What I'd like to see in October

[wesleytj]

6. Ageing

Aging is perfect. Either add +1 to injuries for each Niggle or roll for Niggles at the end of each half to miss the rest of the game ... JKL, you, and I reviewed a lot of teams over 20 games played and we all agreed that if the Niggles actually mattered since 1 game in 6 doesn't matter to anyone ... the aging rules + the cash table would work exactly as desired.

Act surprised, I disagree. I immediately fire anyone who gets a niggler as long as I have money or bench to replace them. I never trust them, they always miss the one game you can't afford them to. They're a drain on bench space and TR when I (especially when I play elves) can't afford either one. Nigglers are the least fun serious injury.

I'd much rather see downgrades. And depending on the downgrade (and the player's position)I usually keep them around. Like if a wood elf lineman loses a point of anything, I keep him and just put him on the line for every kickoff. If somebody kills him, great! The only downside is when they accidentally get the mvp, but life goes on.

10. Miscellaneous

FREE MASTER CHEF as head coach for the HALFINGS!!!!

Galak

OK what do you give the gobs then?

[Thadrin]

10. Miscellaneous

FREE MASTER CHEF as head coach for the HALFINGS!!!!

Galak

OK what do you give the gobs then?

The ability to hire up to four secret weapons, whereas the only other race who will be allowed more than one is dwarfs (allowed two) if any future secret weapon rules are anything like the ones we've talked about here.

[GalakStarscraper]

6. Ageing

Aging is perfect. Either add +1 to injuries for each Niggle or roll for Niggles at the end of each half to miss the rest of the game ... JKL, you, and I reviewed a lot of teams over 20 games played and we all agreed that if the Niggles actually mattered since 1 game in 6 doesn't matter to anyone ... the aging rules + the cash table would work exactly as desired.

Act surprised, I disagree. I immediately fire anyone who gets a niggler

You do ... others don't ... JKL, Chet, and I looked at all the leagues that responed to JKL's request for LRB teams with 20 games or more. I looked through all that data with them. What we found was that top TRs would be right where the BBRC had hoped they be IF (big IF) those teams would have retired at least one or two of their niggled players. The teams with the BIG TRs were not retiring their Niggled players at all, and I agree with them. 1 in 6 games in meaningless risk for a developed player. You, Wes, don't agree with that, but those coaches were keeping those niggled players. JKL, Chet, and I all agreed that a little more incentive to retire Niggled and the whole balance system (which you don't like any part of really (aging, cash table, niggles, etc. etc. etc.)) is working as hoped for.

If you want to go to email or PM I'll dig up the stats and we can disagree about them there. However us arguing in forum is a lost cause since you believe that the game can be balanced through attrition and I and the BBRC do not.

Oh and the Goblins get 4 secret weapons when those rules return ... which they are eventually.

Galak

[wesleytj]

You do ... others don't ... JKL, Chet, and I looked at all the leagues that responed to JKL's request for LRB teams with 20 games or more. I looked through all that data with them. What we found was that top TRs would be right where the BBRC had hoped they be IF (big IF) those teams would have retired at least one or two of their niggled players.

Well I think we disagree on the basic premise of "where they ought to be" in the first place.

The teams with the BIG TRs were not retiring their Niggled players at all, and I agree with them. 1 in 6 games in meaningless risk for a developed player. You, Wes, don't agree with that, but those coaches were keeping those niggled players.

Well I'm guessing in the new system where nigglers are as common as they are (twice as much thru SIs and even more on that with aging) that if I had a WD with 101spp I probably wouldn't fire him at that point either. I haven't gotten that far yet though.

If you want to make nigglers worse so people are more likely to fire them, fine. But then make them less common, like they were before. (ie chuck aging and revert to old SI table) Doing both is just suicide for team development, which I know you want to a degree, but that would just be getting carried away.

JKL, Chet, and I all agreed that a little more incentive to retire Niggled and the whole balance system (which you don't like any part of really (aging, cash table, niggles, etc. etc. etc.)) is working as hoped for.

No I don't dislike it all. I've said on numerous occasions that I really do think the logic behind the winnings table is sound, but that it just went a bit too far. I played for several years in OLBBL which is a clear case of team development allowed to go berserk beyond any hope of redemption. And given my stance on here, you'd probably be surprised to know that I was one of the few (often the only) commissioner on there out of 6 or 7 who thought the league needed reset and some form on control on TR's be instituted. I just think you guys are overdoing it.

I'd love to see a winnings table where most of the top end of it is modified by +2 or so. I'd like some relaxed aging rules where it wasn't 90% nigglers...I think -MA makes a lot more sense as the most common aging result..."he's lost a step", along with -AV (more frail and fragile as he becomes a grizzled veteran) and so on. And by relaxed I mean maybe +1 to all the minimum rolls and such. Yes I know that makes it impossible for a player to age after 1 skill...but that's how it should be IMO.

If you want to go to email or PM I'll dig up the stats and we can disagree about them there. However us arguing in forum is a lost cause since you believe that the game can be balanced through attrition and I and the BBRC do not.

Well if you want to discuss it elsewhere thats fine, but it's not as black and white as you're suggesting. I don't think attrition is the ONLY way to balance the game. I just think it was the primary one and has been eroded over time as the fouling rules have gotten stricter and the general psychology of most coaches has been turned away from fouling.

And don't misunderstand, I'm NOT advocating a return to 3rd Ed BB where DP's fouled with impunity. I love the current version of igmeoy, and I think it's by far the best system for fouling governance I've seen since I've started playing BB about 10 years ago. My only problem with it currently revolves around the "get the Ref" kickoff event being too powerful right now, but that can easily be fixed with some minor tweaking of it.

Oh and the Goblins get 4 secret weapons when those rules return ... which they are eventually.

I didn't really care one way or the other anyway, I was only kidding. I never play either team, and I don't think balancing them against each other is remotely important. As long as they both suck compared to the rest of the teams, I'm cool.

I would like to see what you guys come up with regarding secret weapons. I really hope it's not silly. Maybe make certain linemen types have access to certain weapons as traits. Could be easy enough.

[Pink Horror]

I think Wes and Galak would both agree that +1 to injury for niggles would bring attrition back some. It's unfortunate that rule isn't likely.

The ageing rolls could use some work. I like the version that starts at 2+ and goes up by 2 better than the current set. It's blunt, but it gets the job done. Under the current system, a patient coach with a little luck and some forsight could assemble a core of stars with no ageing effects. If my league members would stop playing Counterstrike I could get closer to proving this.

I also agree with Wesleytj about the chance for a niggle being too lopsided. Why don't we stretch out the stat reduction portion of the table? A d8 with 1-3 for niggles, 4-5 for movement, 6 for armour, 7 for agility, and 8 for strength would give a better spread.

As for kicking, I don't think it should be part of the game until goalposts are drawn or assembled on the board. I'd also like to see a cleaner mechanic that includes strength and agility, the ability to kick in any direction, better kicking skills, and real kicker positions. The current set of kicking rules are good for house rules but they don't fit in well enough yet to become as official as fouling. I think the biggest reason kicking is so popular among playtesters is that only the people who accept the rules' kludginess will try them. You can't get someone who's turned off by the kicking rules to playtest them. Chet, I think you've got a good first draft there, with what sounds like good balance, but can you try to steamline it in the same manner you're willing to critique the core rules? Actually, I'd like it if kicking could be made with a possibility for more rolls depending on distance, so, when the ball nears the goalposts, we get that kind of anxiousness Neo likes about PGFI.



Pink Horror

[GalakStarscraper]

Actually PH ... the next season of the MBBL will have +1 per a Niggle and roll to miss the game at the end of each half.

This is the compromise from roll for Niggles at the end of each drive that we agreed on.

Galak

As for the kicking rules kludgeness ... I haven't notice any such creature to be honest and I've played a lot of games with those rules. But that must just mean I'm predisposed to kludges.

[wesleytj]

The ageing rolls could use some work. I like the version that starts at 2+ and goes up by 2 better than the current set. It's blunt, but it gets the job done. Under the current system, a patient coach with a little luck and some forsight could assemble a core of stars with no ageing effects. If my league members would stop playing Counterstrike I could get closer to proving this.

More aging penalties?! You must be kidding?!

I also agree with Wesleytj about the chance for a niggle being too lopsided. Why don't we stretch out the stat reduction portion of the table? A d8 with 1-3 for niggles, 4-5 for movement, 6 for armour, 7 for agility, and 8 for strength would give a better spread.

I like the d8 idea. How about 1-2:niggler, 3-4:-ma, 5-6:-av, 7:-ag, 8:-st

[GalakStarscraper]

I also agree with Wesleytj about the chance for a niggle being too lopsided. Why don't we stretch out the stat reduction portion of the table? A d8 with 1-3 for niggles, 4-5 for movement, 6 for armour, 7 for agility, and 8 for strength would give a better spread.

I like the d8 idea. How about 1-2:niggler, 3-4:-ma, 5-6:-av, 7:-ag, 8:-st

Now this will suprise you Wes, but I agree here that this would be fine. However, I doubt most other folks would agree here. I'm curious though ... sounds like time for a poll.

Galak

[wesleytj]

Now this will suprise you Wes, but I agree here that this would be fine. However, I doubt most other folks would agree here. I'm curious though ... sounds like time for a poll.

Galak

Not terribly shocked actually, given our earlier post about nigglers (quality vs quantity). We don't need more nigglers, we need the nigglers people get to hurt more so ppl actually do something about it.

That plus revoking that extended SI table would be great for me.

[GalakStarscraper]

Added an poll on how to adjust the aging effects a little.

viewtopic.php?t=1908

Galak

[DaImp]

I don't think the kicking rules should be made official core rules. I would be happy to keep them as an extra set of rules that leagues can adopt as they see fit but not as part of the rules used in official tournaments.
For me they they don't work well enough in their current format, and have been a miserable failure in my league where the only coach who has actually tried to use them in a game was myself. The rest of the coaches are not interested.
I think the core BB rules must stay the same, but I would be more than happy to see a number of officially sanctioned house rules added to add spice and character as the league commisioner see fit.

[wesleytj]

I don't think the kicking rules should be made official core rules. I would be happy to keep them as an extra set of rules that leagues can adopt as they see fit but not as part of the rules used in official tournaments.
For me they they don't work well enough in their current format, and have been a miserable failure in my league where the only coach who has actually tried to use them in a game was myself. The rest of the coaches are not interested.
I think the core BB rules must stay the same, but I would be more than happy to see a number of officially sanctioned house rules added to add spice and character as the league commisioner see fit.

Agree 100%

[Ghost of Pariah]

Thadrin (not Neo) wrote:
"(DWARF RUNNERS ARE STILL NOT PASSERS)"

At least somebody agrees with me! You can have an AG 4, pass strong arm, accurate Runner but if all he can do is pass to MA 5 blitzers then what's that gonna do? Example...(See Brett Favre)

[Pink Horror]

Where did Neo write that? I saw Thadrin write it but not Neo. Be careful with your quotes, Pariah, and don't get your hopes up. I agree with the statement, too, and we know how the BBRC usually feels about ideas you and I agree on.



Pink Horror

[Ghost of Pariah]

Shame upon my head!
I will fix it! Thank you, Pinky.