Talk Fantasy Football

Sure they make slightly less cash, but they save so much by keeping those pricy players alive. Has anyone tried this rule out in a league? Who won, and over how many games?

Chris wrote:Sure they make slightly less cash, but they save so much by keeping those pricy players alive. Has anyone tried this rule out in a league? Who won, and over how many games?

I'll quote Chet ... "when coaches becry a rule hurt one team too badly and the other coaches becry it helps them too much, you are on to something that just might work".

Galak

Or they hate elves
Elves I think are the best at the long long term league (many many many matches) as player cost, currently at least, matters less it seems in those leagues, and it is the skills and stats that count.

viewtopic.php?p=161347

This is an alternative idea that has something of both worlds.

Chris wrote:Or they hate elves

Hmmm... why is it that so many coaches hate elves? Is it just WEs, or do they include HEs and DEs in this too? My experience has not been that elves are the best team. Even if they are very good at very high TRs, isn't the set of rules used to limit high TR going to mean that this will no longer be the case... and why do other coaches say that high AV teams are much better at high TR?

Martyn the Confused

I hate Wardancers, and WE's in general, and HE cos they're just to nicey-nicey to play proper BB.

DE's are alright though

I just hate elves in general. No idea why. Perhaps I was abducted as a child. Doesn't matter what game, film or book, I'm always hoping the elves get their comeupance.

Any thing making them suffer more I am all up for

well you are seeing it through elf hating glasses

i don't think it does benefit them loads, they have expensive players so when they run out of money and can't hire an apoth they are more at risk than other teams

also chaos are better than any elf team at high levels, maybe you need to learn how to play against elves ;]

Grumbledook wrote:well you are seeing it through elf hating glasses

i don't think it does benefit them loads, they have expensive players so when they run out of money and can't hire an apoth they are more at risk than other teams

also chaos are better than any elf team at high levels, maybe you need to learn how to play against elves ;]

Aargh! I never lose to elves! Its the match officials, they falsify the results! And steal my dice! And my pint! My girlfriend ran off with an elf! Who was only 5 foot tall! Aargh!

must have been the shirt you were wearing ;]

Hi Chris,
I don't see what you're getting at.
How can freebooting an apothecary every match be better than simply buying one and having his services forever?

Martin

Hopefully with an elf team there first three games are pretty bloody. It delays there advancment so other teams can jump ahead and try and keep a lead over them.

Well I'd say that medium term (10-20 games) it probably hurts elves (and other low Av teams). They normally have a greater need for cash to replace players so the small drain on their income hurts them more than say Dwarves who don't really have much to spend their money on anyway.

Later on things balance out a bit more.

ianwilliams wrote:Well I'd say that medium term (10-20 games) it probably hurts elves (and other low Av teams). They normally have a greater need for cash to replace players so the small drain on their income hurts them more than say Dwarves who don't really have much to spend their money on anyway.

Later on things balance out a bit more.

I'd have to do the math. After 10k, any team that starts game 1 with an apothecary will be about 20k total in gold down with the freeboot apothecary rules (see the Negative Winnings vs Hard TR cap for this math proof). (20k isn't much to be honest especially since you start with 40k more in position players). I think Ian might be right that its probably more like 40k extra down over games 10 to 20, but I'd need to do the math to see.

Galak