New Team Rating

[plasmoid]

Team Rating decides handicap, and handicap helps decide games. Therefore, TR shouldn't be a description of a teams potential, but a description of it's current power.
After all, your opponent isn't playing against your "potential", but against your current team.

With that in mind, my league has come up with the following changes to the TR system:

1. Money in treasury does not contribute to TR.
2. Anything freebooted contributes it's full TR value.
3. Only SPP that have actually resulted in a skill roll contributes towards TR. (i.e. 1 skill = 6 spp, 2 = 16, 3 = 31, etc.).
4. Frebooted stars contribue double their cost in TR.
5. All rerolls contribute 5 TR, no matter what was payed for them.

[voyagers_uk]

Interesting, yet I feel that if you discount SPP's not yet gone towards a skill ie someone on 100 SPP's will ony have the first 76 counted then that is a danger, after all uncounted SPP's are a telling sign of potential power and that is what TR is more than anything else. After all not all match-ups go to the odds and yet a good big-un should always squis a good small-'un

[GalakStarscraper]

Too much bookkeeping for too little payoff.

The current system is just fine. The only tweak I would ever consider is the one where SI-Miss Next Game players don't impact your TR for a match. Other than that, no thanks. (However, I will note that not enough coaches use the freeboot rules to get around SI players so I really don't have a problem with the current TR rules)

Galak

[sean newboy]

The only one i really agree with is number 1. The others are minor and like Galak says too little use for the work needed to change it.

[plasmoid]

Hey, feel free to disagree with the ideas.
However, don't disagree with them on account of "more bookkeeping". It isn't more - it's just different.
(Admitted - freebooting adds a little, but thats math with 1 digit numbers).

Voygers_uk said:
>someone on 100 SPP's will ony have the first 76 counted then that is a >danger, after all uncounted SPP's are a telling sign of potential power >and that is what TR is more than anything else.

My point was exactly that TR should not be about potential.

Your opponent shouldn't be eating handicap for how your team will look in 2-3 games time! IMO.
The 76 spp player is exactly as good as the 100spp player. Not until he gets the next skill will he contribute anything more to the teams power.

[voyagers_uk]

I agree that skill wise he is just as good, and yet he is actually a lot of spp's better which you are choosing to ignore just because he hasn't gained the skill yet

[Acerak]

Do you amend the team's "true power" rating by adjusting for stat upgrades and doubles rolls versus standard 2-9 rolls? Do you adjust for niggling injuries and stat reductions?

TR is an amalgamated approximation of team power. It gives the "big picture" for a team. Given that the Handicap ranges are ranges - in other words, it's 11-25 TR difference as a group, not 11, 12, 13, etc. - I think the system has enough flexibility to make this sort of micromanaging unnecessary.

Or, like Tom said:

"Too much bookkeeping for too little payoff."

-Chet

[martynq]

Chet makes good points above. I still think that ignoring SI'd players is a good idea though. Quite recently, I had a match with a 10 man dwarf team against a 10 man (plus 1 SI'd) elf team. Because there was a large enough difference in TR, this resulted in my elves losing a re-roll due to the handicap roll, and I was truly beaten. The only reason why there was a sufficiently large difference in TR was because of the elf who couldn't play. Both sides were pretty much rookie (1 previous game each), so it was going to be difficult for the elves anyway.

Cheers,
Martyn

[Thadrin]

Money in the treasury shouldn't count, freebooted players should (full normal cost of player).

Anything else gets tricky in the bookkeeping, though that Reroll suggestion is interesting.

my 0.02

[plasmoid]

Hi all,

voyagers_uk said:
>I agree that skill wise he is just as good, and yet he is actually a lot of >spp's better which you are choosing to ignore just because he hasn't >gained the skill yet.

IMO, you're mixing up your causalities.
Having more spp's doesn't make him a better player in game terms. He can do exactly the same thing as before.

Chet said:
>TR is an amalgamated approximation of team power. It gives the "big >picture" for a team. Given that the Handicap ranges are ranges - in >other words, it's 11-25 TR difference as a group, not 11, 12, 13, etc. - I >think the system has enough flexibility to make this sort of >micromanaging unnecessary.

For the record I disagree that a system that can not be perfect shouldn't be made better.
We were trying to adress places where the system was weak.

I think that "too much bookkeeping" is not a strong argument.
IMO, the bookkeeping isn't "more", just different.

>1. Money in treasury does not contribute to TR.
This must be less bookkeeping.
At one point, my gobbo team was accumulating the 380K to buy Mork. Over that period, my team was exactly the same, but TR fluctuated by 1-37 points.

>2. Anything freebooted contributes it's full TR value.
A consequence of the above rule.
Seems logical, since the freebooters "on the pitch" effect is exactly the same as that of a new player.

>3. Only SPP that have actually resulted in a skill roll contributes towards >TR. (i.e. 1 skill = 6 spp, 2 = 16, 3 = 31, etc.).
To make this even easier, one could simply make the spp "division by 5" once and for all.
That way 1st skill = 1TR, 2nd skill = +2 (i.e. 3TR), 3rd skil = +3 (i.e. 6TR).
a very simple fixed system
No need to bring your calculator anymore (as when dividing 517 by 5).

>4. Frebooted stars contribue double their cost in TR.
Star Players are far better than their gc cost implies.
That is one reason why they can totally dominate matches between low TR teams.

>5. All rerolls contribute 5 TR, no matter what was payed for them.
Team rerolls do the same thing, after all.

>6. Nigglings.
You mention nigglings/miss next games - and I agree.
Miss Next Game players should not be counted. Notice that they will be much easier to remove from your TR, if you've adopted the simple system from "3.".

As for nigglings, they too are a problem when they remove a player for a whole game - and should be treated as above.

Chet has already suggested an alternative version of nigglings that will prevent this problem. Our own solution has been to roll nigglings "for the drive" rather than "for the whole match".

Martin

[Don Khan]

completly agree with plasmoid, i always think that only the true value of the team should count on the TR.
In my old league we were counting the true value of players (with the formulas) and not the money, neither the spp's!
i think it was a great improvement cause, if the difference isn't that big at the begining, when team come to 200TR, it makes a difference, and team are well more equals!

[Trambi]

Keep it simple !
But i agree that TR is not accurate.For example, the rating is the same without depending of niggling injuries, i find this very strange (as it's doesn't depend of AG-1,ST-1, AR-1 or MV-1)

[Anthony_TBBF]

I agree with Chet, TR is justa guide. I think it is accurate enough to determine handicaps and besides, what goes around comes around. All those little details will balance themselves out more or less.

[Trambi]

I agree with Chet, TR is justa guide. I think it is accurate enough to determine handicaps and besides, what goes around comes around. All those little details will balance themselves out more or less.

more or less that's the pb, because a single point of TR, can allow a handicap roll.

[Acerak]

more or less that's the pb, because a single point of TR, can allow a handicap roll.

Sure, it can. But how often does it? Very, very rarely. Look at the ranges and you'll see this is true. Examine your games and you'll see it more clearly.

I like the "per drive" nigglers, though. That's an interesting twist.

-Chet