Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements Mk2

Got some ideas for rules? Maybe a skill change or something completely different!!! Tell us here.

Moderator: TFF Mods

User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements Mk2

Post by Darkson »

Joemanji wrote:Okay, I hope this appears as simple written down as it seems in my head. The basic idea is that when rolling for an Improvement you would get to choose skills equal to the (current) value of that Improvement instead of a normal skill. So for example, if you rolled double 6 (worth 50K) you could choose a 'normal' skill (20K) and a 'doubles' skill (30K) instead. Alongside this some normal skills would be changed in price, ranging between 10K-30K.

I'll try to address some of the issues this system might bring up later in the post, but for now let's spell out exactly what the table I'm imagining might look like:

*IMPROVEMENT TABLE*
2-9 = A single New skill of any value or new skills with value no greater than 20K.
10 = Increase the player's MA or AV by 1 point or a single New skill of any value or new skills with value no greater than 30K.
11 = Increase the player's AG by 1 point or New skill(s) with combined value no greater than 40K.
12 = Increase the player's ST by 1 point or New skill(s) with combined value no greater than 50K.

Note : the new skill(s) a player takes must always come from the categories he has normal access to unless the Improvement roll is a doubles.


Alongside this some skills would change in the value they add to a player's TV, summarized below:

10,000gc = Fend, Kickoff Return, Pass Block, Pro, Shadowing, Catch, Sprint, Sure Feet, Diving Catch, Hail Mary Pass, Nerves of Steel, Dump Off, Grab, Thick Skull, Strong Arm, Extra Arms, Disturbing Presence, Prehensile Tail, Very Long Legs, Horns, Big Hand.

20,000gc = everything not mentioned elsewhere

30,000gc = Block, Dodge, Leader, Guard, Piling On, Claw

Skills players do not have Normal access to and have to be gained by rolling doubles cost +10,000 instead of the flat 30,000.


As you can see, lots of things go into the 10K list, as this will encourage people to take two good skills instead of the same good (but boring) one or two.

For example, an Human Lineman rolls a Normal Improvement. He could take :

Block, adding 30K to his TV.
Wrestle, adding 20K to his TV.
Fend and Pro, adding 20K to his TV.

To me this perfectly logical. The Block guy is the better player, and the Wrestle guy is probably still better than the Fend/Pro guy. But this gives coaches the option to mess around more without being punished quite so harshly. At the moment there really is a right and a wrong way to build teams, and poor old skills like Pass Block don't get much of a look in.

Note that this doesn't increase the frequency of doubles skill access, and doesn't change how likely a player is to get any given skill. I don't like the stick of traits, that stops you taking certain skills. I much prefer a carrot system like this, that rewards coaches who try to build outside the cornerstone skills such as Block/Dodge/Guard. It also has a built in mechanism for punishing abuse of ClawPOMB. Note that some of the 10K skills are in that list because the only players who want them require a doubles to get them. E.g. NoS is a skill desired by catchers, and isn't worth 30K (the same as Block) IMO. I'd also say stunties don't have to pay the 10K doubles penalty. 40K for a Block Goblin ain't right. :D

Thoughts?

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by Darkson »

Right, this is clearly an issue for some, so if all you're going to post is "but what exactly is your issue", or a variation of such, don't bother, as I will just delete them.

Hopefully this will encourage Joe to come back and try this discussion again, as I like the concept, even if not the execution as given.

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
Rhyoth
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:51 pm
Location: Rennes, France

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by Rhyoth »

Okay, let's try to put back the thread on his track.
I like this rule : it's quite simple, it doesn't change much the core of the game, can be quite easily tested, and easily reverted/adjusted if the test go wrong.
I think it address the problem* nicely, as it just gives coaches who like to think outside of the box the small bonus they need (and even if this bonus wass a bit too good, would it be really bad to promote this kind of coaching ?)


Now, i have some suggestion to improve this rule :

1) There is a possibility for some players to run out of skills (especially Treemen and Deathrollers), so you need to fix this issue : for exemple allow a player with only one skill left to choose in its skill category to pick a lowcost double instead
(i would also recommend a limit of 2 skill/roll, to prevent abusive use of this rule)

2) If the most powerful skills are made more expensive, is there still a need to pay an extra 10k for doubles ?
As i understand it, the "30k for double rule" was mostly made to prevent some abuse (so mostly because of Dodge and Guard) ; is there still a need for this rule if the most troublesome combos are already taken care of, thanks to your ruling ?

3) Of course, it since this rule will have a significant impact on TV, you'll probably need to adjust Spiralling Expenses as well.

4) i think allowing a player to take for 30k of normal skills on a double roll would be nice too

5) i can't say i agree on your skill "tiers" :
_ at least put Mighty Blow in the 30k box (and also consider Accurate)
_ as a safety measure, Fend, Sure Feet and Dump-off (or NoS) should not be included in the 10k list (i also don't think you should put Horns, Extra Arms, Strong Arms nor Grab in there)



* if you want a simple problematic, here it is : some kills are very good/versatile/frequently used, so they're taken all the time, while some skills are too poor/situationnal/rarely used, thus almost never seen.

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by garion »

I do like your suggestion although, I think we will have a very tough time getting agreement on the costs. I posted how I would cost them in the first page or two of that other hideous thread.

To get the same effect how about Phil Bowens ageing mechanism?

Okay... to explain - First of all this is based on Phil Bowens experience system so well done to him :) I have altered it slightly to fit my proposal. Also - all other skills can be tiered by cost if you like but I doubt it would be needed after this change.

anyway -

Phil Bowens Exp system -
You added a column for each player on the roster before SPPs for Experience (like you have one for TD/CAS/Comp/Int/MVP ... add Exp).

A player starts as a rookie with 0 Experience (Exp).

At the end of each game a player rolls a D6. If they roll higher than their Exp number they gain one Exp point.

Once a player reaches 6 Exp they gain a skill for 20k (or 10k? or maybe even free? not sure yet) a player can only take 1 Trait from any of the catagories they have available to them, for example a Human Thrower can take one Passing Trait or one General Trait etc.... This skill is seperate from the normal experience table and means that player's could end up with 7 skills again.

This is the list of Traits, no traits can be taken any other way than this -

Agility
- Jump Up (LRB4 version)
- Leap

Strength
-Pile On
-Stand Firm (my version)

General
- Dauntless
- Frenzy

Passing
- Strong Arm
- Dump Off (maybe?)

Mutation
- Claw
- Two heads (maybe? so we have one for chaos and one for skaven/underworld?)

Once a player has got 6Spp and gained their trait they still roll for Exp but do not gain any more Exp. If the player rolls a 6 after a game then they must roll 2D6 on the Ageing table -

Ageing Table -
2-6 - Miss Next Game
7-8 - Niggling Injury
9 - -1 AV
10 - -1 MA
11 - -1 AG
12 - -1 ST

The ageing and exp stuff is phils, adding a skill to it is mine. Just to clear up which bit was pinched ;)

Rationale

This benefits the game in many ways.
- Stops teams building stars and using the rest of their team as fodder. In short - brings back equal skill distribution.
- It weakens the CPOMB combo - as a player cannot have Claw and Pile On, a player must choose which he would like
- It benefits Throwers as they are forced into taking a Passing Trait which should in turn make them think about taking more passing skills
- It will benefit middle of the road teams like humans that do not have as many skill options on their linemen (only G), it will give them more dauntless and a couple of Frenzy players etc... It should also help them because teams that tend not to lose player due to high Av etc will still lose players every so often.
- Elves will take Jump Up more because they will not want a team full of leaping players.
- Players with access to mutations on doubles should get the choice of a mutation here as well.
- When a player gets their trait skill they will be able to use it for at the very least one game before they roll for ageing. Unlike the old system where the immediate joy was scuppered by the immediate retirement of your player for niggling etc...
- Helps prevent run away league leaders. Stops super star players living forever etc...
- Some teams will have a lot more Stand Firm (I'm thinking Dwarves) this should have a knock on effect and mean people will take Juggernaut more, same goes for frenzy and fend possibly.

Edit: oh and on a side note - Fouling also gets its +1 to av back ;)

Reason: ''
User avatar
Joemanji
Power Gamer
Posts: 9508
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: ECBBL, London, England

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by Joemanji »

Can we not turn this into another thread about your version of LRB7 please. Thanks.

Reason: ''
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by garion »

It's not, as said this was a rule by Phil Bowen. BBRC wanted to test it for CRP but JJ vetoed it because he thought there was too much dice rolling involved. Its nothing like my ruleset anyway and I think it would have the desired effects you are looking for. More of the passing skills taken, more of the alternate skills taken generally. Don't you think?

But by all means, if you do not think this suggestion fits in with this discussion have Darkson look at it and he can delete that post and the subsequent ones if you like. I just thought it was in keeping with your proposal and what you were trying to achieve?

Reason: ''
Hitonagashi
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:11 pm

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by Hitonagashi »

1) I think you ought to take Sprint and Sure Feet out of the list. Most agility teams I see have oneturners, and sprint/sure feet are core one turner skills. You probably don't need to make it easier to build a one turner. It's only 2 skills then for a decent one turner for elves or lizardmen (sidestep, then sprint/sure feet in one shot).

2) Leader as a power skill but not Sidestep? Elf sidestep spam is at least as good as blodge mb. I'm not sure why Leader is there (apart from for TT tourneys maybe, but I don't see how this would affect them).

3) How does this affect existing player costs? For an example...I realise it's a skill slot, but suddenly, Pact marauders can all be beastmen with pro at first skill with better skill accesses!

4) This might boost the running game. Not that it's a bad thing at all...but suddenly, on a human thrower, I like having NOS/Dumpoff for less than the cost of block!

I think the main beneficiaries of these changes would be Pact. This isn't a bad thing, because Pact currently suck...but I'd be leery of introducing them to a TV matched environment.

Generally though, I like this idea. I had a lot more complaints (such as Big Guys paying 40k to take block...), but on reflection a lot of them are dealable with.

Reason: ''
dodolulu
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:09 am
Location: Europe

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by dodolulu »

i like the principle of your idea and think that would be an improvement over traits and moreso over the actual system because everyone will agree that some skills are more valuable than others.
what i still dont like (as i think dicerolling or luck should only be a deciding part on the pitch) is the rolling for skillups.

Reason: ''
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by garion »

yeah I think Hito is right about Sure Feet and sprint. I think either on their own would be good in the 10k catagory, but because of the combo it might be a good idea to keep surefeet in 20k as it saves re-rolls and makes you more reliable and then keep sprint in 10k as on its own it is very risky taking 3gfis.

I don't think SS is needed in 30k though, because Dodge and block is already there, while it is an amazing skill you would already be paying a lot to get that blodge SS player.

My main concern with the proposal though is how much it helps these teams- Zons, Norse, Dwarves and Dark Elves These are teams that don't really need anymore help really and making block dodge 30k each would give these teams a significant advantage I think?

Reason: ''
User avatar
spubbbba
Legend
Legend
Posts: 2267
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: York

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by spubbbba »

I really like the idea of trying to make skill choices more varied and hope that will be the focus of this thread. We already have plenty of them about Claw/MB/PO so it was a shame that the last one got derailed.

Rolling doubles did use to be a real treat as it opened up a plethora of skill choices, some very effective and others situational but fun. Now there are only a few of skills ever worth taking on doubles (mostly dodge and Guard with some SS, JU, MB, PO and leader thrown in).

It is a shame that some skills are pretty much worthless, since you have to pay the same price for normal choices and inducements are much better than handicaps then you really can’t afford to waste TV. Some of this is a strategy element, picking the right skills to give your players can be an interesting meta-game in a closed league and is a differentiator between good and bad coaches.
If they don’t roll doubles some players really only have a couple of worthwhile skills and quickly run out of good choices so you could keep their TV low by giving them the 10K ones rather than being stuck with 20K ones that are only marginally more useful.

I am not totally sold on the option of giving a player as many skills as they can afford for the TV, so 5 rubbish ones instead of +ST. It shouldn’t be as much of an issue online (bar multiple pop ups if you have shadowing, DT and tents or similar) but could be a real pain keeping track in tabletop if you have players with 15 skills. Maybe keep the cost the same but limit them to 2 max?

Reason: ''
My past and current modelling projects showcased on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
User avatar
DoubleSkulls
Da Admin
Posts: 8219
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 12:55 pm
Location: Back in the UK
Contact:

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by DoubleSkulls »

garion wrote:BBRC wanted to test it for CRP but JJ vetoed it
This is incorrect, I assume you've been misinformed.

Reason: ''
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
User avatar
garion
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Ex-Mega Star, now just a Super Star
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 12:59 pm

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by garion »

DoubleSkulls wrote:
garion wrote:BBRC wanted to test it for CRP but JJ vetoed it
This is incorrect, I assume you've been misinformed.
I'm not sure- your obviously correct though as you know far more about such things than me. I'm just repeating what I read from Tom Anders in this thread :-? -pages 9 through to 10 i think. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=34200&hilit=ageing&start=120

Reason: ''
User avatar
DoubleSkulls
Da Admin
Posts: 8219
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 12:55 pm
Location: Back in the UK
Contact:

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by DoubleSkulls »

I do like the idea of the OP, but I think some tweaks are needed.

Is the idea that a Human Lineman could get Block is take Fend for a first skill "save" 10k and then get Block next?

I'm not sure I really like the idea of being able to get two skills for the price of one. For many of those I don't think the marginal efficiency is that low. A more complex idea would be to have 3 for 2 skills. So you if you take one you get 2 the next normal skill up. This also seems to help a bit with the combo skills (Sprint/Sure Feet, Catch/NoS, NoS/Dump Off)

Reason: ''
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
User avatar
Darkson
Da Spammer
Posts: 24047
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 9:04 pm
Location: The frozen ruins of Felstad
Contact:

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by Darkson »

I think it should still just be one skill per roll, but I like the idea of "tiered" skill costs.

Reason: ''
Currently an ex-Blood Bowl coach, most likely to be found dying to Armoured Skeletons in the frozen ruins of Felstad, or bleeding into the arena sands of Rome or burning rubber for Mars' entertainment.
dode74
Ex-Cyanide/Focus toadie
Posts: 2565
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:55 pm
Location: Near Reading, UK

Re: Improvement table awarding a given value of improvements

Post by dode74 »

The difficult bit will be deciding which skill goes where. It might be best to produce a list for each race.

It may also be the case that some skills are considered so bad that they would almost never be taken anyway by any team - such skills may require a buff.

Reason: ''
Post Reply