Yet another suggestion to replace aging

[Grumbledook]

Injuries aren't even, I played norse at the dutch open with undead and managed one KO and no cas. There is no regularity to injuries caused other than the more players that get knocked down the more chance you receive one. Saying orc vs chaos games are the ones where the ko box gets full is silly. Sure it can and does happen, though on the otherside, no cas or kos can be caused by either side. Also with evles dodging lots failing those can make you fall over and suffer a ko or cas. Along with leap, gfi or whatever. Basing it on injuries isn't a reliable system cause of this.

[Grumbledook]

Ok here was my post i made last week. It was just knocked up quickly so will need some work and discussion. All i ask if for bad points to be pointed out and explained why they are bad. Any problems to have a suggestion to how to fix it.

Ok then after some consideration the following problems are apparent:

Players can get through aging with no effect
Aging directly related to skills targets the right players but makes players not want to get a skill cause of the aging risk.
Adding more columns onto rosters isn't preferable.
Recording games isn't preferable.
Aging should encourage retirement not force it.

So ideally the best system is one thats easy to do and doesn't upset too many already apparent rules but at the same time curbs the better players.

I like the EXP system personally but its been cited that players don't want to record games. The simple rolling a 1 for a player then rolling on the aging table seems simple enough to me. So how about just make players who have 3 (or whatever) skills do this. Or an amount of of SPP. If they roll a 1 they roll on the aging table after every match.

Listening to pariah I also like the niggle ideas. It doesn't affect the players on the pitch, so wouldn't force the coach to retire them cause they are still useful if they play. Though if they build up more niggles obviously they will play less often.

I also liked the idea of niggles adding +1 to injurys. Its not uncomman for a player not fully fit to pick up other injuries, though I think this will need playtesting.

Using this system means that a player will eventually get loaded up with aging but it only targets the problematical players. Now this isn't exactly realistic but then like its been said, rules should be for the good of the game not to make it life like.

The final thing is to come up with a tweaked aging table, becuase if you are rolling for aging after every match for a player, you will come up with a lot more 1s than if you just tie it into gaining skills. So a no effect and MNG would be required imho.

This system would then allow players to get to 7 skills without aging, possable but not all that common. It avoids the fact of linking it with skill based aging, which causes the following problems. A player can't get really good and avoid aging altogether. It also means you don't force a player to age when they get a skill, which sucks alot. If you use skill based aging you will come across one of those two problems.

I think that this could be the best of both worlds, no extra work required for the upkeep of your team roster. Rolling a 1 on a d6 is simple thing to remember and controls only the better players. If I have missed something obvious or there is any other comments, I welcome them but I can't see a problem with this compared to all the other suggestions that have been put forward, as i think it takes the best from most of the suggestions.

So whats everyone think?

[Ghost of Pariah]

Zombie, I didn't attack anyone and you aren't a mod so why don't you go have a tall glass of shut the hell up. I didn't insult him. It was a real question. How do I know what his history is? Nobody asked you to mod this forum anyway.


I think you are looking at this wrong, Grumbledook. The chaos team is a power team and hits hard but they have mostly AV 8 and will suffer just as much as high elves & humans...teams with mostly MA 6. The dwarfs will suffer about as bad as orcs and undead. Teams that have mostly MA 5 or less. The Wood elves will suffer as much as lizardmen, dark elves, skaven...teams that have mostly MA 7. See the pattern? It's scoring abilty.
Sure a wood elf team with show up to a game with 9 or 10 players more often than a dwarf team but that happens now. And ass for the chain reaction you mention...well that happens now! I just don't see the big problem that this will cause. It only accellerates the current system.

Ok, I see you say that you like the EXP system. Now that system is biased against low AG teams that develop slowly!

But we agree on the +1 niggle system so I am happy.

[Zombie]

And basing it on skills or on games played isn't a reliable system either. So what is?

I say this is the best thing brought up so far. It will definitely work with some tweaking, as it's easily modifiable. I say let's start the testing now!

Edit: my English is pretty bad sometimes!

[Deathwing]

And who tends to pick up niggles? Wardancers and GRs?
Or Skaven linerats, human lineman, stunties etc. I reckon the cannon fodder on the line in any team are the guys more liable to be carrying injuries over the positional players.
(Unless they're Longbeards. )

I'm not a huge fan, but at least skill based aging is targeting the problem players rather than the linemugs. I don't want to see a system where the positional players get away relatively unscathed while there's a constant turnover of the rank and file, particularly on the lower AV teams. That's the risk of any injury-tied system. Yes, it'd keep TR down, but I don't believe it's the way to go.

Remember also that power players (be they wardancers or others) tend to attract fouling. The CAS and KOs they'll suffer will mean a lot of resting games for them.

Fair point, but the low SPPs linemugs are the guys that suffer the 2D Blocks as a matter of routine, even more so in a high scoring team. They'll bear the brunt of this, disproportionally so IMO. They are not the problem players.

[Grumbledook]

Ah thats where the problem is. To use your own words it accelerates the current system. As it stands now its possable to play through, I have done it. I just feel that it will drive the team that sufferes badly a few games to go on a downward unrecoverable spiral and force team retirement. Like I said and you just pointed out, it can happen to any race regardless of av and skills.

[Ghost of Pariah]

Okay, after your repost and PMing DW I see where you and DW are coming from now. Maybe I am wrong.

ACK!

[Zombie]

Remember also that power players (be they wardancers or others) tend to attract fouling. The CAS and KOs they'll suffer will mean a lot of resting games for them.

Fair point, but the low SPPs linemugs are the guys that suffer the 2D Blocks as a matter of routine, even more so in a high scoring team. They'll bear the brunt of this, disproportionally so IMO. They are not the problem players.

In my experience, linemen aren't the ones getting the most CAS and KOs against. Sure, they get hit a lot, but they don't get fouled (you wouldn't waste your time on them), and that's what really hurts. Fouling with 2 assists and dirty player nets you +3 on armour and +2 on injury, or +5/+0. That's where you usually get hurt.

[Grumbledook]

Pariah, would you mind reading my suggestion near the top of this thread, i'd appreaciate your feedback on it, as an aging system we can near enough almost all agree on would be nice ;]

[Deathwing]

In my experience, linemen aren't the ones getting the most CAS and KOs against. Sure, they get hit a lot, but they don't get fouled (you wouldn't waste your time on them), and that's what really hurts. Fouling with 2 assists and dirty player nets you +3 on armour and +2 on injury, or +5/+0. That's where you usually get hurt.

But you've stated elsewhere that your league is light on Tackle. In our League most teams have at least 2 or 3 Tackle players. That's enough to make a significant difference. In your League a Blodge player on the line stands a good chance of keeping his feet. In our league any Dodge player on the line is almost certain to have somebody with Tackle throw 2D against them.

As for Fouls, IGMEOY is a factor. Sure, if both players have DPs and are gonna trade fouls every turn then that's where your injuries will come from. However, if people tend to sit on the eye and have more Tackle players as we do, then they'll get more cas. from Blocks. My point is that what causes the majority of cas. is entirely dependent on League composition and playing style.

If the likes of Wardancers and Gutter Runners are really getting hurt more often, I'd suggest that they wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
You don't go tying up your opponent's Block/Tackle/Mighty Blow Orc Blitzer with your WD, do you? You put some mug in his way so he can't get near your Star WD.

[Mestari]

Players can get through aging with no effect

This is not a bug, it's a feature. And remember that the chance of getting through without aging is less than 4 per cent! How much slimmer you guys want the chance of going through unscathed to be?

I really can't see how the current system is supposed to be "broken". I don't like aging either, but the current system works.
My currently preferred solutions:

1.Increasing BH lethality (my suggestion)
2.Grumbledooks suggestion of rolling d6 for every player with more than three SP rolls and rolling on some sort of an aging table whenever a 1 is rolled.
3.Current system
4.EXP system

Why I still like the BH lethality system?
Even though, as Deathwing noted, this kind of system might attack the rank and file players more than the stars, I feel that under the current income and handicap system an increased lethality of injuries would be sufficient to force people into retiring their star players simply to lower their team rating. If they hold on to their stars, they won't be able to replace their worn out linemen and will suffer because of that.

Home-grown stars are great things to have. They contribute to the league spirit by creating legends. It's not so nice when the famous star of some team is retired because he lost ST due to aging. Forcing them to retire due to team management reasons is a lot better.
If you feel that the TR impact of the stars in insufficient to cause this effect, perhaps we should raise the SPP limits for gaining skills (from third skill onwards).

[Ghost of Pariah]

Yeah, I could go for that but with one caveat. NO -1 to any stat...except maybe AV and then only as the worst possible result on a D66 table or something. If you are rolling every game then you would need to have a sort of soft ageing table but I think that's what's needed. IMO the things that make people hate the ageing system isn't the mechanics...it's that they don like rolling dice with no hope of anything but a crappy result. They may not consciously know it but I believe that's it. Like I said somewhere else, the current ageing system and the EXP system are like playing craps but only rolling to see how much money you lose. I think the current system works effectively but it brings the whole game down cuz it's just not fun. Galak can tweak the exp system as much as he wants but in the end, whether it happens at 7 EXP or 6, it still sucks to get a -1AG on your thrower who has Strong Arm. It may not happen until his 3rd skill but you know it's going to happen and that causes resentment for the system. That's why I pointed out the Galak has said that every system "works perfectly" and then wants to change it shortly thereafter. I think subconciously he knows they are working but he doesn't like his halflings getting blodge and a -1 to ST anymore than anyone else.

The ageing rules have to be fun. Some whackey or something good has to be able to happen. My vote is for the current rules to stay the same but not to take effect until the player's 3rd skill and the table needs to be lightened up. I'm in favor of a peaked result where the player still gains SPP's and giving negative traits to players. Bonehead is a good one. Mayeb there should be more. Like "Easily Confused"...you know you could make the whole ageing table be negative traits.

[Grumbledook]

The only other problem i see with the current system is that if you get someone like a 1 turn gutter runner get through and not age, he is rather untouchable, unless they fail a dodge/leap/gfi/catch or the other team gets a blitz result.

I don't like the idea of uber players being able to stay uber with the minimal chance of ever hurting them.

[Milo]

A skill based ageing system is still going to target the low AV players sooner. Why aren't you guys against that?

One small correction: A skill based aging system is going to target the players with skills sooner. Not all low AV players gain skills -- a norse or skaven lineman, for instance, isn't going to get SPPs any faster than a Human or Orc lineman. Only the really talented players (Wardancers, Welf Catchers, Gutter Runners, etc.) are going to be hit harder by a skill based aging system.

Which is, IMO, fine -- the fact that they gain skills makes them less prone to attrition by injury, as you yourself implied.

Milo

[Ghost of Pariah]

I don't consider Norse and Amazon "low AV" teams. Sure they are AV 7 but block and dodge effectively make them AV 8. A developed Amazon team is hard to injure without lots of tackle.