We replaced ageing with peaking

Dark Lord (retired) · Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:13 am

Honestly, I don't think any of this is needed anymore and I'm thrilled to see that BBRC is ready to try the game without any Ageing syetm.

All of the other restriction are more than adequete to stop super teams from developing.

Mirascael · Post by **Mirascael** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:17 am

Dark Lord wrote:How does peaking not cause player turnover? In fact, unlike ageing, this causes player turnover instead of TEAM turnover.

With the increase of niggling injuries and the stretching of the SPP table most players are likely to peak at 3 or 4 skills and then the longer they play the more likely they are to get an injury...A career ending injury.

What this system does (as I said vehemently before) is allow coaches to have their players' careers ended on the pitch. And, thank you very much, but player turnover was the goal of ageing ONLY to keep uber teams from developing.

I'll second this entirely.

This stops uberteams from developing.

And might stop real players from abandoning Blood Bowl.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:18 am

Dark Lord wrote:Honestly, I don't think any of this is needed anymore and I'm thrilled to see that BBRC is ready to try the game without any Ageing syetm.

where'd you hear that? great news if so!

Dark Lord (retired) · Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:28 am

I can't remember if it was posted here or told to me privately so I'll keep its source hush-hush for the time being.

Khankill · Post by **Khankill** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:51 am

I would be fine with no ageing system as well.

If they do decide to keep it however, I think this is the best idea I've seen to date. It can keep uber-teams from happening and isn't a punishment for success. just my $.02

narkotic · Post by **narkotic** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:32 am

I like the idea of peaking instead of ageing and if the peaked players would still earn SPPs it might stimulate player turnover as well, as they will become a TR burden on the (very) long run.

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 10:20 am

A few months ago I already made an suggestion for an peaking system instead of the ageing rules. Didn't got much positive response then.

I think peaking alone won't be enough to bring back balance. I included an retirement roll which is combined to the Starplayer- and Peaking- roll, to check wether the player thinks about retirement.

You could pay him an bonus to prevent him leaving the team, if you do not have the cash on hand ... he leaves the team. Worked well in our league so far.

Just to clarify ... under our houserule you have to make 3 rolls every time your player advances (one starplayer roll, one for peaking and one check for retirement). A part of the leaving players were integrated as freebootable Starplayers.

roysorlie · Post by **roysorlie** » Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:15 am

Yer, I also suggested Peaked as a roll result, and didn't get much positive response.

I've stopped caring, as I consider aging being a detriment to the game, I just won't use it. And I will not use any other system, until one comes along I like.

It is definitely the rule I will gladly houserule out.

I miss much of the mayhem, as well. (I.E cards) And I also think it's a detriment to the game, that fresh teams no longer benefit any from playing teams with much higher TR.

There are so very many groups of 4-5 people that stat playing the game, and if one guys playes alot more then the others, (because he owns the game) Or for whatever else reason, the others can't catch up, and have no reason to play up. And they will lose for no gain, and people will dislike it.

noodle · Post by **noodle** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:14 am

Well...

We never used ageing from the start. We thought it was a stupid rule and in no way representative of real life (!)

Injuries cause players to get worse, not ageing! We have 3 seasons a year, now by the ageing rules players could get, like, old in about a year! So, we ditched it.

Peaking seemed very sensible, from a background point of view. A player has loads of potential, but MAY not fulfil it - hence the peaking rules...

Problems I see with ageing:

1) Its not representative of "real life"

2) Its unfair and does nothing to PROMOTE the playing of many games....

3) It adversley affects more experienced teams (why? They are better, they should win more often. Stop trying to make EVERYTHING fair. Life's not like that!)

4) Its over the top.

5) It can demoralise players if they are unlucky in THEIR rolls while others aren't.

Peaking just makes the top players rarer (like they should be) and peaked players (like linemen with block tackle) stalwarts of the game..

p.s. no SPPs after the peak do NOT count to team rating and YES a peaked player can get an MVP!

My opinion, my league, my rules

squiggoth · Post by **squiggoth** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:09 am

In our league nobody has any problems with ageing, it seem sonly logical that a player is gonna get sore ankles and a bad spine after he's been on a pitch with 21 likeminded homicidal maniacs a few times. Actually, in our league it happens that the coach with the most aged players has been at the top ever since we started, so I don't really see the problem. And if you don't like ageing, call it something like "wear and tear" for all I care or have your players play a safe game like billiards, checkers or petanque instead of BloodBowl

noodle · Post by **noodle** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:12 am

Maybe so, but in our league no-one likes ageing, for reasons already given. We want teams to get better, not worse.... Yes there are problems with the system - i.e. without ageing teams don't really plateau until T/R 400 (!) but we have coped with this for 7 years without ageing!

So fine, ageing is in the rules - we ignore it. Its not going to be in a tournament anytime soon, so its not like there's a problem!

Use it if you wish

Mirascael · Post by **Mirascael** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:31 am

squiggoth wrote:In our league nobody has any problems with ageing, it seem sonly logical that a player is gonna get sore ankles and a bad spine after he's been on a pitch with 21 likeminded homicidal maniacs a few times. Actually, in our league it happens that the coach with the most aged players has been at the top ever since we started, so I don't really see the problem. And if you don't like ageing, call it something like "wear and tear" for all I care or have your players play a safe game like billiards, checkers or petanque instead of BloodBowl

It does have nothing to do at all with "wear and tear" as well.
Just call it what it is: punishment for getting SPPs and successful performance.

noodle · Post by **noodle** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:34 am

IMO - players get recycled quickly enough thanks to deaths, injuries and niggles... We don't need ageing to "even things up"

In our league at least

squiggoth · Post by **squiggoth** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:03 pm

No, the way I see it, it's a fine way of dealing with those pesky dodge, block, M8+ gitz that just won't die otherwise and score 5 TD's per match

noodle · Post by **noodle** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 12:07 pm

Thats another reason I don't like it - your players age/wear out quicker if they are succesful. If they are rubbish (fumble, fail a catch etc) they don't get as many SPPs and stay young?

To me ageing is a pointless game mechanic brought in to placate people who couldn't deal with "uber" players... which bears no relation to anything in the real world (I know I shouldn't say "real world"

)

So we got rid of it, replaced it with peaking and our coaches were happy