Carthage
Joined: Mar 18, 2021
|
 Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 02:15 |
 
|
Yes its done now, but its for a moderate gain. With your system it would double the gain because you would save on both the skill cost and the redraft cost associated with that skill.
I *might* do it to save 20k. I'm *absolutely* going to do it to save 40k.
I'm not saying its a bad system. Just pointing out a weakness of it.
Might instead scale it off total career gained SPP? 0-10 is 20k, 11-20 is 40k, etc.
Which would track more the fluff of what agent fees realistically are. The bigger stars of the team demanding more money. It would also prevent the SPP banking, scale costs up when you pick a stat instead of a skill, and provide some risk-reward for at least the first 2 random rolls so people maybe keep them during redraft instead of firing and hiring fresh guys. |
|
|
Diablange
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2025 - 21:48 |
|
| Carthage wrote: | Yes its done now, but its for a moderate gain. With your system it would double the gain because you would save on both the skill cost and the redraft cost associated with that skill.
I *might* do it to save 20k. I'm *absolutely* going to do it to save 40k. |
Your example only stands if you put a 100% skill fee. Of course a possible choice, but if you take a "more reasonnable" fee of 50%, then you have to compare 20k and 30k only.
| Carthage wrote: |
Might instead scale it off total career gained SPP? 0-10 is 20k, 11-20 is 40k, etc.
|
That would be interesting too, yes. And it should also work for both 2016 and 2020 skilling systems. Only drawback is the number of spp needed to have skills is not linear, meaning either your formula shouldn't be linear either, or having a formula not very accurate.
All these possibilities seem better to me than the current system, honestly. |
|
|
Sambre
Joined: Apr 14, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 16, 2025 - 13:57 |
|
By saving spp for next season, you also give up on the benefice that the skills would have provided for the time you've saved. It's a risk. Your gutter runner might well die of not having block. And then what good do those spp do. |
|
|
Nightbird
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 16, 2025 - 23:39 |
|
| Zelmor wrote: | Also, Christer mentioned it a couple times that he wants FUMBBL to be a reference implementation of the Blood Bowl ruleset. So I don't think such homebrew things will make it to the site. There are more important things on the todo list.
Like the Unreal Engine 5 migration. :^) |
Pretty sure the OP has this in mind strictly for League so this has zero impact on FUMBBL sticking to the core rules. |
_________________
"If most of us remain ignorant of ourselves, it's because self-knowledge is painful
& we prefer the pleasures of illusion." ~Aldous Huxley |
|
Diablange
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 09:48 |
|
| Nightbird wrote: | | Zelmor wrote: | Also, Christer mentioned it a couple times that he wants FUMBBL to be a reference implementation of the Blood Bowl ruleset. So I don't think such homebrew things will make it to the site. There are more important things on the todo list.
Like the Unreal Engine 5 migration. :^) |
Pretty sure the OP has this in mind strictly for League so this has zero impact on FUMBBL sticking to the core rules. |
Allow me to disagree on several levels.
1- I believe the official rule is a bad one, so having Fumbbl proposing alternatives might be a good idea.
2- Leagues ARE a part of Fumbbl, aren't they ? You can minor the impact, or the number of leagues interested, etc. Still, this won't o down to 0.
3- The amount of work needed for developing any evolution is a factor to take into account. I surely won't take the developers estimation on that, but I doubt what I propose is a big thing, to do or maintain. If it is, then bury it. If it's not, then could be seen as a quick-win.
And finally 4- If there is another proposition, equivalent to this one, making more sense to a greater number, so be it, I'd support it. Carthage came up with spp tracker, why not ? It sounds better to me than the official rules. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 10:27 |
|
|
Diablange
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 11:43 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Diablange wrote: |
Allow me to disagree on several levels. |
I don't see what there is to disagree with.
It would be a great option for [L] but [C] will have as few changes from official as possible. No matter badly official stinks. |
Well, you can't say an evolution would have 0 impact on Fumbbl unless there is a plan to limit Fumbbl to [C], is it ?
If it's me misunderstanding the initial comment, please forgive me, english is not my mother language I might have read the comment the wrong way. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 12:41 |
|
[C] is going to stick to current official rules, is what they mean. It's not going to adopt your suggestion
[L] already does have some options around customising fees and seasons, more options might be implemented but we (users) don't have much foresight of that |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 13:15 |
|
| Diablange wrote: |
Well, you can't say an evolution would have 0 impact on Fumbbl unless there is a plan to limit Fumbbl to [C], is it ?
If it's me misunderstanding the initial comment, please forgive me, english is not my mother language I might have read the comment the wrong way. |
Yeah. It can be be a bit irritating but people do often use "Fumbbl" to mean "[C]ompetitive Division".
I suppose because it is tha main Fumbbl "league" and the crazy people in the [L]eague Division can do whatever bizarre thing that the system allows them to do.  |
_________________
NO Seasons! 2016 Progression, KO Tournaments, --- All Star Bowl - Always recruiting!
Open/Gamefinder play |
|
Diablange
Joined: Apr 27, 2020
|
| Posted:
Jun 17, 2025 - 13:34 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | [C] is going to stick to current official rules, is what they mean. It's not going to adopt your suggestion
[L] already does have some options around customising fees and seasons, more options might be implemented but we (users) don't have much foresight of that |
| koadah wrote: |
I suppose because it is tha main Fumbbl "league" and the crazy people in the [L]eague Division can do whatever bizarre thing that the system allows them to do. |
I get that. 
And I surely don't want to comment any decision made to ensure the site is able to follow the official rules of course !
So, should I add the [L] sign in my title and in my comments ? Are we allowed to believe, even amongst a small part of the site, that there can be better rules than the official ones ?
If it was just for me, I'd revert skilling up to 2016 version, anyway, just adding the formula I proposed here for redrafting (with redrafting being optionnal for league admins wishing everlasting teams). |
|
|
|
|
| |
Things we dislike of...
Search
