I hate aging!

[DoubleSkulls]

I dislike ageing - along with others in the so, ECBBL may well drop it for the next season. I don't really see the point. My Orcs get enough player turnover that they've only put on 40 TR in the last 15 games and seem to have a top out ~TR250. IMO this is too low and getting rid of ageing will help teams develop a bit better.

Anyway, Galak, why are you fiddling with the EXP/MVP system? What are you trying to achieve?

[GalakStarscraper]

Anyway, Galak, why are you fiddling with the EXP/MVP system? What are you trying to achieve?

Not really me fiddling with it. It me responding to my league's testing and input from other factions. Now of the changes I listed where my ideas. I'll simply present what I've seen, been asked, or told should happen.

1) EXP vs Skill based aging:

The FUMBBL league is an incredible example of how skill based aging just doesn't seem to work. The league has a produced a massive number of incredible stars (and yes, I know that they've played a lot of games to get there). And to the fact that system can penaltize too early and that it can cause a situation like Zombie had where getting a skill is a bad thing and the current system needs dumped. If your league opts for no aging rules at all ... that as also is what house rules for BB are all about.

2) Move the aging point to 7 EXP

Reason: The MBBL at 6 EXP shows the teams reaching the point where several players have 6 a little too earlier on the TR curve. Pushing it back by one point appears at this point to be the more reasonable point at which it should effect the team. It should be noted however that after 10 games in the MBBL, no one has actually had an aging effect (even MNG) yet.

3) Add back in the MVPs (note we'll retroactively award the 6 MVPs missed from Season 2).

Reason: Testing in both the MBBL and Chet's league is showing that EXPs allow kill any real growth potential of lineman and for that matter many team members. Adding the MVPs back in is believed to restore the growth curve while still maintaining a valid aging system for turnover.

4) Any player with 7 EXPs or more gets the Pro skill for free and Pro will be removed as a General skill. (players who have already taken Pro will be allowed to replace it with another general skill)

Chet suggested this long ago. At first I was opposed to it. If the EXP point is moved back to 7, I think this is a fine risk/reward scenario. The player now is one that you have to consider for retirement at some point, but he gets a small boost at the same time he earns the negative. Chet's league is having success with this formula at 6 ... at 7 I've begun to see the merits of it.

5) Replace the Aging table with the Serious Injury table

Pure and simple, it makes the whole system easier to remember and understand. If you push the aging point back to 7 than the effects of SI table make more sense in the overall model.

Again ... NONE of this is my idea so yelling at me is simply shooting the messenger in this case. It is simply an accumulation of a ton of emails that have flooded through my door based on real league testing. The mix is one that has already been discussed with the members of the MBBL for next season and in general they have been very well received by the players seeing the actual effects of the current EXP rules we are testing.

Galak

[carnage4u]

can someone post the Link to the ageing rules.. or even repost them in their form. since from what I remembered of the thread it got rather long and people tweaked the idea,.

I dont know what the final version of it was.
I want to try to figure out if i Like them.
I dislike the aging rules and trying to figure out if another system is better.

their is always the simple way of just taking the ageing rules away and not having to add some other negative chart.

Unless the ff change to money, the new money chart the higher skill chart is not enough for certain power leagues.

anyway, if someone could post or show me where the final rules for ageing are.

thanks

[DoubleSkulls]

3) Add back in the MVPs (note we'll retroactively award the 6 MVPs missed from Season 2).

Reason: Testing in both the MBBL and Chet's league is showing that EXPs allow kill any real growth potential of lineman and for that matter many team members. Adding the MVPs back in is believed to restore the growth curve while still maintaining a valid aging system for turnover.

Everything else I'm quite happy with and the explanation makes a lot of sense.

Is your argument that your "prettiest Black Orc/Longbeard/Zombie" with 6 MVP awards isn't going to happen anymore - so they get stuck on 1 skill?

I can sort of see the sense in that, but wonder if the effect is going to make teams too good too quickly. TR should shoot through the roof in the 1st half a dozen games - 5 more than they are getting under EXP, which is probably triple what they used to get.

[Dangerous Dave]

Galak said

It should be noted however that after 10 games in the MBBL, no one has actually had an aging effect (even MNG) yet.

Wrong.....

My Piling On Mighty Blow Mummy is missing the next game due to EXP aging.


Dave

[Thadrin]

2) Move the aging point to 7 EXP

Reason: The MBBL at 6 EXP shows the teams reaching the point where several players have 6 a little too earlier on the TR curve. Pushing it back by one point appears at this point to be the more reasonable point at which it should effect the team. It should be noted however that after 10 games in the MBBL, no one has actually had an aging effect (even MNG) yet.

This seems like a slightly artificial barrier. I mean, why 7?
(rhetorical question.)
How about this modification which not only adds the barrier at 7 but adds a bit more bite at higher EXP levels:
A player with 6 or more EXPs still gains an EXP point on an experience roll of a six.
Aging occurs when the result of the experience roll+6 is equal to or less than the player's current EXP.

3) Add back in the MVPs (note we'll retroactively award the 6 MVPs missed from Season 2).

Reason: Testing in both the MBBL and Chet's league is showing that EXPs allow kill any real growth potential of lineman and for that matter many team members. Adding the MVPs back in is believed to restore the growth curve while still maintaining a valid aging system for turnover.

Not so keen on this, because it does bring back the syndrome where a Lineman can get very well developed by gaining a load of MVPs and no other SPPs whatsoever. Maybe reduce the MVP to 3PPs if this goes through?

4) Any player with 7 EXPs or more gets the Pro skill for free and Pro will be removed as a General skill. (players who have already taken Pro will be allowed to replace it with another general skill)


5) Replace the Aging table with the Serious Injury table

Pure and simple, it makes the whole system easier to remember and understand. If you push the aging point back to 7 than the effects of SI table make more sense in the overall model.

I like both these ideas very much. Especially the Pro one. I've always throught that it was a bit TOO easy to get that skill. Only quibble would possibly be renaming the stuff on the SI table (or rather, ignore the injury description), but hell - thats real nitpicking.

[Skummy]

My leauge runs seasons of up to 35 games a year, with the four major tournaments. I would like to know how the experience system works when it is played after 50+ games before it becomes official. The aging system has so far been a very balancing in our long running league.

[Dangerous Dave]

Well I'm not sure about the Pro skill being given free and being removed. It downgrades Big Guys since Pro is one of their better choices. Sure maybe the current rules are a bit odd in that any player could be a Pro after 1 game! But nonetheless this is a change to balance.

In addition, I would prefer the EXPs to be on a d8 roll and age after EXPs of 8. This means that a player cannot age until after his 9th game and there is according to my calculations a 0.03% chance of aging at this point. The d6 system at 7 EXP aging has a 0.04% chance of aging after 8 games. So not much different but you are guaranteed 1 more game and after that point, the chances of aging are slightly smaller - 1 in 8 instead of 1 in 6.


Dave

[Grumbledook]

http://fumbbl.com/teams/Terrifying+Anar ... aroth.html

Can I just direct you to that dark elf roster above. They have a tr of almost 400. Sure they have a lot of niggles but they have been like that since under tr 300. Clearly the aging rules aren't much of an encouragement to retire players and cap team ratings if this can happen in under 60 matches.

[Ghost of Pariah]

Galak, it's only been 6 games! Let the system work before you change it again. You altered it once already. I have to seriously ask you to consider waiting one more season. How can you tell anything? I don't see the skills coming much slower than normal but after 6 games how can you tell?

Your testing methods frustrate me. I don't see how you get any information when you change the rules every few games.

[GalakStarscraper]

Galak, it's only been 6 games!

Your testing methods frustrate me.

Its been 10 games for the retroactive teams, and also my league is not the only one the data is being pulled from. You have to realize that we are just one piece of a bigger whole. The data from our 10 doesn't contradict the data from the other leagues who are beyond 10.

If I thought it wouldn't kill anyone, I'd open the MBBL3 again to test but only allow each coach one team. The MBBL3 had 5 day time limits for playing your game. So in 6 weeks coaches were able to play a 12 game league season with a team. However, that league seriously burnt out the coaches including myself. So now I take what results we are getting from the MBBL and mix them in with the other leagues doing testing to see what's being shown.

We aren't the only fish in this sea, Pariah ... I promise.

Galak

[GalakStarscraper]

Well I'm not sure about the Pro skill being given free and being removed. It downgrades Big Guys since Pro is one of their better choices.

A great side effect in my opinion.

Galak

[Sixpack595]

Your testing methods frustrate me. I don't see how you get any information when you change the rules every few games.

Thats how we end up with BS rules like 4th ed and Ageing. People try it for a bit, a few more think the idea is good, and we end up with a garbage rule. I don't think its a bad idea to try something other than Ageing since we already know its crap, but other stuff needs better playtesting before being implimented. Also needs to be tried by different groups. One groups "great new rule" just blows to another league. I hope the Exp system get tried and tweaked for a looong time before put into LRB.

[Skummy]

Grumbledook: It is a scary roster, but they have 5 players with AG 5 and leap and two who gained 4 strength - this is the far end of the bell curve. This could just be a very good coach who has rolled some nice skills.

I also don't know whether this league is using straight LRB rules. I notice that Piling On seems to be an undervalued skill in the league, which leads me to guess that it has to be declared before use. Whether or not the official handicap table is used, the kind of tournament rules in place and the skill level of the other coaches are all unknowns. I did notice that the Chaos team in particular has responded to this team by taking a whole lot of tackle.

BTW, Ockham Razors is a clever team name!

[Ghost of Pariah]

I think before this sillyness goes any further and we have 10 columns on the roster, I think they need to try loosening the cuffs on fouling. Put mighty blow back the way it was.
I say let fouling be as deadly as ever but make the penalties stiffer. Softening up casualties and fouling was the biggest mistake of the latest editions. It doesn't solve the problem. Make fouling deadly and penalize those who do it. Player turn over is easily achieved with death.
Retirement blows. I don't even like getting SPP's anymore. I don't want my team to grow in experience because it just shrinks in power. What is the point of building up players if it means I just have to retire him?

So what I'm hearing is that the EXP system will kick in a 7 SPP's or 7 EXP? What difference does it make if I age on my first skill or the very next game? This is dumb. Scrap the EXP system and just say that nobody ages on their first skill. Use the SI table and be done with it.
Why use this EXP system if it's going to get all complex? I think it's an ok system but not if you are gonna make it too complicated!

Here- Use MVP system. Shift the table up one skill so that no ageing happens on first skill, and then have all ageing effects be niggles and have niggles cause +1 to the injury table.

What is so hard? We don't need another column. We don't need complicated systems. We need more dead players.