BB2 Full listof changes to crp

[MattDakka]

Also: the simplest implemention to avoid hoarding of cash is to limit treasury to 150k, no petty cash or money spent on inducements allowed.

This. If you want to prevent teams from hoarding gold just cap the Treasury at 150k, keep the things simple.
The problem is 150k might be not enough to replace a couple of core expensive positional players, maybe a cap of 200k or 250k would be better.
I'd allow coaches to put money from the Treasury to the Petty Cash to buy inducements (as the current rule).
With such limited Treasury staying at high TV for long would be harder.

[koadah]

If you are going to cap it I'd say cap it at 250 or 300.

There is no point having a market place if no one has enough money to buy more than a rookie positional.

[plasmoid]

I think the hard part of any Bank rule is finding the right cap.
If you set it too low, then certain things will be hard/impossible to buy. Think Deathroller, 70K reroll doubled - or Bloodthirster if you like.
If you set it too high, then it won't impact anything. And from the comments I've been getting, some coaches will only be satisfied if the cap allows them to replace 4 dead players at any time.

PBBL-Bank (and my rewrite/tweak) tries to solve this conflict by allowing the first 150K, and then shifting to a sliding scale after that.

Cheers
Martin

[Jimmy Fantastic]

Hi again Jimmy,

Wait... what? You pushed your rule to cyanide knowing they would use it primarily for TV based MM ... and didn't consider this?

No Jimmy, I didn't push this to Cyanide. I put it on my website a few years ago, in order to easier explain what the Bank rule does to everyone used to the Petty Cash rules (which were instated with the CRP).
And no, as stated, I didn't consider it.

Now you claim it will never ever come up... see what I mean about being dishonest?

No Jimmy, I don't see. All I see is a pattern in your posting style.
I don't now claim that it will never ever come up.
I just claim that it will never ever come up.
Which is why I didn't consider it.
I gave you a description of why it will not happen. Do you disagree with that description?
Do you disagree that teams in a TV-matched open League will not endure game after game of getting hammered by increasingly harsh opposing freebies, while they build up a treasury.
If anything, your own resistance to the very Bank concept is that coaches will actually be forced to stay under the cap and not have a huge treasury.

After I told you.

Yes. Because I hadn't considered it. Any chance you could respond tothe questions I then asked? Or are you happy to just get your rage on?

But as you say on your blog:

Well guess what? Petty cash has been playtested in literally millions of games and works fine.

I'm glad you say that it works fine and has done so for a long time, because that's why I used it as a framework for my Bank rewrite.

But hey, we should totally use the only rule that the creator of Bloodbowl felt was bad enough to veto

If you had been around, or had bothered to check, you'd now that what caused the veto was that he found 2 treasuries to be too complex. So I'm completely with you, when you say that we shouldn't bring in 2 treasuries. After all, JJ vetoed it.

What I brought into the framework of a tried and tested rule sanctioned by JJ himself was the idea of a cap, which he didn't object openly to. And I didn't push either of the Bank rules to Cyanide. As I believe you have already been told.

Cheers
Martin

Well done, nothing I could come up with would be as damning as your own posts.

[dode74]

Hi Dode,

Martin - the final result is not the same. The final result is that the players no longer have to try to work out what they will need in terms of treasury cash BEFORE they know who they will play. It removes a layer of strategy and risk.

The Cash generated when the teams are compared is the same.
Also, having played with the PBBL version of the Bank, I can not wrap my head around how you can call it "a layer of strategy" to 'choose' blindfolded (which is what you're doing when you have zero idea whether you'll be facing Chaos or High Elfs). That's not strategy. That's totally random.

Cheers
Martin

It's risk management. You can choose, or not choose, to top up the 70k from your 220k with 30k from your 150k or not. If you already know who your opponent is you know whether or not you will need it.

[MattDakka]

I think the hard part of any Bank rule is finding the right cap.
If you set it too low, then certain things will be hard/impossible to buy. Think Deathroller, 70K reroll doubled - or Bloodthirster if you like.
If you set it too high, then it won't impact anything. And from the comments I've been getting, some coaches will only be satisfied if the cap allows them to replace 4 dead players at any time.

I think that 250k -300k should work fine, still better than no cap at all.
Not so low, not so high and no need to write clunky rules.

[VoodooMike]

The Bank rules (which, for full disclosure, I think are bad in any form) were put forward as having two major benefits:

1) Under Bank rules the Team Value you arrive at a match with is the team value that inducements will be based on regardless of how much of your treasury you choose to spend. Under Petty Cash that isn't the case... the effective TV can move around, and is especially hard to manage when the underdog wants to spend additional gold.

2) Restricting the amount of gold that a team can hoard brings all teams, bashy and agility alike, into closer balance as the more robust teams can no longer save up a ton of gold in order to have an infinite ability to rebuild as compared to their squishier counterparts.

Now, of the two only the first one was ever an actual benefit. The second point is total crap - the teams that tend to build up large treasuries are teams that also tend to have less expensive replacement players, and less need to buy them which is precisely why they end up building a huge pile of gold. The teams that need the gold tend to have higher priced replacement players and need them replaced more often - limiting their stockpiling of gold is even more of a kick in the teeth to them.

The plasmoid-buggered version manages to keep all the downsides of the original Bank rules while tossing out the one thing that it had going for it. Being able to spend your banked gold as well either alters the TV, requiring a re-calculation of the TV for the match, or it allows for the addition of up to 150k worth of inducements that aren't counted as part of TV, depending on how you implement it... but regardless of how its implemented, it's simply the worst aspects of bank and petty cash combined.

I'm not a big fan of the petty cash rules... nor of the bank rules... but combining them is stupid.

[garion]

+1
Absolutely nailed it.

[odinsgrandson]

Hi Jimmy.

I am used to Petty Cash rule. Plasmoid suggests forced use of Petty Cash above the bank limit. How is this horrible? It seems simple enough?

Yeah, I don't seem to see the trouble with it either. I mean, it is a change, but I'm not one to argue that change is always terrible.

This seems like a neutral alteration to me.

[Jimmy Fantastic]

See VoodooMike's excellent explanation.

[plasmoid]

Hi Dode,

It's risk management. You can choose, or not choose, to top up the 70k from your 220k with 30k from your 150k or not. If you already know who your opponent is you know whether or not you will need it.

To me that sounds like Ben Brode of the Hearthstone devs explaining that for every random element they add, the game becomes more and more about skill, because only a skilled player can deal with all that randomness.

I have played under the PBBL Bank rule quite a bit, and in my experience, people just banked everything because you didn't know whether you'd be matched against an overdog (where you might have gotten the Cash for free anyway) or an underdog - where an available reserve might make sense, or might turn the underdogs inducements into far more severe inducements.

I should note that the rule was written in 2009, before Cyanide and before FUMBBL went CRP, so at the time no thought (or testing) was given to huge TV-matched environments, where you can actually expect to be matched against same TV.

PBBL Bank rule led to throwing away cash. Which isn't neccessarily devastating, but certainly not liked by all (e.g. Garion). My Petty Cash version makes the cash reserve more flexible, making cash more likely to be spent than burned.

Either way, I unlocked the lizardmen/Wood elfs DLC yesterday, and stumbled on a PM from 18 months ago: And I'm now absolutely certain that Cyanide understood the primacy of the PBBL Bank rule.

Cheers
Martin

[plasmoid]

Hi Mike,
I'm not exactly sure who put forward those advantages that you mention. Here's how it went down:

1) By decree to the BBRC from JJ, the Perpetual Blood Bowl rules were supposed to have team TV wax and wane. A team staying at high TV would be bad in the league settings that he considered. Also, the TV cap that he imagined teams waxing and waning around was lower than would have been liked by most FUMBBL or Cyanide coaches. There was originally a "no income at all" cap at TV200 or 220 (Can't remember). I believe the thinking was that at high TV the balance breaks down - leaving the advantage to teams that start out stat heavy and progress well with skills (while skill heavy starters need very good skill rolls to get the same value from their SPPs).

2) The hard cash cap was later replaced with SE's - but the idea was the same: To limit a team's ability to stay at high TV. A huge treasury almost completely Blocks that mechanism, letting a team stay up very long. That's not to say that all high TV teams are good. TV can easily be bloated. But a lean high TV team was considered a dominating force in any league.

That is why a Bank rule was added. In fact what specifically happened was that JJ wanted all cash to count towards TV. But discussion revealed that this was way too harsh on anyone trying to save for anything. Which is why a "TV free" cash zone was created - The Bank.

So - to address your #2, I don't think that this was so much about bash vs finesse. A fully blodged up elf team can for most opponents be very hard both to deal with and to ever tear down.

Furthermore to the examples you give:
The bashy team you describe at high TV would have (almost) no income. So eventually players would get busted up or die - not just linemen - and the coach would have to come down for cash. (Unless he had a huge stockpile of cash).
A massive elf team would have the same problem.
But most squishy teams - especially those with expensive linemen - rarely reach a 150K treasury anyway, because they need to replace (expensive) players. So they're unlikely to ever hit that cap in a setting without friendlies/fakes, but if they do, 150K + winnings from the game is a start. Edit: Hey - that's 3-4 skaven linemen, perhaps Elfs need to whine less. Elf coaches could maybe only replace 2 players rather than the 3. That's the waxing and waning.

So that's the reason for the Bank rule.
Maybe it is outdated now.
But it was in PBBL for the reasons mentioned.
Which put it on "Galak's list". Which put it in Plasmoids CRP+. [No, I don't enjoy speaking about myself in the 3rd person, but Dode has commanded that I call it so.]
I have no idea why Cyanide chose to adopt it - as they have a TV-matched environment, and on top of that an environment where huge teams will just play other huge teams instead of dominating small teams. But I am certain that they actively discarded the PBBL version, and went looking for their own version of a Bank rule. No doubt inspired by (but not identical to) mine.

Now, regarding your #1:
Yes, the PBBL version is in that regard simpler than my version. And to you and other, that makes it better. All good.

These are the differences that could make others prefer mine:
1) As described in my previos post, the inflexibilty of the PBBL Bank leads to burning cash.
1b) Merging Bank with Petty Cash rules makes it more flexible - and let's you make an informed decision on what to do with your cash.
2) My version does not require any changes to other rules - i.e. it does not require a removal of the existing Petty Cash rule. Which might appeal to some. Perhaps to Cyanide?
3) My version does not have 2 treasuries. JJ found that to be too complicated. Perhaps this was also the reason that Cyanide discarded that version? (Personally, I don't think 2 treasuries were particularly complicated).

Cheers
Martin

[nonumber]

It's an atrocimacy!!!!!

[koadah]

... Plasmoids CRP+. [No, I don't enjoy speaking about myself in the 3rd person, but Dode has commanded that I call it so.]

It sounds stupid. Go back to calling it just CRP+. How many CRP+s are there that we need to know that it is "Plasmoid's". Dode & Co will not stop moaning whatever you do. May as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb.

I assume that Cyanide want to keep cash down so that Manchester City/Chelsea type teams cannot immediately replace a dead superstar with another superstar via the market place.

I would agree that on-line coaches would probably not want their teams to fall too low in TV when they have no cash to rebuild them.

[plasmoid]

Hi Koadah,
the Marketplace thing makes a lot of sense. (To me at least). That might be the reason they've opted for Bank - seeing as how they have included very few other rules cchanges (delibarately )
Cheers
Martin