Ageing and such

carnage4u · Post by **carnage4u** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 7:19 pm

I have searched a bit for some ageing comments and such. I am new to this board, but Not new to Blood Bowl. I started playing at end of 2nd edition and beginning of 3rd edition.
I have played through a couple seasons of gameplay and tons of just side fun games.

Here is my question. I have seen posts that people seem to like the ageing rules and some even trying to say that they pose even more penalities on players or make it easier to age.

I don't understand this and would like some insight into it.

My group and I dont like the aging rules at all, and of course the strenght of the game is we can simply ignore that and continue on happy,

but

I dont see why we need to punish players for gaining a skill in the game. we play in a rough league. Lots of tough teams and death is common. To keep a team going for 10+ games and have any thing left of orignal team is hard.

why should a star player that gaines one or two skills possible lose points or gain niggling injuries..

does aging automatically have to be bad?

why cant someone that gets older gain pro free? why does it mean they have to lose if they age.

I am hoping for some logically reasons why ageing is good. I just dont see it and would like to see someones opinion that likes it. My group of 10+ people all find them basically lame.

thanks a lot for any input.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 7:32 pm

Without rehashing a lot of previous threads, it comes down to this.

Jervis wanted a system that basically caps teams between TR 250 and 300 no matter how many games they play.

The current system of Aging, FF mods, new win table, and 41-46 SIs does just that.

For a lot of coaches this level of TR is a comfortable playing area. Aging helps enforce this flexible cap and does so in a way that allows the coach the ultimate decision on keeping vs retiring a player. Every other system of capping that I've seen comes down to forcing coaches to retire a player ... which the vast majority of coaches that I've played with dislike a lot.

If casualties are keeping your league in check ... that's great. That system doesn't work for a lot of other leagues for whatever reason. So aging is in there for those leagues. If you get by without it, carry on. The system is easy, linking it to skill rolls avoid extra mechanics like I've seen discussed like game counting or hit counting, and the best part (even if Wes disagrees) its working just like it was hoped it would.

The only increase currently on the table is that Niggling Injuries be rolled for at the beginning of each half instead of each game. A minor tweak to the rules that should have the system in balance to where JJ wanted it in the first place.

Galak

carnage4u · Post by **carnage4u** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 8:13 pm

""""The current system of Aging, FF mods, new win table, and 41-46 SIs does just that.""""""

Ok..
what does FF mod and 41-46sis stand for?
sorry i'm not good with all the abrevations that are all used on the board yet

dakkakhan · Post by **dakkakhan** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 9:14 pm

1.He is referring to the Fan Factor Modifiers that make it harder to continuously increase your fans, thereby affecting your gate for each game.

2. The winnings table is now different and also makes it tougher for teams to gather and keep huge treasuries to use freely.

3. 41-46 on the injury table now results in an injury that also comes with a niggling injury. The table used to have less results that included Niggles, they changed it so as to encourage more retirements, and hence keeping team ratings lower.

Hope that helps.

carnage4u · Post by **carnage4u** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 9:44 pm

thanks for the info.

for some reason the people i play with seem to stop playing with teams when they get near 300 team rating anyway so I guess we never had problems with teams getting out of control.

we liked to start new seasons and sometimes have new teams across the boards.

I guess I can see if people keep the same teams forever and such.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 10:06 pm

carnage4u wrote:thanks for the info.

for some reason the people i play with seem to stop playing with teams when they get near 300 team rating anyway so I guess we never had problems with teams getting out of control.

we liked to start new seasons and sometimes have new teams across the boards.

I guess I can see if people keep the same teams forever and such.

So leagues like my two for example (MBBL and MBBL2) don't ever have fresh start seasons. Without aging and the other rules these are the types of teams you can end up with:

112 games under 3rd edition with Dwarf = TR 635 = http://www.geocities.com/ibarist/gdrk.htm
85 games under 3rd edition with Dark Elf = TR 628 = http://www.geocities.com/vanguard815/malice.html

And yes, I realize that some of the items on these rosters indicate some house rules ... but that doesn't change the fact that these types of teams were possible with 3rd edition.

TR 250 to 300 is a very comfortable range for me to play in ... these types of monsters were possible under the old rules and Jervis just really wanted around a TR 300 top out ... thus the current mix of LRB rules. As proof of this take the Champions of Old teams in the 2nd edition rule book ... almost all of these teams when translated to LRB type rules are TR 250 to 300. This has always been Jervis' idea of a Star team not the TR 500+ giants that were possible with the 3rd edition rules.

Galak

Darkson · Post by **Darkson** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 10:47 pm

Cool mini for the Minatour on the DE team. Any idea where it came from?

carnage4u · Post by **carnage4u** » Mon Sep 30, 2002 11:08 pm

those teams had some amazing TR's
I can understand a bit more now why they want to keep people in the 300 range. I think i had a wood elf team that topped out around 300TR and they were fairly amazing.

Nice Dark elf pics as well

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 12:46 am

Darkson wrote:Cool mini for the Minatour on the DE team. Any idea where it came from?

Wizards of the Coast Dungeons and Dragons Minotaur ... I use them myself ... VERY nice 3 point football stance.

Galak
your ultimate source for worthless miniature trivia

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 1:01 am

carnage4u wrote:those teams had some amazing TR's
I can understand a bit more now why they want to keep people in the 300 range. I think i had a wood elf team that topped out around 300TR and they were fairly amazing.

Nice Dark elf pics as well

Actually carnage, I know of a league with 53 teams in it that is still playing with 3rd edition rules. The AVERAGE TR of a team in that league is 477. The lowest TR in the league is 365 and the highest is 836. Now for some folks this is fun ... but a league like this cannot allow in rookies and Jervis really wanted an environment where you never had to retire your team and at the same time rookie could come in at any time. The changes are all geared at never start over type leagues.

Galak

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 2:11 am

Never had that problem when playing 3ed leagues. No one ever seemed to be able to keep a league going past the first season. People would drop out or want to start a different team because of a lousy record, etc. Never saw a team break 200 TR (I know, sad isn't it). I am talking table top leagues here.

neoliminal · Post by **neoliminal** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:39 pm

For leagues where people simply restarted after a season, the ageing rules are probably not required. On the other hand they will also probably have very little effect.

Ageing is targeted at long term teams and the goal (which I think is still unrealized) is to have a system where teams get good, and then slowly get worse. Then they get better again. The natural cycle of a team in the NFL shows the sort of thing we're trying for. Teams that are good this decade will stink next decade.

John -

Lucien Swift · Post by **Lucien Swift** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:46 pm

GalakStarscraper wrote:Jervis wanted a system that basically caps teams between TR 250 and 300 no matter how many games they play.

let's be fair, it wasn't just jervis, it was a significant number of bb players overall...

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:48 pm

Okay I can agree with you Galak that an instrument is needed to keep
ongoing teams balanced.

I do not like the way it is introduced in LRB. Still there should be
something and I have a few decent ideas but they are in playtesting phase
right now, so I couldn't tell much from experiences.

One very important thing is that even if a rule is well balanced and thoroughly thought out, it is worthless if it is not fun useing it.

christer · Post by **christer** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:58 pm

Ageing is targeted at long term teams and the goal (which I think is still unrealized) is to have a system where teams get good, and then slowly get worse.

I think this holds for the non-bashy teams (skaven, elves, norse perhaps). The ageing in itself doesn't do this, but these teams tend to take more causlties on the pitch than some others (dwarfs, orcs, chaos) which makes them have a hard time. At 200+, these teams tend to have alot of damaged players and can't afford to replace them.

The high av teams still continue flourishing at around 200.

-- Christer