koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 13:37 |
 
|
You can say that Malmir is at the extreme end. He can play a lot of games, build massive freakazoid teams and guys like myself will never be able to compete with that.
Ha ha. So cut Malmir back.
However, many casual coaches may take a long time to get an even half-decent team at 2000TV. For many, it would be a real kick in the guts to have to cut them back to 1350.
And Malmir will still have the advantage as he'll still be able to rebuild his team quicker and will probably have several ready-built teams on the go.
For years I wanted one Major to have a TV cap to keep the interest of the more casual coaches. Just one. But people wouldn't have it. "Majors are for the big teams" they said.
Now it seems that you are going completely the other way. 
I would say that the first season could be a long one. e.g. 20 games or more.
The rest can be shorter ones, e.g. 10 games.
The cut back should be far less brutal.
We do have TV matching.
Where did 1350 come from when we were previously talking about 1750?
Now, you may think "Shut up mate. You don't even play those divisions".
Well, IMO a strong main division is good for everyone as it keeps people on the site.
Though I suppose, if it stinks some people will come over to the League division which I believe will default to NO SEASONS!.
Of course, that would be good for me. 
But it won't be good for anyone if a lot of people just quit.
This may be good for BB3, but I don't think that a big cut back will be good for Fumbbl |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed
Last edited by koadah on %b %12, %2020 - %14:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
ArrestedDevelopment
Joined: Sep 14, 2015
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 13:48 |
|
1750 was and is the cutback motioned for old teams transitioning to new rules. They *will* have to do a hard cut to 1350 at some stage if played, and would be forced to have gone through at least one such hard cut to enter a tournament. |
_________________
 |
|
Steallan
Joined: Jun 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 13:56 |
|
There's some real panic in some posts, even though nothing is implemented yet nor set in stone. Is it decided that seasons will be exactly as the leaked rules? Is it decided that teams no longer in the leaked rules are gone forever?
Fumbll is committed to sticking to GW rules yes, it has to be this way, but we can do that with just tiny, wee changes, that have a huge effect, as has been done before. No need to freak out, yet.
Already we have a removed team still in Fumbll. Taken out teams will mostly rejoin, and can still be included anyway.
But redrafting is what really makes or breaks the new rules. If we lose Slann forever, it'll only keep one of us up all night.
15 games 1300tv and 20k agent fees does seem too constricting. But that's the tabletop imagining in the rulebook, designed for small numbers of games being played.
For fumbll, adjust those three values to get a better balance for us online, hundreds of game playing nutters, and all is well. They wont need much of an adjustment.
What would 20 games, 1350tv and 10k feel like? or 25 games (like BB season) 1400tv, and 5k.
25, 1400tv and 10k.....oh that! i've nailed it.
And then we all must try the new system before convincing ourselves one way or the other.
If the redraft numbers implemented are exactly like the leaked rules, give it a go first, then rage out, from a position of strength. |
|
|
Steallan
Joined: Jun 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 14:01 |
|
oh no, 20, 1400, and 10k.
no wait, 21.5, 1453tv, 5k and a lineo sacrificed to your god of choice. Old world god, not like......Buddha. |
Last edited by Steallan on %b %12, %2020 - %14:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
Arthas85
Joined: Apr 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 14:02 |
|
I think that GW could have done things differently.
Look at stat increases: a +1st cannot be 50k/80k for both a snotling and a saurus/chaos blocker.
Taking block as a double on a gobbo or a halfling is not strong as taking it on a claw/mb/tentacles/stand firm beast of nurgle.
As far as monster builds are concerned, don't get me wrong: I do enjoy from time to time watching games among these super-cool teams usually coached by very competent players. |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 14:18 |
|
I think i'm more in favour of no redrafts now you know. BB should be about fun and I think more fun will be had for more ppl if they get to build what they want and sometimes get smashed by perfect 3k tv teams than having to reset all the time just to constantly get annihilated by dorfs. |
_________________
Pull down the veil - actively bad for the hobby! |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 14:27 |
|
| Steallan wrote: | | There's some real panic in some posts... |
I wouldn't say "panic". An idea has been put forward, and some people don't like it. They don't have to play it to know that they don't like it.
Will it be good overall? That is harder to say. Will the people you gain by making the change outnumber the people that you lose? You cannot know that until you do it.
People who make a lot of noise about quitting, often stay. People who say nothing at all often just drift away silently.
If you start with a 1350 cut and people move their teams to league, what happens if you decide that 1350 is no good and you change to e.g. 1750. Will teams be allowed back? I doubt it. 
So they should park their teams and hope for change? Maybe they'll be less inclined to play at all if their favourite teams are on hiatus.
Just putting ideas out there for the management team to think about. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 14:51 |
|
| ArrestedDevelopment wrote: | | 1750 was and is the cutback motioned for old teams transitioning to new rules. They *will* have to do a hard cut to 1350 at some stage if played, and would be forced to have gone through at least one such hard cut to enter a tournament. |
Oh.
If you do not touch your team, does it remain as is?
You only have to cut it when you want to play.
Edit: If your team is under 1750 at switch over, do you still have to redraft to play? |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
Nelphine
Joined: Apr 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:06 |
|
redraft can mean simply rebuying your entire team if it fits under, but yes i would expect we'll all have to redraft if we're past the season length with a team already. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:20 |
|
|
JimmyFantastic
Joined: Feb 06, 2007
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:23 |
|
| koadah wrote: | | Nelphine wrote: | | redraft can mean simply rebuying your entire team if it fits under, but yes i would expect we'll all have to redraft if we're past the season length with a team already. |
But your players are all going to cost an extra 20k. Does the 20k count towards TV? |
Not for TV, no.
So teams will never redraft to the actual cap in reality. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:29 |
|
| JimmyFantastic wrote: | | koadah wrote: | | Nelphine wrote: | | redraft can mean simply rebuying your entire team if it fits under, but yes i would expect we'll all have to redraft if we're past the season length with a team already. |
But your players are all going to cost an extra 20k. Does the 20k count towards TV? |
Not for TV, no.
So teams will never redraft to the actual cap in reality. |
Phew! That is something at least. 
But you get more cap space if you fire all your no-skill guys.
Edit: JimmyFantastic! last game 2017! The new rules are not a complete disaster then.
Calcium was here recently too. |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed
Last edited by koadah on %b %12, %2020 - %15:%Aug; edited 1 time in total |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:29 |
|
It appears you pay more gold to redraft previous players because of Agent Fees
And that team value is based on Current Value of the players plus extra bits like apo RR etc
Current Value isn't defined where I can find it but don't think it includes Agent Fees
So if you had 1300k gold budget and bought a complete rookie squad, you'd start the new season at 1300k TV
If you kept Studman Fourskill who has Advancements gained over his last 5 seasons, and built a rookie squad around him, you'd start the new season at 1200k TV |
Last edited by Sp00keh on %b %12, %2020 - %15:%Aug; edited 2 times in total |
|
Traul
Joined: Jun 09, 2013
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:33 |
|
| koadah wrote: | If you start with a 1350 cut and people move their teams to league, what happens if you decide that 1350 is no good and you change to e.g. 1750. Will teams be allowed back? I doubt it.
So they should park their teams and hope for change? Maybe they'll be less inclined to play at all if their favourite teams are on hiatus. |
That is a very good point. Since the formula is likely to take some tinkering, it is much safer to start on the high side and trim down if needed than the opposite. |
|
|
Steallan
Joined: Jun 16, 2020
|
| Posted:
Aug 12, 2020 - 15:47 |
|
Ah! so Agent Fees are lost redraft cap, not lost TV. Much better, but still a big impact.
The most important question is now about two figures. Does fumbll go with leaked rules as written, or push up the number of games in a season, and the redraft cap, to reflect the difference between tabletop leagues vs faster, easier to play more games, online leagues.
ooooo exciting! |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
