Salary Caps

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Oct 15, 2002 10:58 am

I'm with Anthony and Lucien ... given my choice:

First I'd pick EXP aging,
Second the LRB aging,
Third Salary caps.

Galak

Post by **voyagers_uk** » Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:06 am

I like the Exp aging above everything else, I hate salary caps. I never agreed to use appearance fees and I doubt I ever would.

Normal aging seems to be working all be it a bit slowly in some cases. This Exp form of aging would even progression out a little more imho.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:32 am

Personally I think that the ideal system would be:

No off-game degrading of player abilities whatsoever. No aging, no artificial salary caps.

Player turnover is achieved by decreased income, attrition during game, introducing several tempting "freeboot" mechanics similar to the wizards that could sometimes be considered even "must-haves" for critical games, developing the TR system to increase TR faster the better the player gets (thus making stars a real burden TR-wise) and by handicap effects.

However, I realise that this is hardly achievable, and no-body, AFAIK, is even attempting to create anything to achieve these goals.
Still, I would prefer this system over every aging- etc. system.

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Tue Oct 15, 2002 12:08 pm

With the new Exp aging system I really think there is no excuses to avoid players getting old.... my dear friends: that's life!.....

If, on the other hand, anyone want to use some kind of salary caps (instead of aging), why not simple use the TR? The work is already done, and this way you count with FF, re-rolls, etc...

This new EXP rules are so versatily that... well, you can do a lot of house rules with it like:

* decrease/increase aging to your taste
* Take the Star PLayers to the roster with the "right" age...
* make diferent races have diferent agings...
* Change the aging results more to your tastes

WOW... I guess this EXP rules will be a kind of Pandora Box of house rules....

Just remember the aging rules is suposed to start giving results after some 22 games in individual players... I guess it should be about 16 games to start feeling it in the teams...
I guess there should be some teams making hundreds of games, so they feel the aging hard, but... well, I guess most teams make a lot less games, because in the next league/tournement there are a lot of new rules/players... and "they" need to tune the rules to get some balance here: between the "regular" players (30 games team?) and "hard" players (perhaps with teams runing since 1st edition, making "translations" to the new rules as they came...

well, perhaps with more than a hundred games with the same team....)

So, if you make small leagues (about 16 games each team max) I think you can forget about aging, TR/Salary Caps limits - since you reset your teams after each season.... if not, you NEED aging... just don't get to attached to any of your players - they are cannon fodder anyway (yes, I play with Gobblins...)

Sorry for a so big post for so little juice... but speaking english is hard to me.... and thinking too......

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:58 am

Well, my personal choices would go in this order:

1. Appearance fees
2. Salary cap
3. Current aging
4. Galak's aging (i know it's not Galak's, but i like to tease him)
5. Nothing at all

DaImp · Post by **DaImp** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:02 am

Could one of you clarify for me (or just give me a link) what the EXP aging rules are?
I take it the LRB aging rules are the stock standard rules we all know, but I seem to have missed these alternate aging rules.

That'll teach me for taking a holiday!

Joaquim · Post by **Joaquim** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:14 am

I saw them in the BB news forum:

http://www.gamesworkshop.com/community/bb_forum.htm

They are from Galak (ok, ok... you are only one of the authors, I know...) so they are well designed and I guess they maybe in another site... Galak?

Anyway... I think there is still needed some playtesting, specially to know the effect in high profile players (like wardancers, catchers..) versus... hum... dwarfs, goblins.... you know...

Joaquim

Trambi · Post by **Trambi** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:41 pm

Neo : With this system, we have a tr limit of 150 + reroll costs + ff costs +other staff costs ! ? No flexible enough for me.

Post by **DoubleSkulls** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:59 pm

DaImp wrote:Could one of you clarify for me (or just give me a link) what the EXP aging rules are?
I take it the LRB aging rules are the stock standard rules we all know, but I seem to have missed these alternate aging rules. That'll teach me for taking a holiday!

Have a look at viewtopic.php?t=2618&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=8

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:15 pm

Joaquim wrote:They are from Galak [...] so they are well designed

Isn't that a contradiction in itself?

neoliminal · Post by **neoliminal** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:18 pm

Trambi wrote:Neo : With this system, we have a tr limit of 150 + reroll costs + ff costs +other staff costs ! ? No flexible enough for me.

Try looking at some teams that fit the actual criteria and you'll see there's lots of room to work with.

Trambi · Post by **Trambi** » Thu Oct 24, 2002 12:46 am

I will ...
Human team TR 250 salary cap 208 but i have four star players (no freeboot them) without them TR 183 salary cap 141
Human team TR 168 (without starplayers) salary cap 135 (without starplayers)
Undead team TR 172 (without starplayers) salary cap 134 (without starplayers)

Ok it's work pretty good.
(without permanent star players but it's normal cos now you can only freeboot them)[/quote]

Ivesy_boy · Post by **Ivesy_boy** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:23 am

If any of you follow Australian Rugby Leage you'll know that the top team just got caught for breach of salary cap. They'd been paying players extra money under the table

. Maybe teams like chaos could try to breach salary cap, but face penalties if caught.

Ithilkir · Post by **Ithilkir** » Tue Nov 05, 2002 12:06 am

Or if people find the salary cap too low if they have a high number of elven/high maintenance teams, then why don't they simply increase the salary cap? It's an easy figure to fudge

Personally I detest the EXP aging system, too much arsing around changing rosters and at least in the initial few games of a league, far too much referring.. Heck, I still don't get it fully after looking at it numerous times.

LRB Aging, seems fine to me mind you

Out of the three... Hmm.. I'd go in order of..

1. Salary Cap (adjustable)
2. LRB Aging
3. EXP Aging

DaImp · Post by **DaImp** » Mon Nov 11, 2002 11:35 am

I actually think the salary cap system is the solution I have been looking for as a post season check on the size of teams. In the league I run there are only a handfull of regular players, but there are alot of coaches who join in the league for a few games before getting distracted. As a result there is always a widening gap between the quality of the teams in the league. One solution would be to force all coaches to start with brand new teams every season, but I would prefer to carry over the existing teams - which would then require me to limit the size of the teams at the start of the season. The salary cap system seem perfect for this job.
I admit I am not a fan of the ageing rules - adds another dice roll to work out at the end of the game and for the length of leagues we play it rarely has much of an efect. I have not tried out the Exp system, but my gut feel says I won't like it. Maybe I don't understand it too well, but it seems too complicated.

Talk Fantasy Football

Salary Caps

EXP.... or only TR...

EXP rules

Re: EXP rules

Bulldogs