Talk Fantasy Football

If you've come up with an alternative system in the past and posted it at TBB, please repost it here with the complete up to date description. If the description becomes out of date later on because it's been changed after discussion and/or testing, you can edit your post here to keep this thread up to date. If you want, you can also include what you think are the advantages and inconvenients of your system. The ideal format for your post would be :
1. name of the system
2. link to thread discussing it
3. description
4. advantages
5. inconvenients

If you've never proposed a system before, please don't post in this thread, as i'd like to keep it clean and no more than a list of different alternatives. There are other threads for discussing them.

When i get them all here, i'll start a poll to find out which one people prefer.

Here's one to start you off.

1. NAME

Wear and tear (WAT)

2. LINK

viewtopic.php?t=4808&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

3. DESCRIPTION

After every game, roll 2D6 for each of the top 3 players on your team (based on SPPs). If there's a tie for 3rd place, choose the one you want. If you roll below the number of SPPs that the player has divided by 10 (rounded down), roll on the aging table below. Rolling one or more 6 with your 2D6 automatically lets you escape the aging table for this game.
For every player who fails the 2D6 roll, roll another 2D6 and consult the table below:
2-3 : -1AV (his body just can't take the punishment anymore)
4-5 : -1MA (he's not as fast as in the good old days)
6-8 : niggling injury (my back/knees/etc. hurt)
9-11 : nothing happens
12 : remove one permanent injury of your choice (miraculous healing); if you don't have one, nothing happens

4. ADVANTAGES

No bookkeeping.
Doesn't start until one of your players gets to 30 SPPs, and even then starts off very slowly.
Not tied to skills, which means that gaining a skill is always a positive thing.

5. INCONVENIENTS

The penalty for high-TR teams might be too harsh for the taste of certain coaches.
Even though you only roll for the 3 highest players, since you roll after every game, that might still be too time consuming for certain people.

Here's one I like. It's not my idea but I have talked about this with various people inthe last little while.

NAME:

Salary Cap

LINK:

No link.

DESCRIPTION:

Instead of aging (which seems artificial to me), impose a Salary Cap on a team. Basically you would take the cost of the player and either a cost per SPP or skill and add them together, this is their salary. Exciting! The Salary Cap would be a limit on how much your team costs in total. I'm not sure how much that would be, you'd have to work it out so teams cap out at an acceptable TR level. Tis way you can manage your roster by deciding who stays and goes. Do I hang on to the Super Star? He counts towards alot to the Cap and means the rest of the team maybe be less skilled in general. Or do I keep more average skilled players all around? This system seems more like managing a real sports team to me.

ADVANTAGES:
Doesn't give your new +1ST Blitzer a NI on his first skill roll...
Is more like real sports team management!
Let's you tailor your roster to your taste by deciding who stays and goes on your team.
The Cap is easily House Ruled to be higher or lower depending on League preference.

DISADVANTAGES:
A bit more book-keeping.
Must decide on a baseline Cap to work from.
Need to think more about how exatly a team's worth is calculated.

I think I'm with Anthonyt on this.

That sounds good plus there is already JJ's cost formula to work with. While JJ's formula doesn't always calculate the purchase cost it could be used as a nice way to calculate this number.

Another advantage is that the Cap can be raised and lowered depending on individual tastes!

Good job!

Zombie has started a thread about caps here: viewtopic.php?t=5397&highlight=

Here's a thought; just keep the current ageing result table, but modify the ageing roll table. Instead of SPP's determining the odds of ageing use the number of games played.
Such as:
Games Played / Ageing:
8 / 3+
10 / 4+
12 / 5+
14 / 6+
16 / 7+
18 / 8+
20 / 9+

It would be a lot simplier- don't know about the number of games:ageing ratio, but you get the idea. It would make more sense, seeing as how you should age with the number of games played as opposed to how well the player does. If he has an awesome game and gets a MVP and then possibly hit with a -1 St or AG. That's bogus.

I really like Zombies suggestion, but I think it could be made faster and easier. I'd also prefer more -MA and -AV results.

1. NAME

Wear and tear 2 (WAT2)

2. LINK

None. Zombies original:
viewtopic.php?t=4808&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

3. DESCRIPTION

After every game, roll 1D6. The player with that ranking in the team, based on SPPs, will have to roll for aging. If there is a tie, choose between them.

Roll 2D6. If you roll below the number of SPPs that the player has divided by 10 (rounded down), apply the effect below.

2 : Niggling injury
3 : -1 MA
4 : -1 AV
5 : Niggling injury
6 : -1 MA
7 : -1 AV
8 : Niggling injury
9 : -1 MA
10 : Nothing happens
11 : Nothing happens
12 : Miraculous healing: remove one permanent injury of your choice; if you don't have one, nothing happens


4. ADVANTAGES

Only two rolls per game.
And Zombies original:
No bookkeeping.
Doesn't start until one of your players gets to 30 SPPs, and even then starts off very slowly.
Not tied to skills, which means that gaining a skill is always a positive thing.

5. INCONVENIENTS

The balance hasn't been tried out at all.
No miraculous healing for players with <130 SPPs.

1)Name: Intensive Training

2)Link: http://www.talkbloodbowl.com/phpBB2/vie ... php?t=5408

3)Description:

When a team reaches a rating of 200+, the top players need extra training to keep them at the highest level. Unfortunatly this extra training can lead to some extra injuries, like strained muscles, sprained ankles, or sometimes worse.

So when a team is is TR 200+ at the start of the match, at the end roll a D6 for the top 3 players ranked by spp (the team owner can choose on ties). On the roll of a 1, they suffer an injury in training, so roll on the SI table for them.

4)Advantages:

Its simple, no maths involved at all (well apart from looking at the top 3 spp)
Targets only the best players and leaves rookie players alone.
Only affects developed teams, so no suffering from aging in the first match.
Not tied to gaining a skill, so leaves gaining skills a good thing.
Few dice rolled compared to other suggestions
No extra bookkeeping, recording matches played or any other extra statistics each match
Eventually every player will get too bad to keep on (ie one turners)
Its flexable, changing the tr limit or the number of players you roll for means it can be made more severe or less harsh depending on a leagues taste.
Doesn't introduce any extra tables and does away with the aging table as well.
Teams that suffer a bad run of luck through player deaths or what ever don't have to worry about "aging" until they have recovered and built their team back up to over tr 200.
Training injuries can and do happen in real life, so its not an "artifical mechanic"

5)Disadvantages:
(waiting for comments and will add them in as and when)

1. name of the system

AV lowering Aging (ALA)

2. link to thread discussing it

None.

3. description

The more games played, the lower the Max AV can be.

Games Maximum AV
1-8: 10
9-10: 9
11-12: 8
13-14: 7
15+: 6

4. advantages

Very simple.
Keeps casualties on the field.
Minimum rolling required.

5. inconvenients

Finding balance of games requires playtesting.
Hard to find balance for high AV and low AV teams.

You should change the name so we don't confuse it with current aging. Maybe you could call it "not as tough" (NAT for short).

1. name of the system
Enhanced Badly Hurts (EBH)

2. link to thread discussing it
http://www.talkfantasyfootball.org/vie ... sc&start=0

3. description

Whenever a player is badly hurt, he must make a roll on the Serious Injury Table. Miss next games are ignored, but stat reductions and niggles stay.


4. advantages
-Simple
-In-game effect
-Increases the amount of niggles and stat reductions by a factor of 2.5!
-The attrition preventing effect of the one-shot apothecary is reduced, especially for the high-AV teams which can currently easily escape games unscathed


5. inconvenients
-Will this effect the problem players sufficiently?

Something I just read made me think of this as an alternative aging system, it's pretty similar to the current system but I thought I'd throw it in to the debate.

NAME

Peaked Aging

LINK

viewtopic.php?p=72981#72981

DESCRIPTION

Whenever the player gains a skill make an aging roll as in the LRB, if the player fails the roll then he has peaked and may not gain anymore SPPs.

ADVANTAGES

Not a major change from current rules
Players do not get worse when they gain a skill

DISADVANTAGES

Does not actually encourage retirement of the peaked player
May lead to player turnover at the lower end to redevelop important positions

Realistic Ageing:
Ageing dependent on played matches. Examples with arbitrarily chosen numbers:

a) After 10 games on 3-, after 20 on 4-, after 30 on 5-
b) after 5 games on 2-, after 10 on 3-, after 15 on 4-
c) after 10 games on 3-, after 15 on 4-, after 20 on 5-
d) or whatever might be appropriate numbers for such a system.

Perhaps these rolls should be made after the final match of the season, would make for a more realistic fluff.

As far as I know, there is no way a team can ever lose RRs. Therefore negative income should possibly cause a loss of one RR.

Someone (I think it was Pariah) had the idea of including Bonehead/Really Stupid to the injury list. That was a great idea. Maybe these should rather belong to the Injury-Table though. Losing a niggle on a 12 is a nice idea as well.

Annotations:
The current MVP-system is really really lame. Might be much more reasonable to grant players 1 SPP for each 3 games.

Though some might argue that counting the games of each players might be complicated (it's not IMHO), I'd say that many players do this anyway, since this is an interesting statistical core number. There is a reason why the fumbbl counts played games.

Another major advantage would be that new teams were entirely unaffected by ageing. It would simply be outrageous, if the first Star Player of your team gets a niggle or stat-decrease.

I mean, imagine some guy making his first BB-match ever, one of his players advances and gets a niggle? How stupid can you get?

Additionally, I like the concept of peaking too. Peaked players could possibly still continue to gather SPPs (thereby increasing TR). The chance of peaking should increase with each skill (for example 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6- ,7-, 8- ).

Peaking might be enough as long as the "peaked" players continue to gain SPPs and increase TR without adding new skills. Eventually you would get rid of the player but you could take time to train a replacement without having the retiring player totally crippled.

You could roll for peaking every time a player passed a multiple of 10 SPPs with the chance of peaking increasing each time, similar to previous experience suggestions. e.g. if SPPs/10 are equal to or greater than 2D6 then the player peaks. (maybe allow any 6 to succeed).

Call this system Tapering Off, since it doesn't cause immediate effects.

Not sure I understand why peaked players need to keep gaining SPP's.

If the team is not getting any better and not able to become an uber-team then why do you still need to encourage retirement? It doesn't make sense. It seems to me that some people are obsessed with forcing retirement. Why, what purpose does it serve?