Ageing - Yea or Nay?

[Khankill]

The more I look at this, the more I like the EXP system. It requires a little extra paperwork at the end of a match; I just believe it will better match the aging effect that we a trying to simulate. I do think the game is helped by an aging system that helps move great players along to make room for new talent. The only true test of this system however will be to implement it and see if the desired result occurs.

Khankill

[franck_le_grand]

Drop it...

If you want to keep it well then I like the EXP system, but I would prefer dropping it...

[Darkson]

I like the EXP version, and will introduce it next time we have a BB campaign.

[Ozle]

I hate ageing personally, i can see why some people like it, but for me Blood Bowl is all about the danger and death and fancy moves, and with things like ageing you much more unlikely to get the funky cool players.

And as someone said in another thread, if your teams struggling a bit and your one good player picks up a crippling -1 Str then your pretty much out for the count.

[plasmoid]

I voted drop it.

But the EXP system looks OK - a lot better than ageing.
(Wear and tear also looks OK, but fat chance that it will be taken seriously).

BTW,
personally I think that a 4 (maybe 5?) skill maximum, rather than 7, would be a very simple way to narrow the gap between starting teams and older teams.

[GalakStarscraper]

Both my leagues have switched to EXP which has my vote.

Galak

[Khankill]

BTW,
personally I think that a 4 (maybe 5?) skill maximum, rather than 7, would be a very simple way to narrow the gap between

The problem I see with this is a team will still be gaining SPP, raising its team rating though the roof and no longer reaping any new rewards.

[Darkson]

BTW,
personally I think that a 4 (maybe 5?) skill maximum, rather than 7, would be a very simple way to narrow the gap between starting teams and older teams.

Do you know many teams with a 7 skill player (not including startinfg ones)?

[franck_le_grand]

Both my leagues have switched to EXP which has my vote.

Can I get some feedback on how it works in your league? Are people happy about it? is it fun? is it good?...etc. etc.

[Dangerous Dave]

I voted tweak...

I think that there is a need to recycle and changing the on pitch effects may change the balance of the game. So... am I happy with the current rules - no not really but with a bit of tweaking (ie bring aging in so it happens later) would be good.

As for EXP - I'm not sure. It needs proper testing so its too early to say.


Dave

[vorner23]

Well in my opinion, i think that it works fine as it is.

The player slowly gets skills and stat increases and as he gets better so too does the chance that he will get older/injured increase.

The current system is good enough and balances well. I would say if it ain't broken don't fix it.

[GalakStarscraper]

Both my leagues have switched to EXP which has my vote.

Can I get some feedback on how it works in your league? Are people happy about it? is it fun? is it good?...etc. etc.

So far it is getting good reviews. A lot of players got skills when we converted from EXP. My other league is just now converting to EXP but we'll have folks at the point of aging ... it will be interesting to see how that goes.

Galak

[Smeborg]

Hi guys.

I dislike ageing, as do others that I play with. Let players die or get injured with their boots on during the game!

I think ageing is the wrong way to go in terms of game design. If you have a perceived problem in Blood Bowl (what problem is ageing trying to fix, by the way?) the worst way to solve it is by adding a layer of complexity to an otherwise clean game. If there's a problem, fix it at source, not with sticking plaster.

I also dislike the proposed experience system. Why have all this complexity between matches? Some time ago, there was a thread about BB games taking too long, such that it could be difficult to fit two games into an evening. Well, you pretty much guarantee that with all this die rolling and book-keeping between games.

I'll try to guess at the perceived problems that ageing is trying to solve. Maybe they include cheesy players and too powerful teams. If that's the case, I can think of better ways to solve the problems, e.g.:

- Change the handicap system (3rd Ed. handicapping worked better as a match balancer than the current system).

- Limit characteristic increases to one (instead of two) per characteristic.

- Limit the number of advances that a player can make (e.g. to 5 instead of 7).

- Limit the number of doubles rolls that a player can make.

- (my favourite) Take Apothecaries out of the game.

Well, that's my two penn'orth.

Cheers

[Grumbledook]

Aging is to cap off teams at about 250-300 team rating, and i think it adds to the whole having to keep the team well managed having to keep building players up to replace others. Not that many need replacing by death or SI.

If you take out apoths undead get a nice advantage (great as i play them!)

Limiting stats to +1 will take out the dirversity that the teams can achieve.

Aging was bought in to replace the handicap system from 3rd edition, cause that was broke anyway imho. The cards were too much of a random match deciding decision. Getting the extra mvps kinda blew as well, spec if one player keeps on getting them.

Any changes to the skill system (with regards to doubles limiting and gaining stats and limiting the number of advances) would ruin the game. Players will become more and more alike and won't allow for more varied teams.

The EXP system is easy despit what people say, its easier to understand than the gate and winnings and those are simple enough. How hard is it for each player to roll a dice up to 16 times after a match? Roll for inj on a 1 after 6exp points, add one to exp points on a 6 after reaching 6 (roll higher than current exp total before getting to 6, ie need 4+ if you have 3exp points)

Its simple and as far as the stats ive seen from galaks testing so far, it works.

[Mestari]

- Change the handicap system (3rd Ed. handicapping worked better as a match balancer than the current system).

- Limit characteristic increases to one (instead of two) per characteristic.

- Limit the number of advances that a player can make (e.g. to 5 instead of 7).

- Limit the number of doubles rolls that a player can make.

- (my favourite) Take Apothecaries out of the game.

Even though we seem to have the same idea about the best way of handling this, changing the handicap system is the only thing I could agree with on this list. I take EXP/aging any day over this list because of the rest of the items.