What is the best method of curbing team growth?

[Sixpack595]

Does it matter who complains about it? I'm sure the mark of a good idea, is who comes up with it, not the idea itself.

What exactly makes someone a "pro"? Is there a union we need to join? Should I claim my BB winning on my taxes?

My current impression is that these people who are complaining about one-turners are the same people who complain about "cage-stallers" and want SPPs for fouling back.

<snip>

So again my questions towards the "pros": Are one-turners broken or are they not?

No one wants to be in a situation where they just sit there and have no way of stopping a score. Are they broken? Yes if they can ride the bench when their team is down a few guys. As long as you must field 11 theres a way to get rid of them, and keep them from being a problem. Any player that is unstoppable is a problem.

[wesleytj]

So again my questions towards the "pros": Are one-turners broken or are they not?

Back in pure 3rd ed, I was always the person defending 1-turn scoring as a legitimate tactic that a good coach could overcome, with proper use of their resources. There were plenty of ways to stop a 1-turn scorer. Some of these include cards and wizards.

However, now that cards are gone, and wizards are all but gone, I'm not so sure. I don't think there's a reliable in-game mechanic for stopping a 1-turn scorer, and therefore I think it could be broken. Pretty much all you can do is make your best set up, and hope they fail a roll somewhere.

[lawquoter]

Having just gotten torched by a one-turner, I admit it was frustrating. It didn't seem to matter how I set up, he made every dodge, and vrooom! Td. I take 4-5 turns with orcs to tie. Td. But he worked hard to develop the guy, so I don't begrudge that. I just wish I had a better chance to splatter his guts all over the pitch (both foul attempts failed miserably).

[sean newboy]

I voted for other. I want exp with some changes. Hadnt voted b4 because i thot Zombies was more complete. Happy now Pariah, some more support for exp but with changes.

[NightDragon]

I really don't see why we should be worried about curbing growth at all untill you get past 300 SPP's. Seeing players develop is great. Why do we need aging etc in the first place? If it was because new coaches were getting put off because they were losing, then grow up and come back when your more mature. Let teams develop up to a certain point, no aging et al at all to clutter it all up, and then put the breaks on by having a TR limit. Simple and fair.