New Handicap Suggestion

[martynq]

OK, I've just had a look at the second draft of the table. On the whole, I'm pretty happy with which events are in which table but I wonder about the following possible changes (though they don't necessarily fit with the themes of the tables).

I would say that "Bribe the Ref" is probably the best of the 10 point rolls - being able to setup 12 players on defense is very good against a team close in rating to you... though of course it would require you to actually have 12 players to setup. (Hmm... perhaps I'm wrong here.)

Extra Training and Intensive Training seem pretty good also and I would consider moving them to the 25 point table.

On the other hand, Bad Press, Greased Shoes and Buzzing seem to me the worst results on the 25 point table and I would wonder about moving them to the 10 point table.

These are, of course, just opinions and are also probably damn wrong!

Martyn

[Milo]

OK, I've just had a look at the second draft of the table. On the whole, I'm pretty happy with which events are in which table but I wonder about the following possible changes (though they don't necessarily fit with the themes of the tables).

I would say that "Bribe the Ref" is probably the best of the 10 point rolls - being able to setup 12 players on defense is very good against a team close in rating to you... though of course it would require you to actually have 12 players to setup. (Hmm... perhaps I'm wrong here.)

Well, keep in mind that it's only one drive. It may earn you an extra TD during the game, it may not, but it doesn't last the length of the entire game or even a drive. I'm not sure that makes up more than 10 TR.

Extra Training and Intensive Training seem pretty good also and I would consider moving them to the 25 point table.

Again, Extra Training gets you an extra re-roll -- for most teams, that's worth about 6TR. But you have to have 10TR of handicap in order to get the roll, so that still leaves a effective difference of 4TR.

On the other hand, Bad Press, Greased Shoes and Buzzing seem to me the worst results on the 25 point table and I would wonder about moving them to the 10 point table.

Buzzing can be really good -- several people have pointed out the Jump Up/Piling On trick. Greased Shoes probably still needs to be revised or replaced, but I didn't come up with anything last night. Bad Press is one of the less powerful results, but I do think some variations is a good idea.

Thanks for the feedback, though.

[Milo]

Milo, i'd like to know what you think of my version, and if you don't like it, could you tell me exactly what it is that you don't like about it, and that can't be solved with either of the two proposed amendments?

It's not a bad system, Zombie, but I prefer some random element in it. Saying that a coach must buy the most expensive result isn't really random -- both teams could calculate it well in advance, and possibly alter the result by investing in re-rolls, donating money to another team, purchasing bounties, etc.

I don't think that knowing handicap results in advance is a good idea for league play. It could convince a coach to dodge a game, pick on an underdog when the handicap result is less damaging, etc.

Milo

[martynq]

"Bribe the Ref"

You may be right about Bribe The Ref. With a bashy team possessing 12 players or more and with a small TR difference, I reckon you could use it to good effect if you kicked in the first drive... but possibly it's not as useful as I think.

Buzzing can be really good -- several people have pointed out the Jump Up/Piling On trick. Greased Shoes probably still needs to be revised or replaced, but I didn't come up with anything last night.

Glad we agree on Greased Shoes. Possibly the reason I don't think Buzzing is that good is because I coach elves a lot - I expect all my players to be able to handle the ball and I don't have POs. I agree that a Piling On mummy would really love Buzzing though!

Martyn

[narkotic]

This one is even better than the first draft.
I ckecked the changed effects (so no comment by me for now if they are placed in the right severity tables, but most seem ok)


Appearance Fee: changed from 1d6x5K to 2D6x5K – good, as Zombie said it was too weak earlier, now high TR teams will think twice of paying it.

I am the greatest: changed from two randomly to two „picked“ players – good, now its a punishment, not a lottery anymore.

Running Late: changed from 1D6 to 1D3 players – good, its not unpredictable anymore. Maybe you should add: „if you roll a 1 you may choose the missing player.“

Doom and Gloom: changed from lose half RR rounded down for the 1st half to roll 6+ for every RR to keep it for the whole match – maybe a little too harsh, what about rolling a 5+?, or rolling again for the second half? or both?

Assassin: changed to auto-KO if stun result is rolled – good, still a dreaded result but now the guy will miss at least one drive.

Virus: changed from all with nigglings miss to niggling rolls succeed on a 4+ - good, a no brainer gets toned down a little.

Bad Habbits: changed from lose 1RR to lose 1D3 RRs – ok for a medium table effect, maybe you should add „ regardless of the roll you keep 1 RR“

Grudge Match: unchanged but still this, in conjunction with "Get the ref" from the Kick-off table, annihilates the opposing team. You should shut down this killer-combo (maybe changing get the ref?), maybe changing Grudge match to „you may do two foul actions“?

Bribe the ref: changed from you may ignore the first penalty to ignore any one penalty – why this was changed? I can see abuse with the new result.

Sponsorship: changed from 10K to 20K extra winning – good, it was a NIL result before that, maybe change it to 1D3x10K?

Team Anthem: changed from +1FF to +1D6FF – good, another former NIL result, but maybe +1D6 is a little to flaky for a low table result. Why not 1D3+1?

That’s babe got talent: changed from +1D6 cheerleader to auto-win cheering fans – great idea

Egghead convention: new, same as that’s "babe got talent", but just for brilliant coaching – great idea


An improvement for sure. But what are the chances that the BBRC will accept a concept like this?

[Milo]

As for BBRC approval, I'm definitely in, and I think I know of at least one other member who would vote for it. As for the others, I don't know -- some of them have their own ideas. I think this one has the advantage of being a less revolutionary change, so that's a good thing.

Milo

[DoubleSkulls]

Milo - I really like the concept.

BRIBE THE REF: You may set up 12 players on the field once during the match.

How about making this a little bit more useful if you've only got 11 (or less) by adding.

"If you only have 11 or fewer players your opponent must set up one player less than they are able to once during the match."

[Zombie]

I'm thinking of employing my own version for our next season, with the coach being able to choose which results he'll take. We usually try to keep house rules to a minimum over here, but your version just seems too half-assed (for lack of a better term) in my eyes.

You'll have a vote at the begining of the season and see how it goes.

[Milo]

Milo - I really like the concept.

BRIBE THE REF: You may set up 12 players on the field once during the match.

How about making this a little bit more useful if you've only got 11 (or less) by adding.

"If you only have 11 or fewer players your opponent must set up one player less than they are able to once during the match."

Ian,

Good idea. I hadn't thought about the handicapped team starting with less than 12 players, but now that you mention it, it's probably fairly likely to (due to lower TR.)

Milo

[Milo]

I'm thinking of employing my own version for our next season, with the coach being able to choose which results he'll take. We usually try to keep house rules to a minimum over here, but your version just seems too half-assed (for lack of a better term) in my eyes.

You'll have a vote at the begining of the season and see how it goes.

Zombie,

Half-assed seems a bit harsh to me, but to each their own. The idea seems to be getting a good reception on here, but I never expected to please everybody. Seems like the best that can usually be hoped for here is to not piss anyone off too badly.

Please let me know how your league does with it.

Milo

[mrinprophet]

Milo - For what it's worth, I like it. Most certainly better than what we have today. I'd like any system to retain some randomness, which this does. While Z's proposal would have that, I feel that assigning points to each result would be difficult. The reason is that each result can be more or less effective depending on the particular teams involved, and assigning a particular point total to each result would then be less effective. Although, it shouldn't be too bad. I just prefer Milo's.

[Zombie]

Have you read the table i posted with all the points assigned? The reason i posted it so early was to prove that it wasn't that hard to do, and that there wouldn't be that much controverse over the point values (i.e. most people would accept the point values as pretty good).

[mrinprophet]

Z- I did read it and it looked thoughtful, which is what I'd expect. However, my point was that the strength of each of these is somewhat relative depending on matchup. For instance, you have Under Scrutiny listed as 60 points. Against me, unless there are secret weapons, that would be worthless as I've fouled 1 time in my league career. It's a viable strategy of course, just one I don't use. It would be well worth it if I had a 60+ TR advantage and was more interested in destroying than playing. I do think it's probably about as random as Milo's suggestion because while he points out correctly that TR can be manipulated, those who would are knobs and probably wouldn't last too long in league play, although I'm sure we all know of few of those. (Also, people can do the same thing with his proposal with regard to severity of handicap, they are just unsure of the actual result). No doubt yours is sound, I just like the Milo's better.

[Zombie]

Personally, of my two options, my favorite is the one without the randomness, where the coach gets to spend however he likes. Using that system, if i played against you, i wouldn't take under scrutiny. Instead, i'd spend the points more intelligently. But it seems that a lot of people here think that blood bowl isn't already random enough with the in-game stuff and the skill rolls, and want a random handicap table as well. Oh well.

[Milo]

Personally, of my two options, my favorite is the one without the randomness, where the coach gets to spend however he likes. Using that system, if i played against you, i wouldn't take under scrutiny. Instead, i'd spend the points more intelligently. But it seems that a lot of people here think that blood bowl isn't already random enough with the in-game stuff and the skill rolls, and want a random handicap table as well. Oh well.

Truer words were never spoken, Zombie. There are two very distinct classes of coaches -- those who like known factors and stick to strategy, and those who prefer the "wild and zany" side of random chance. I think this proposal reduces the effect of chance on the handicap tables without eliminating it altogether, and I hope that will have some appeal to both sides.

Milo