JT-Y wrote:
If anyone has useful feedback like that given above, then I'm interested to hear it, it can be posted here or directed through the community team via the BB Facebook page. The latter is the best because I don't read everything here whereas the community team is very good about passing stuff on.
As of yesterday there is literally no other way to reach me with feedback I'm afraid.
I'll just add it here, but anecdotally speaking, I haven't seen anyone complain about the misunderstood ruling in practice. Even on FUMBBL which is a perpetual league without redrafting, there doesn't appear to be a groundswell to move their code back to CRP. They have a post up about it, not sure if you want to look, or just avoid it out of principle.
I can't speak for every private league out there, but in the instance of my 8 team league we haven't ran into any issues with matches being unbalanced due to adding treasury after TVs are assessed. The inducements are poor value for money, so an overdog may pick up a keg or an apothecary, but anything else would be a waste. Conversely, expensive mistakes keeps treasuries low, so an underdog would rarely have more than a hundred thousand or so to add toward their inducements, which as I mentioned are poor value for money.
My biggest TV gap last season was a 220K underdog to an Orc side. I kicked 40K from my treasury and added Zug. It wound up being his only appearance of the season, but at least I got to get my very expensive toy... errr totally grown up strategy game piece off the shelf. I've also seen a couple instances where somebody kicked 10K from treasury to prevent a 40K waste of TV and instead turned it into a keg. It just feels like you have more control and is thus a much more positive experience.
The reason why I've been a fan of the BB2016 is that it kept the stout on pitch mechanics of CRP, but it removed the barriers of entry for new teams/coaches.
The pile on change means less busted rookie teams,
Expensive mistakes and redrafting is keeping TVs closer to that 1500TV sweet spot,
and I swear I thought the inducement phase was revamped so with a little bit of money, underdogs (typically the new teams/coaches) could get a more balanced variety of inducements. I actually thought this was why the wizard was missing... Hell, I even wrote a review on BGG gushing over how forward thinking that was of you guys.
If GW wants to keep selling us stars, cards, and other inducements, it would be nice to get to use them. Personally, I'd prefer if the ambiguity of the current rules stay or if they become the permanent inducement rules.
Also, since I may have your ear, I heartily endorse you making an optional rule related to MNGs. Please allow us the option to have our players "playing hurt", where you may choose to drug up your players, put them on the field, but they either gain double niggle or decay for the game. I just think it's another opportunity to allow coaches to have management input on their teams, which again, I think is a positive.