My new proposition to replace aging

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:18 pm

Oh yer i forgot about the 6 skips it, i think it could be a good system to test.

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:20 pm

Apparently there is no lack of good ideas to replace aging. This is also a good one, but surely it would require some simplification to be popular.

But definitely the chance of aging becomes too high at some point - if there are two aging results in almost every three games, it's way too much. Either there needs to be more no effect results in the aging table or the odds of aging need to be made smaller.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:25 pm

It is simple you have 56 spp you have to roll over 5 on 2d6 or get a 6 on one of the dice. Maybe rolling a 5or6 on either die would curb things abit at higher spp levels.

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:42 pm

Yeah, I like tis system but I think the randomness factor could be a problem.

I agree with Mestari. There are lots of good systems to replace ageing. Now we just need a majority to settle on one. lol

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:48 pm

Its no more random than anything else thats been suggested is it?

Ghost of Pariah · Post by **Ghost of Pariah** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 10:56 pm

Well I guess the no age on a any 6 is what I mean. On 3D6 that can happen a lot. Especially when Nuffle is controlling the dice.

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Sun Feb 16, 2003 11:01 pm

You need something like that if your rolling every match though don't you.
EXP you roll 2+ and you don't age that happens even more ;]

Mestari · Post by **Mestari** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 7:06 am

Pariah wrote:Well I guess the no age on a any 6 is what I mean. On 3D6 that can happen a lot. Especially when Nuffle is controlling the dice.

Chances of not rolling a six are 125/216

This means that approximately every second game you have to roll for aging if your SPP's exceed the limit. IMO this is too often.

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 9:32 am

Ok, so right now the proposed system is the following. Same as original, except that you roll 2D6 (any 6 saves the day) and divide SPPs by 10. It's a lot less deadly. Any other opinions, comments or criticism?

Grumbledook · Post by **Grumbledook** » Mon Feb 17, 2003 6:08 pm

Maybe any 5 or 6 saves you from aging, if just a 6 is too uncomman.

Sushé Wakka · Post by **Sushé Wakka** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:18 am

What about avoiding WAT when the difference beetwen the two dice scores is one (i.e. 3 and 2, 5 and 6, etc...)? Not only is an original mechanic but it can happen more often than a lonely 6 (didn't calculate the chance so I might be wrong, however).

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:30 am

Actually, that happens much less often.

Sushé Wakka · Post by **Sushé Wakka** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 9:33 am

Ooops

Do you have the numbers?

Zombie · Post by **Zombie** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 10:03 am

Actually, now that i actually did the calculations, to my surprise it's much closer than i thought, though still lower.

The chance of a 6 with either die is 11/36, or almost 1 in 3.

The chance of getting to consecutive numbers is as follows. If the first die comes up a 1 or a 6 (i.e. 1/3 of the time), it's 1 in 6. For anything else, it's 1 in 3. So you have 1/3 * 1/6 + 2/3 * 1/3 = 10/36.

In any case, one of the reasons that i liked the 6 rule was that it fits with the general BB rule that a 6 always succeeds and it's pretty intuitive.

Indigo · Post by **Indigo** » Tue Feb 18, 2003 10:30 am

not wanting to get too much into the statistics here, it seems like all of ideas we have solve the problem in the main, it is just the extremes that dont work, i.e. some target low experience teams, and others target more experienced teams.

it might be better to work towards a system that changes depending on the SPP of the player for example. Although I am happy with my fitness system, I can see it's drawbacks and that is the area I am addressing.

I do have the feeling though that whatever system we find will increase book-keeping. Still, IMO, since we are developing a system for LONG TERM leagues, then a reasonable amount of book keeping is to be expected - if you dont like it, play shorter leagues!

I'll let you know if I have any further ideas...