost low enough it doesn't work out that way. If you went for say 1080 w/13 player maximum teams like undead, necro, chaos dwarf would be adding 2 extra 40k players to their normal roster. More expensive rosters would actually have less positionals, but their extra players would be more useful in theory. Any tweak of this kind though will favor some roster over another, so you might need to work out a few probably lineups to resolve it. 1100 w/13 players would make some teams like necro more capable of starting with a stronger roster though since they would only need 80k to fill the last 2 lineman spots.

Reducing lineman costs straight across the board would make it simpler to do #1 without needing #2 and would certainly be easier bookkeeping, but it wouldn't minimize the bloat that expensive teams would be carrying in those last 2-3 spots. Last 3 spots on 3 of the elf teams = 210k last 3 spots on the cheap lineman teams = 120k. reducing each by 10k wouldn't change the gap, it would still be 90k.

[cbbakke]

I did a sample of what roster cost would look like if people have to fill out their roster and the one team that I saw that could be an issue is necro. The cheap filler lineman really could give them an edge. If you look at most the teams who have a full roster it is because of stuntys. In general those teams are considered to be below par so it would serve as a bump for them in theory.

I I have played since 3rd edition and this is the first one that I have seen the really hyper roster management and I still have not really put my finger on why it is.

[koadah]

Becasue they like team sports that have large squads and don't like the idea of keeping team numbers as low as possible to avoid inducements. Though of course under this teams like pricey elves will be giving away a fair bit in inducements game 1.

Maybe after a season that would change. Could always increase the winnings to allow more players to be purchased.

Team management is good, however I wish to ease people into such activity from demo games and this could be an intermediate step.

I hate the idea. It totally "unbalances" the game. Trying to "rebalance" it would just be horrible IMO. Though maybe just one extra journeyman to take them up to 12 wouldn't be so bad.

How about starting with 1200k teams? Then they can spend the money on what they like.

Playing with less than 11 is a big part of the game. This isn't the NFL. You cannot bring on reserves after every turn. Oh wait, that may be the only way to actually use your 16 men. And deal with C-POMB into the bargain.

[Darkson]

Having read through everything, I'm also in the "against" camp - seems like so much rebalancing needs to be done to "fix" something that isn't "broken" in the first place.

If you mates are new to BB, maybe ask them to play the game "as is", rather than changing the rules to match some expectation they have without experience.

I'd also say that this change would make them weaker coaches in the long run. Part of the skill of playing teams is managing to play with less than 11 players for any specific drive - this would make it less likely they'd learn that skill.

[cbbakke]

Becasue they like team sports that have large squads and don't like the idea of keeping team numbers as low as possible to avoid inducements. Though of course under this teams like pricey elves will be giving away a fair bit in inducements game 1.

Maybe after a season that would change. Could always increase the winnings to allow more players to be purchased.

Team management is good, however I wish to ease people into such activity from demo games and this could be an intermediate step.

I hate the idea. It totally "unbalances" the game. Trying to "rebalance" it would just be horrible IMO. Though maybe just one extra journeyman to take them up to 12 wouldn't be so bad.

How about starting with 1200k teams? Then they can spend the money on what they like.

Playing with less than 11 is a big part of the game. This isn't the NFL. You cannot bring on reserves after every turn. Oh wait, that may be the only way to actually use your 16 men. And deal with C-POMB into the bargain.

How do you see this "unbalancing" the game? I am not saying that it will or won't. Just looking for an example

added on:
You are correct, this is not the NFL. But I also can't think of a team sport that the team plays with less then a full roster on purpose. Soccer, football, baseball, hockey, basketball on and on. Playing with a short roster in blood bowl is an attempt to use a game mechanic to get an advantage.

[Lamanzer]

In our league we have two rules to counter the fact that a team can win a game just because its oponent was destroyed in its last game.

1) You must have 13 players on the roster sheet.
2) If you cannot field 13 players, you must take Journeymen.

[cbbakke]

In our league we have two rules to counter the fact that a team can win a game just because its oponent was destroyed in its last game.

1) You must have 13 players on the roster sheet.
2) If you cannot field 13 players, you must take Journeymen.

that isa a good middle ground. How has it worked out in your league?

I was thinking also you could have a rule like: you have to play all players on the roster in front of journeymen

[koadah]

How do you see this "unbalancing" the game? I am not saying that it will or won't. Just looking for an example

added on:
You are correct, this is not the NFL. But I also can't think of a team sport that the team plays with less then a full roster on purpose. Soccer, football, baseball, hockey, basketball on and on. Playing with a short roster in blood bowl is an attempt to use a game mechanic to get an advantage.

My bad. I was thinking that teams would be forced to have a 16 man roster. As long as the journeymen are optional it is not so bad.

Even so. An elf team that is guaranteed to have as many players as they like for each game is going to be tough to beat over the season.

As has been mentioned the journey men will go on the line and there will be no need to buy more than 8 or 9 proper players. You will end up adding rules to deal with issues caused by this rule.

Football is the only American sport I follow but in soccer and rugby reserves are a relatively recent idea. Originally there were none. When I was a kid only one reserve was allowed. Each weekend 1000s of games will kick off with exactly 11/15 players on a squad or even less.

Playing with a short roster is team management. Why waste TV on players that you don't need?

If you are trying to train up rookies you are better off sticking as close to the real game as possible. Giving them extra cash up front to buy reserves is closer to the real game. AV9 teams don't need the reserves they can buy RRs.

Don't derail this with your usual "No one takes 4 human catchers any more" complaints. This is a "how to help the new guys" thread.

[Lamanzer]

that isa a good middle ground. How has it worked out in your league?

It seems to work as we want , but we have only played 6 weeks with these rules. so it's difficult to be sure.

Opponents of Mighty blow/claws Team still have a lot of difficulty to field 11 players in the second Half and Av7 teams are more competitive. (Since the beginning, we have not heard: "F....ng Av7 team! Next year I will play Orcs or undeads" )

[cbbakke]

Soccer and rugby may have only had one reserve but I am betting teams show up with that one player for their reserve.

Playing with a short roster in blood bowl is exactly what you are saying. A way to lower your TV. Why lower it? To gain an advantage on the pitch. IMO it is using a game mechanic (TV) to try to get an unattended advantage on the pitch. I don't believe Jervis had the intent of people playing a short roster to get an advantage. It was intended to give a general handicapper between teams, not a system to try to exploit.

If you want to run with a roster of 8 and have a lot of journeyman, when you play an equal coach who has full developed team you are going to be in a lot of trouble. Anytime a journeyman blocks with 2 dice it is a 11% chance of falling over and 50% of reroll not working.

[dode74]

I don't think the comparison between RL sports and BB is reasonable if you are merely talking numbers. You have to take value into account. For example, Manchester United could afford to have 100+ players on the books, but they don't. Instead they have about 35-40 in the main squad and they are all good players. Some teams have more players, some have less. Some teams are unable to manage to field the 25 they can register as eligible to play. This is to do with the cost of the players rather than the number of slots available. The same is true in BB. Many people would rather have 13 medium-to-high quality players than 16 low-to-medium quality ones at the same cost. It's about balancing the books, not the slots.

[cbbakke]

your talking about teams not being able to afford the players. That is a different system then bloodbowl where the coaches are choosing to have less so they can get an off field effect to give them an on field advantage.

if you got rid of the team value completely, would these same coaches still sit at a small roster?

[dode74]

I think it's exactly the same thing. IRL teams have fewer players so that they can afford better ones, but they still need to have enough players. Same is true for BB.

[cbbakke]

it is not true because the teams do have the gold in blood bowl but choose not to have more players so they can get an edge on the pitch.

Answer my previous question please