BB2 Full listof changes to crp

[garion]

its completely unrealistic though,

Says a man pkaying a game with giant humaniod rats, bomb-throwing goblins and chainsaw-wielding dwarfs.

Uf you want a fluff justification remember teams are travelling fron one end of the olde worlde to the other ( and beyond) and the place us full of bandits, pirates, marauders etc, not to mention corrupt city officials (taxes), thieves, conmen wgen they arrive at their destination. Aafer ti drop (use) the money than rusk losing it.

I'm sorry but realism is very important in role playing game, its not about realism within the real world, but it should be consistent within its self. It is called verisimilitude, and it is important for creating immersion. I am suprised you of all people would say other wise as you like background and character in your team and in the game.

Throwing money away is daft, there is no need for it, JJ was absolutely correct for vetoing it. There is no reason money should contribute to a teams TV it has no bearing on its strength.

Also not all teams are nomadic, there are a number of teams mentioned in the rule book that have home stadiums even after the collapse of the NAF, also with the latest upgade to home stadium rules it would make even less sense if your story were accurate, which it obviously isn't.

p.s. its not a good look when an admin consistently responds to posts in such a way.

[Darkson]

Also not all teams are nomadic, there are a number of teams mentioned in the rule book that have home stadiums even after the collapse of the NAF,

That still have to travel to get to tournaments, which are held all over the Olde Worlde (and beyond). Or are you suggesting the Reavers only play teams that come to Reikland?

The Bank is a rules mechanism, designed to remove or penalise the huge treasuries that teams would build up (as shown by the poor Petty Cash rule that replaced it), in exactly the same way the Interception is rolled before the Pass roll. Is it realistic? No, it's a design to get around a specific problem.

Also is it realistic that a sport allows teams to pick up specific players for just one game? You don't see the NFL allowing Brady to play for the Redskins as aone-off, or Ronaldo to play for Accrington Stanley in the FA Cup. Again, a rules mechanic to solve a specific problem.

So why does the Bank have to be any more realistic that Interceptions or Stars (just as examples).


And if you want to be realistic, most BB teams should have NO money, like most professional teams, who are mainly in debt.

[garion]

I said my main concern with bank was it actually hurts the T3 teams more than anyone else in my experience. Also I have never seen a correlation in the game between amassing large sums of money and winning tournaments, the rule purely from a technical stand point, is overly complicated for something that doesn’t need to be. Many people are confused by the rule. Heck many people are confused by cash in CRP which is as straight forward as it gets really.

However since we are on the subject of the fluff, the part that does not sit well with me is cash dumping, it is counter intuitive, both mechanically and from a fluff perspective. It shouldn’t happen and it detracts from the game, and confuses newer coaches. A newcomer to the game would never think cash dumping is sensible, but with bank rule it is.

I agree interception is a strange rule and doesn’t make much sense fluff wise, but it needed for game simplification. Bank rule makes it more complex and is not needed. I have never seen an issue with cash in CRP, other than there being a lack of things to spend money on really, and if you really think it is a big problem that some teams have a lot of money then making spiralling expenses harsher would be a far better solution, though it's not really needed.

[Darkson]

How does it hurt T3 more than others? They don't have a large treasury, and normally run at lower TVs than other teams anyway. If anything they'll benefit more, because other teams will be dumping small amounts per game (around 40k) meaning they (the T3) will be getting more inducements.
And T3 coaches didn't find it an issue during play-testing.

I find the Bank rule easier to understand than Petty Cash.

[garion]

I never had a problem with hording cash with T3 teams - https://fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=735585 for example, it has at times had close to 1 million, same goes for goblins https://fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=783155, I certainly find amassing money with them alot easier than with humans, or elves for example.

The problem is - there comes times where your team gets completely destroyed (which is fine, I’m no cry baby when my players die) and you need to buy 2 trees and a bunch of flings, or in the case of goblins - 2 trolls and saw player and a fanatic, or with vampires - 2 vamps, or with ogres 2 ogres etc…. Bank rule punishes you making the rebuild a lot harder, and the T3 teams are all reliant on a couple of very expensive players, they aren't dwarves, dark elves, Norse, who have amazing linemen. So when you get a bad beating as a T3 team the bank encourages retirement, which is a shame, especially as the odds are against them anyway.

Where possible I would always rather a team re-build from near rookie level rather than have to go through a few painful games with half a team which will just be an automatic loss.

Similarly I have been saying for a long time that I would rather FF did not count towards TV, because when a team is completely destroyed it means starting again as a rookie team you end up having a FF of say 12 which artificially bumps your TV up with no benefit. This again encourages retirement like what happened to this team for example - https://fumbbl.com/p/team?team_id=656217 as you can see the team is retired because its TV is 1120k when it is just a rookie team. But I guess the FF thing is for another thread

[Darkson]

I could (re-)start that Fumbbl and Cyanide MM aren't what the game was designed for, but that is a very old argument that neither side is going to budge on.

So I'm going to say "the Bank works better than Petty Cash in the game as it was designed to be played" and leave it at that.

[garion]

I could (re-)start that Fumbbl and Cyanide MM aren't what the game was designed for, but that is a very old argument that neither side is going to budge on.

So I'm going to say "the Bank works better than Petty Cash in the game as it was designed to be played" and leave it at that.

I used bank in a league environments, not fumbbl and I found it disagreeable, it’s just an unnecessary complication, and as I said I found cash dumping counter intuitive, and that is punishes T3 more than anyone else.

There is just no good reason for its inclusion. People involved in the vault just seem sour about it because it was a rule they wanted and JJ vetoed it to make the game more straight forward, and while I don't agree with the simplification of the game in all aspects money is something that should be straight forward, and as I say, I have never seen anything that would suggest having lots of money =winning, a bank of 150k is still a wizard, so I just don’t see its use, its just over complication.

[Jimmy Fantastic]

There is just no good reason for its inclusion. People involved in the vault just seem sour about it because it was a rule they wanted and JJ vetoed it to make the game more straight forward, and while I don't agree with the simplification of the game in all aspects money is something that should be straight forward, and as I say, I have never seen anything that would suggest having lots of money =winning, a bank of 150k is still a wizard, so I just don’t see its use, its just over complication.

Agree 100%. Cash hoarding is a non-issue.

[Shteve0]

I agree with Garion, Regash and Jimmy on this. The bank rule is clumsy and, in retrospect, I can only think JJ made the right call.

So I'm going to say "the Bank works better than Petty Cash in the game as it was designed to be played" and leave it at that.

Have a word with yourself. This is a facile, unsupportable argument, as you well know.

[plasmoid]

Cash hoarding allows certain teams to negate the effects of SE's for a very long time, allowing them to stay above the intended TV cap far longer than what was the intent.

For teams that get the snot beat out of them on a regular basis having a Cash maximum of "150K + winnings from the game + whatever you're willing to pay" doesn't really seem like a cieling you'd hit often. Or if you did, you really aren't the sort of team that "gets the snot beat out of them on a regular basis".

First draft of PBBL had a hard cap. No Cash earned after TV200... or was it 220.... I forget.

Hoarding Cash lets both elfy and bashy sides go far higher. To the detriment of all the other teams.

Cheers
Martin

PS - a trip Down memory lane:
the original PBBL rules were that all Cash counted towards team value.
The Bank rule was the bridge that prevented that from happening.
Replacing that with the polar opposite (Cash doesn't Count at all) because the Bank rule was "too compliacted" (two treasuries - OoooH) looks like a fairly sweeping change for a very small reason.

[garion]

Sorry Martin but that's just nonsense theory bowl, it's a non issue in real life, having money does not equal winning. Bank rule is overly complex and serves no purpose other than the stupid practice of cash dumping.

[Jimmy Fantastic]

I like the idea of these guys being infinite TV

Everything that can happen has happened on fumbbl basically.
Cash hoarding is a non-issue. Same with journeymen "abuse".
Some people have problems with both though, for reasons which I can not fathom.

[Fassbinder75]

I agree with Garion, Regash and Jimmy on this. The bank rule is clumsy and, in retrospect, I can only think JJ made the right call.

"clumsy". Mr Bean on mescaline would be a picture of resolute sobriety compared to the Bank rule!

[plasmoid]

I'm not sure what is clumsy about the original bank rule.
You have 2 treasuries on your roster. One is available for the next game. The other one isn't.

[dode74]

Sorry Martin but that's just nonsense theory bowl, it's a non issue in real life, having money does not equal winning. Bank rule is overly complex and serves no purpose other than the stupid practice of cash dumping.

Actually it can help. Take a look at the inducements spent by RandomOracle on his way to winning FUMBBL Cup X. The bank would have prevented him taking at least a wizard and a couple of apothecaries. That's not to take away from his achievement: everyone was working under the same rules. It's merely pointing out that it does have a tangible real life effect.