Ageing rule fixed: "Wear and Tear"

[DoubleSkulls]

The fact that this is a luck based game certainly does not mean that we should pile more randomness into it. Quite the opposite.

But having more die rolls decreases the randomness. You are more likely to get a "normal" result when you roll 15 dice than when you roll 2.

So with EXP its quite random per game, but over a player's life time its a lot less random.

[GalakStarscraper]

Agreed EXP over a player's life isn't that random, its one of the reasons I prefer it over the old Aging.

Also just for record Vitalis said:

Consider the subtle difference between your understanding of this and the finding of last years october review.
You focus on team rating.
Ageing was brought in with focus on downsizing the strong players.

Actually incorrect. My league helped play test the rules that became the Rules Review. As a result we were given a lot of documents as to the "goals" of Jervis and the BBRC. Aging was NOT introduced to downsize strong players. It was introduced to focus on team rating. In fact we received notes that they wished they could use a method for "aging" that targets the entire team (like EXP does) but that they were unable to think of such a method but that if the members of my league thought of one while testing to let them know as that would be preferred over the skill based aging.

Since the current aging system targets strong players, the assumption by many people has been that this is what Jervis and the BBRC wanted ... the truth is that it was not. The current Aging system was targeted to overall team rating capping and unfortunately the best system that was devised at that time was linking to skill rolls.

I just wanted to add this as many people have used this but this is what Jervis and the BBRC wanted argument and it just has ZERO basis in fact.

I don't like the Wear and Tear method because I want teams to be able to develop stars ... auto aging doesn't hold any appeal to me at all.

The EXP system will nail a player because unlike the current Aging where you just need 4 to 5 good rolls to be an unaged star, the EXP system requires you to roll after each game to avoid it ... stats say its going to get you in the end.

Sorry gang, I disagree that EXP is too luck based ... the current system is too luck based ... not EXP. As for automatic aging ... no thanks at all.

Galak

[Vitalis]

I stand corrected...

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
Ian Williams said:

>But having more die rolls decreases the randomness. You are more
>likely to get a "normal" result when you roll 15 dice than when you roll
>2.

This is only partly true. More rolls will bring more players close to the average. However, it will also mean a greater difference between the 2 extremes - meaning that the few lucky/unlucky coaches can get _very_ lucky/unlucky.

Even if the ageing process does stabilize (for most coaches) over time, the actual "injury roll" (i.e. 2-6 on 2d6 = you get a permanent) well let some coaches off very easy, while others will be hammered repeatedly.

In my league, we have a homemade equalizer like ageing. Works on a die roll too. Over all, it is very popular. However, we have 36 coaches, and each year 2-3 really get burned by the rule. It works fine for everyone else, but it's not so funny for them.
Being taken out of the running, while not even being on the pitch, is a pretty lousy experience.

The rule is up for a change next season.
I just see EXP doing much of the same......

Martin

[Grumbledook]

Sometimes that happens, a team can get stung one season with injurys, but things average out over time and he might get very lucky the next season. Things happen in cycles, someon is always going to get a rough patch while others are on a high. I think whatever system you pick will bring this and its part of nature.

[Munkey]

Grumbledook said:

Things happen in cycles, someon is always going to get a rough patch while others are on a high.

A bit like in real sports then, especially when you look at the NFL whch balances the teams by means of a salary cap.

[Zombie]

Galak, your EXP system might be less random than the current aging, but you have to admit that it's still luck-based.

Appearance fees and salary caps aren't, and that's what makes them better.

[Grumbledook]

Thing with salary caps is that it 100% means you can't get past a certain point and you will get to a ceiling and I personally don't like that. It also means that you are less likly to have to turn a player over to get a new one in, especially if they have a high av. I think leagues are more fun to have to constantly develope new star players rather than having to sack some cack linemen, or maybe have less than 16 players to stay under the cap.

For those reasons i prefer the EXP system, you can with a bit of luck reach the slighty higher team ratings, luck will of course catch up with you and like i said before things happen in cycles.

[GalakStarscraper]

Galak, your EXP system might be less random than the current aging, but you have to admit that it's still luck-based.

Appearance fees and salary caps aren't, and that's what makes them better.

We can agree to disagree on that who better comment.

Galak

[Marcus]

Appearance fees are luck based. You only gain money by rolling dice.

[Munkey]

Didn't mean to imply that i'm in favor of salary caps, just that there are real sports that use rules to ensure one or two teams don't get too powerful.

Thing is in the real world aging just happens

[Kraff]

Why not go to a 'Games Played' standard for 'Wear n Tear' on players?

This will cause players who don't rack up SPP to decline as well as keeping high scorers from declining as fast. In addition, you could add the strategy of half games; do you rest a star the second half to reduce 'wear n tear'?
Set it to every 'X' games you roll to age. Every roll after the first has a cumulative -1 penalty and any result of 2 or less indicates ageing. I don't know what 'X' should be but that can be set at whatever you want your attrition to be. It really isn't that much record keeping either. Of course, this will probably start impacting a good bit of your team at the same time, but you should already have back ups hired or even have time for 'resting' players if you go by the 'Halves' method.
Another thought on what was previously called 'Ageing', for the higher priced teams like elves and dwarves, they are generally fictionalized as longer lived. If you feel like these systems unfairly hurt these teams, increase the games for these specific teams before they need to roll.
well, those are the ideas I had. We are going to try using games played as the ruler for 'wear n tear' in my new league about to kick off. Maybe it will work well but I haven't actually tried it yet...