BB2016 - No Petty Cash Rule - Wins from treasury?

[plasmoid]

Hi Nivlaps and all,
I'm still massively surprised that the focus of CRP on using TV to get reasonably fair fights has gone out the window, and this doesn't bother everyone.

Sure, cash dumping may only really matter in the last game of the season - but that's exactly the one game where you want a fair fight!

I belong firmly in what Nivlaps calls scenario 3: League play, where finding the right winner (along with the glory and the bragging rights) is a Big part of the fun. Winning with a stack of Cash is going to be hard to swallow for coaches who are serious about their fun

Nivlaps - I guess where we disagree is on what can ve done with 200k of unmatched inducements.
- I worry what the new wizard will look like
- I think the cards are a viable source of power.
- If nothing else, then keeping 2 KOs on the pitch for a long drive can be massive.
IMO

Back several posts ago, someone said: Just how much difference in Treasury can be accrued in an 8-10 game season.
IMO an awful lot.
12 man Orc team or 12 man AV7 team at the start of the season?
My money is on the orcs having spare Cash.
And while the example may well be picked apart, there will always be someone who goes through the season relatively unscathed, stockpiling for the

I hate it.
Cheers
Martin

[Darkson]

I'm still massively surprised that the focus of CRP on using TV to get reasonably fair fights has gone out the window, and this doesn't bother everyone.

Yep - that right there is the best reason not to use these rules.

[GalakStarscraper]

I'm still massively surprised that the focus of CRP on using TV to get reasonably fair fights has gone out the window, and this doesn't bother everyone.

Yep - that right there is the best reason not to use these rules.

It does bother me ... and I've sent messages to 4 different people to state that. Asking that the Special Play cards get fixed as well as getting Treasury included into TV.

[MacHurto]

Can't it just be fixed by not allowing teams to spend cash in inducements during play-offs? In any case, if cards bear any ressemblance to 3ed, they have a bigger chance to be game changers than a bribe and a RR. And if I understood it correctly everyone gets cards like back in 3ed?

[Darkson]

Can't it just be fixed by not allowing teams to spend cash in inducements during play-offs?

That doesn't fix the problem of unbalanced games during the season.

In any case, if cards bear any ressemblance to 3ed,

They don't, they're the CRP cards.

The problem with them is they've chosen 2 decks, one deck worth 50k, one worth 200k - anyone with any sense is going to pick one of the 200k cards.

[MacHurto]

I was just addressing Plasmoid concerns for using all the money on the final. I am not sure this represents too much problem during season games as you need to keep some cash. Maybe one extra bribe? I guess data would eventually show whether this really unbalances matches.

Regarding the cards, yes, that makes absolutely no sense

[Lyracian]

Hi Nivlaps and all,
I'm still massively surprised that the focus of CRP on using TV to get reasonably fair fights has gone out the window, and this doesn't bother everyone.

It does not both me. I like the fact that teams can now actually use cash they have accumulated. Like Star Players I would ban Wizards from play-off matches as they are "outside help". Beyond that, as someone who likes special play cards, I like the new rules set.

[CyberedElf]

I agree with the complaints against cards and treasury bought inducements not affecting TV, but as a package I'm willing to try it. I think Plasmoid (unintentionally) brought up the exact reason I don't thoroughly object to the treasury issue. Ignoring that one feature and D3 MVP, I think it's safe to say bash is more negatively affected by the new rules than dash is. Plasmoid asked if the AV7 or the AV9 would end the season with more money. That the high armor team is more likely to spend more money in the finals could be a feature not a bug. (I am of the opinion that bash was inferior to dash in CRP.)

Unfortunately, balancing by the average is not real balance. Cards and Expensive Mistakes are so random, even if I could argue for *overall* balance, I wish they had not chosen this path. CRP was the most balanced and "best player usually wins" Blood Bowl has ever been. That is only the recent history though, not the original spirit. I won't cry about Blood Bowl becoming more random. (I'll just whimper quietly.)

[nivlaps]

@Martin/plasmoids:

I think we agree on large stretches most notably I share your worries about:

Nivlaps - I guess where we disagree is on what can ve done with 200k of unmatched inducements.
- I worry what the new wizard will look like
- I think the cards are a viable source of power.

...and I'd propose a) not having wizards, or have them be much more expensive and b) edit those cards as they're completely out of balance.

But on a more fundamental level: I like the way the BB lore was reflected in the way the game played before the CRPs. Obviously, the current ruleset is perfect for tournaments but I like it when more story and legend can be built into the way a league plays.

Perhaps a solution here could be to base money less off of performance. Maybe on activity, persistence and completing one's games, rather than performance, so the game doesn't perpetuate competitive imbalances.

I've designed and published a few manager games in my time, and I hate the way giving the guy who wins more and more money plays out over seasons and seasons of play. The solution, to me, seems to be to look more to how things are done in the NFL fx: Put hard caps in place, level budgets out, to keep things more interesting.

If all teams came in at 1,150,000-1,300,000 fx based purely on activity, new players would have a bit more cash and if players who were but from rosters initially made it onto a free agents list, from which new players could hire too - then perhaps this could create a more close-tiered and interesting high-TV competition environment? I'm not sure this is the way to go, but in my (extensive) experience harsh soft or hard caps is the way to go. (Plus, it solves the cash dump problem you point out so well.)