Aging and Peaking combined

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 7:19 am

Hi, I've been out of blood bowl for about 5 months and am just catching up on all the magazines and threads.

Here's my opinion on how to prevent players from playing forever.
Combine both aging and peaking.
Aging stays the same but after an aging roll also make a peaked player roll.
The peaked roll starts with the 2nd skill. Roll a D6.
2nd skill 2+
3rd skill 3+
4th skill 4+
5th skill 5+
6th skill 6+

This prevents needing to keep track of another stat that increases book keeping and another needless stat.

Brings back peaking which I always thought was ok. The exception is that peaked players continue to get SPP's. So the managing of the team comes into play to know the right time to let a player loose. I also think that the peaked player adds "realism" to the game. Not every player has the stuff to become a superstar.

Also aging works ok...with the wear and tear on the bones.

Combined both would make managing a team more strategic.

Ken

NightDragon · Post by **NightDragon** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 8:36 am

I don't agree. I don't like peaking at all and aging is OK in concept but not realistic. Much better to just set a TR limit and allow any injury to be a roll on the table.

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:33 am

I don't understand your last segment saying all injury rolls will be on the table.

Also currently any bloodbowl player can become a superstar. By peaking not everyone has the right "stuff" to become a stud. This would be the difference between a #1 draft pic and a walk on. By keeping the spp's rolling players would continue to play but at some point their TR contribution will outwiegh the benifits of keeping them on the team. Then it's time for that player to retire. But it's the owner's choice of when this happens instead of having to cut a player before your next game no matter what because you're over the TR cap.

Ken

Princelucianus · Post by **Princelucianus** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 12:06 pm

My god, I must be the only one (almost) together with our league, who like the ageing rules. I've also had my fair double 1's on first skill and hideous decreases on good players (I have a 5 3 3 8 dark elf lineman after 2 decreases

That's life isn't it. You buy a player, and find out he
-simply trains less.
-started to use drugs
-family inhereted sickness starts revealing
-slept with the wrong woman
and a dozen other reasons why ageing happens. But it doesn't bother me, because it also happens to the other teams.

Lucy

D'Arquebus · Post by **D'Arquebus** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 12:19 pm

Princelucianus wrote

My god, I must be the only one (almost) together with our league, who like the ageing rules. I've also had my fair double 1's on first skill and hideous decreases on good players (I have a 5 3 3 8 dark elf lineman after 2 decreases
That's life isn't it. You buy a player, and find out he
-simply trains less.
-started to use drugs
-family inhereted sickness starts revealing
-slept with the wrong woman
and a dozen other reasons why ageing happens. But it doesn't bother me, because it also happens to the other teams.

Lucy

With me and my league, that makes at least two Lucy. Your reasoning for the ageing falls in line with my suggestion to simply rename the roll EGO. Becoming a superstar gives the player a swollen sense of their own worth and they become less competent, for the reasons you listed.

As to the peaked result, I think this could play a roll in a slightly revised version of the current ageing table. I agree that some rolls really destroy certain players and could perhaps be toned down. Still the current system is the best I've seen so far.

You can possibly make a 'god' player but not a whole team, so he can then be picked off on the field by opposition. Also it allows for the coach to struggle on with aged players if they wish or cut them to be replaced. That decision remaining in the coaches hands (vs a more restrictive TR/salary cap) is also to the good.

Post by **Dave** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 2:53 pm

I likem to, but want to see them slightly improved. No peaking pleese

Skummy · Post by **Skummy** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 4:07 pm

I'm very happy with the current aging rules. Peaking has always seemed like a bit too much of a manufactured game mechanic to me, and anyway I'd rather have a niggle than be peaked. I'd like to see a league playtest niggles giving +1 to injury, though.

MistWraith · Post by **MistWraith** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 4:16 pm

We have been testing this out (the nigglers adding +1 to injury). It has worked out well so far. But, we have only doen one season (10 games per team).

Sixpack595 · Post by **Sixpack595** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:50 am

Why does Ageing suck? My Orc team has hit 210 without an ageing stick...1 single skill BOB got aged, but then died... there are teams with multiple ageings that have won 1 out of 10 games with a TR of under 150. How does that support ageing? The sad fact is that ageing can hit the shitty teams, but well implimented Salary caps, or appearance fees don't.

Princelucianus · Post by **Princelucianus** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 10:19 am

Teams will equal out in the end. So, unlucky starts will change in the long run. I had a team that got hurt bad by ageing, but since I had to fire several players, my TR remained pretty low, and I was able to keep my luckier players. When you play with AF's, you may simply not play with your better players. I've tried it and it sucks. During the AF's time, I had to pay for several players and it sucked bigtime. Ageing allows you to build a better team (where you can actually play with) than AF's. I can't judge the salary cap system though.

Why should my hobgoblins or zombies start to ask for money suddenly.

Lucy

Post by **Dave** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 10:53 am

yep, they'll steal it or do not need it...

(or can't use it??)

NightDragon · Post by **NightDragon** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:39 pm

There are better ways than peaking to retire players. That is too forced.