Malmir
Joined: May 20, 2008
|
 Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 17:12 |
 
|
Please will someone who understands this better than I do read my take on it and correct me on anything I have got wrong...
So as I understand it, I play a team for 15-20 games depending on final limit. I can redraft (restart) the team at any point in that run. After (let's say 15) 15 games I can either enter them in a tourney or redraft them. After the tourney I have to redraft them. Redraft them means they get cut back to 135 but I get to keep some of them as they are (skills etc) if I am prepared to pay 20k more per player than their current cost. When I gain skills on players I can choose whether to roll for a stat or a normal or a double but stats are more highly priced and the stat roll will be random. Other skill selections are not random? Oh and also the better my team has done in the previous season the less budget (skills? money?) I get to redraft and vice versa? |
|
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
That sounds about right Malmir
Edit: I think you perhaps edited after I’d posted, or I misread it, but the last bit isn’t correct |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum
Last edited by mister__joshua on Aug 09, 2020; edited 1 time in total |
|
mister__joshua
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
|
| Nelphine wrote: | | sure but.. why do we need a meta where any given team is best at all? i mean i have no idea how the new ruleset will shake out, but my ideal is that 90% of teams are within 90% of the winning rate of each other, over 90% of tv ranges. (and yes i think a lot of the new changes will move us closer to this meta, so i have high hopes for changes to teams like chaos/nurgle that are particularly bad when they start compared to high tv, as well as dwarves/amazons that are particularly good when they start) |
I suspect (based on nothing more than an educated guess) that they’ve made an attempt this edition to ‘balance’ the teams within their own tier, but not balance the tiers against each other, which is sensible as you’ll never balance goblins against woodies for example.
As evidence of this I offer the following observations:
- Undead and Woodies were considered the strongest teams and both received a nerf/price increase and remain T1
- Humans and Necros are similarly tiered in Naf tourneys currently. Humans received price cuts and a buff with Halflings and a better thrower, but are now T1. Necros for price increases and a debatably nerfed Wight and are T2
- the Human and Noble blitzers are obviously priced in different scales as the human is 20k cheaper but also a better player.
I find this interesting. I assume it’s mainly for tournament use, and so people can know the relative strength of their teams but don’t expect it will have an in-game impact. We’ll see... |
_________________
"Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man." - The Dude
Mr. J's LRB7 / Forum |
|
Dominik
Joined: Oct 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 17:23 |
|
Im probably the coach with the least retired teams on FUMBBL. To me retiring healthy players (apart from a 14th player with Rookie status who has to go so we can get the Wizard inducement in a tourney match) and teams is a no-go. My heart will bleed everytime I have to retire promising players. When I looked for games in R and B it was mostly to get a chance to develop the team. In my world a team never retires, it only has highs and lows and me as their coach is trying to lead it to a golden era. All that is taken now but as I said, I can achieve that in Leagues now with the downside of less recognition and no valuable prices. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 18:05 |
|
|
Grasshugger17
Joined: Jun 29, 2020
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 18:24 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Malmir wrote: | | Oh and also the better my team has done in the previous season the less budget (skills? money?) I get to redraft and vice versa? |
What?
I thought that you got more budget from wins, TDs, cas etc. |
He's asking a question not making a statement. He's asking, does his team have less money to re-draft with if it performs better? |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 18:47 |
|
| Grasshugger17 wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | Malmir wrote: | | Oh and also the better my team has done in the previous season the less budget (skills? money?) I get to redraft and vice versa? |
What?
I thought that you got more budget from wins, TDs, cas etc. |
He's asking a question not making a statement. He's asking, does his team have less money to re-draft with if it performs better? |
Yes, and someone said he was correct.
I believe that better performance should get more money. |
_________________
Open [L]eague Tournaments - NOW recruiting!! Old/New style skill progression! - Secret League - All Stars! |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 18:50 |
|
You do get more redraft budget if you perform better. Generally this leads to a win more situation under the current ruleset. So a cap is added - while you earn more if you perform better, their is still a cap. This is primarily to prevent the gap between an average team and a great team from being so extreme that the average team has no chance the next season against the team that performed great the previous season.*
*Coach skill notwithstanding of course.
For some clarity, the most extreme version of the redraft (with 20 games) without a cap would allow a team that has a great record to redraft 800k+ higher than an average team. |
|
|
Malmir
Joined: May 20, 2008
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 18:54 |
|
Ah thanks all - more budget for better performance makes much more sense. |
|
|
Uber
Joined: Mar 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 19:33 |
|
I have the same concern as MattDakka in terms of diversity. By having such a low cap, some teams just won't make sense. I get that we wanna reduce bloat, but zero bloat isn't much better. The low cap also puts a lot of pressure on everything having the right TV, which is far from the case. Low TV big guys are actually terrible. I fear way too many fun things would leave the meta under such a system. I'm not necessarily excited either by all-linemen teams with 2x the skills as other teams. |
_________________
Recovering FUMBBL addict. |
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 19:50 |
|
I'm afraid to say that I've only read the blogs and not the 14 pages of comment (plus the new rules chat elsewhere).
I'm hyped. The time when CRP first came to FUMBBL is a few months I remember extremely fondly; everyone finding their feet before it was 'worked out' was a golden six months. I think the division merger and implementation of seasons makes sense in terms of the size of the player-base, following the intent of the rules and it'll make tournaments more interesting. 'Mega TV Blood Bowl' has been a thing since I started playing here and I know some love it, but my personal feeling is that bringing the TV down into the more competitive segments of the TV curve can only be a positive thing. I'm sure there will be 'forever' leagues to sate those that enjoy it.
My only sadness is Slann, I suppose. I wish I could come up with a killer argument for breaking convention and keeping them around, but I understand why FUMBBL may have to leave them behind. A real shame and I don't think keeping them does any harm, but as I say, I get it. Again, no doubt leagues will keep them going.
Exciting times. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 20:11 |
|
| mister__joshua wrote: | | mrt1212 wrote: | | What is the pace going to be like on skilling players? We talking about that yet? |
This is an interesting point when talking about the TV people expect to reach. You can now theoretically reach legend by 46spps, but that’s not a likely scenario as it would be all normal skills.
Legend is easier to reach for any player not choosing multiple stats, but Super Star is probably a better comparison point. You would reach this at 62 spps with all ‘chosen’ normal skills, plus 6 spps for each double you want, making a super star with 2 doubles roughly the same as before (74 spps). Each skill reached along the way will be a little earlier than before for a normal skill, a little later if that’s when you choose a double.
I think a more interesting upshot of this is that it allows much more tailoring of teams. The first 3 things that come to mind are:
- Big guys can always take Block as first skill
- Skaven and Chorfs (if they appear) can choose to take Mutations
- For players that really benefit heavily from stats (Vamps, Wardancers, Wolves) you can choose to take a stat roll and know you’re getting a great result whatever it is. Picking this as first advancement is building a solid base for a player. |
Thanks - I heard that there would be changes and in some ways, I think it alleviates the fear of not being able to build players up, and completely changes the dynamic of building players from opportunism to specification, purposefully.
It's hard for me to speculate much beyond that and how it dovetails with seasonal considerations but just at first blush, it feels like you can have a team closer to your own specs rather easily and turnover the players between seasons that aren't cutting it. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 20:14 |
|
| Uber wrote: | | I have the same concern as MattDakka in terms of diversity. By having such a low cap, some teams just won't make sense. I get that we wanna reduce bloat, but zero bloat isn't much better. The low cap also puts a lot of pressure on everything having the right TV, which is far from the case. Low TV big guys are actually terrible. I fear way too many fun things would leave the meta under such a system. I'm not necessarily excited either by all-linemen teams with 2x the skills as other teams. |
What about zero reroll teams that don't take journeymen?
https://fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=873371 |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 20:20 |
|
| Garion wrote: | | MattDakka wrote: | NAF tourneys favour a small subset of races.
Chaos compared to Wood Elves for example, is way weaker in NAF format.
This is why you see top tier 1 races more represented in NAF tourneys, unless there is some extra rules forcing to play weaker races or giving bonus to certain weaker races (such as extra skills). |
you aren't wrong, but I look at it this way - the new meta has different races that are the best. The old meta was high tv elves and high tv cpomb, if this new meta is humans and black orcs dominating for exmample then thats ok (to be clear this is not a prediction). Its nice to see it mixed up for the first time in 27 years. As the best teams over the last 27 years hasnt changed.
Mind you i think dwarves are gonna be amazing in this edition... so there is that problem haha |
100%! This is the new opportunity we have before us! We get to explore what works and what doesn't with so many more games happening and working through the meta to find hidden gems and obvious oversights from GW. What if Humans and variants on Humans are nifty? Are we supposed to hem and haw about it because The Old Ways said they weren't?
And I share the fear about dorfs being amazing based on some of the skill changes (Claw) and the introduction of others (Ironhide or whatever it is) and the pace of skilling with the SPP level changes. They'll be a tough nut to crack with a coach who sees everything happening below the surface. |
|
|
mrt1212
Joined: Feb 26, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 09, 2020 - 20:23 |
|
| Uedder wrote: | You get legends with random skills for 46spp. No doubles, no stats and likely a couple of bad skills.
The problem is not getting a 2000tv team in a tournament, it's getting 2500k (or more) with endless stats, freaks and doubles.
That said I think some kind of cap is needed to level the playing ground.
Tournaments could be ways to slightly breach the cap. |
I'd have to dust off my Legends tome, but I thought I recognized a pattern where most if not all of my elven ones had at least one stat, usually +AG, and then a double of some sort. The tools they were given expedited the process of getting more tools. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Old style skill prog...
Search
