Team Aging

[Munkey]

It occurred to me that although we have aging on players in one form or other this still allows a buildup of re-rolls over time.

My thoughts were that perhaps when a new player joins a team there should be a chance that a re-roll is lost, representing that the new player is not fully part of the team yet.

I think the roll should be modified by the number of re-rolls you already have so as not to penalise teams with only a few anyway, but I have not worked out the exact details yet.

I'm also not sure that this might not overly penalise high player turnover teams such as elves, skaven and halflings/goblins.

What do you think, is there a need for keeping team re-rolls down and does this have a part to play in the keeping overall team ratings down?

[Deathwing]

I'd like to see a mechanism for removal of TRR. Player turnover and ever escalating FF have been/are being dealt with. TRR are still a nice way to drop overall TR, and no matter how hard aging bites, they are still gonna be a huge advantage that long term teams will build up over time, new winnings table notwithstanding.

[Relborn]

I would also like to see such a rule. It shouldn't be too complicated though. Maybe the extra rules for the crush are a good way to start.

[Cervidal]

Here's a try....

Start rule:

As a team adds new meat to the roster, the rookies have yet to be hazed into the team good and proper. After all, how can a guy depend on a rookie in the trenches if he hasn't been taught like one of the boys?

This rule comes into effect only if adding to a roster beyond 12 players. A team struglling to field a whole team is in bad enough shape as is!

Prior to adding a new player to your roster, add up your team's Star Player Points. Divide this number by the total number of players on the team. (this'll give an estimate as to how experienced your bunch of Blood Bowlers are). If this number is higer than X (number yet to be determined, maybe 16 to represent a team at full Veteran status?), roll a d8. If this d8 roll is less than the number of rerolls on the roster, subtract one as the ill discipline and rookie misktakes brought in by the new guy takes effect on the whole team.

End rule

The only real flaw I see is using a d8 instead of a traditional d6, but 8 is generally viewed as the traditional cap on team rerolls.

[Munkey]

Cervidal said:

As a team adds new meat to the roster, the rookies have yet to be hazed into the team good and proper. After all, how can a guy depend on a rookie in the trenches if he hasn't been taught like one of the boys?

Perfectly sums up what I was intending with the fluff.

I like the D8 mechanism for removing re-rolls, although it is not a standard D6 eight is as you say the usual cap for team re-rolls and D8s are already established in the game.

I think the adding up of SPPs may be a little complex, especially as we already do this once for Team Rating, perhaps we could add a modifier to the roll based on Bands of Team Rating.

So lower rated teams could be at +1/2 modifier and unlikely to lose a roll, higher rated teams at -1/2 and more likely to lose a roll. Then simply roll when purchasing a player after you already have 12 on the roster.

How about:

TR Modifier
0-99 +2
100-125 +1
126-150 0
151-175 -1
176-200 -2

[Anthony_TBBF]

We have a system that we use at the end of each season, basically you have to roll to keep TRRs that you've gained, ie.:

1st RR - no roll
2nd RR - no roll
3rd RR - keep the RR on a 2+
4th RR - keep the RR on a 3+

etc., tops out at 6+.

[DoubleSkulls]

Doesn't this penalise low Av teams that not only need more players but have to buy more to replace loses?

EXP is an appealing system because it is actually based on games played.

Maybe something a little more random - after every game roll 2d6, add 1 for each TRR you already have. If the total is 16 or more then lose a TRR. That way only teams with at least 4 TRRs can lose any, which will tend to more those with high TR.

It also has nothing to do with Av 7 or player turnover.

[Munkey]

Maybe something a little more random - after every game roll 2d6, add 1 for each TRR you already have. If the total is 16 or more then lose a TRR. That way only teams with at least 4 TRRs can lose any, which will tend to more those with high TR.

Player Turnover was used to fit with the fluff but it was a worry that this would overly penalise low AV teams.

The odds when rolling 2d6 every game stack up like this:

Re-roll Dropped every # games
8 3
7 4
6 7
5 18

The problem with this method is that it provides a disincentive to purchase those extra re-rolls, especially the 7th and 8th. I would need 4 games to save up for one


What about a team 'aging' box: Use the assistant coaches box (not used much to my knowledge), roll a dice like for player aging, if the score is above the amount in the box then add one to the value.

Once the value gets to 6 the aging kicks in - on a roll of 1 roll on the coaching burn out table:

2-6 No Effect
7-9 Lose a re-roll for the next game only and lose D3 coaching experience
10-12 Lose a re-roll permanently and lose D6 coaching experience

This way the rule mimics the EXP aging rule.

[DoubleSkulls]

That would probably work - but use Cheerleaders instead - as retired players can be made coaches.

[Munkey]

I had used assistant coaches because I thought perhaps this could also be used on the Brilliant Coaching roll on the Kickoff table, there should be some benefit to coaching staff gaining in Exp (and increasing your chances of losing a re-roll)

You are right though, assistant coaches are used more often than cheerleaders. Now I think about it I don't think i've ever seen a team with a cheerleader.

[Cervidal]

Well... in the system I came up with above, I don't think it'd penalize low AV teams much at all.

First, keeping the SPPs in the equation, you wouldn't even start losing rerolls until you hit a certain skill level. You can hurry up and buy your 16 players before you hit that level, which is what most low AV teams try to do, anyways. They would only run into problems once the team starts to get skilled, just like any team would.

Second, if low AV teams are losing players, they're bound to lose SPPs off the roster, too, likely keeping them under the threshold to check, anyways.

[Munkey]

Well... in the system I came up with above, I don't think it'd penalize low AV teams much at all...

[snip]

if low AV teams are losing players, they're bound to lose SPPs off the roster, too, likely keeping them under the threshold to check, anyways.

I hadn't though of that

If I get time I might try running some numbers on some of my old teams to see how the low/high AV teams compare.

[Relborn]

What about giving each player an importance number, based on his position, his SPPs and skills. When he leaves the team or is injured that might result in an amount of un-useable re-rolls ...

[Munkey]

Ideally I would like to keep the rules as simple as possible, I think calculating an importance number may introduce an extra level of complexit into the post game sequence.

Most players I know can't be bothered to calculate their new team rating straight after a match

Also this might again unfairly penalise the low AV teams as it is based on player deaths and injuries, but then possibly a more skilled player is less likely to be injured (e.g. Blodge) and so maybe this will balance out.[/quote]

[Krinosy]

Such a loss of RR could be incorporated into the Aging/Experience rules - the proposed Aging/Experienced table is something along the lines of:
2-5: Statistic decrease+MNG
6: Niggle+MNG
7: MNG
8-12: Nothing

Perhaps the '7' result could be changed to 'loss of TRR+MNG'.