Solution to Uberteam domination

CplSaint · Post by **CplSaint** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 2:23 pm

Now, don't get me wrong; I love leagues with powerful teams, but there's only so much you can do in a league with a dozen 400+ TR teams... So I've created some rules that encourage (i.e. Force) coaches to keep some rookies on their team - just in case...

The peaking table stops players advancing too far; just as in real life you have superstars and good players who aren't going to get better.
The table also means that some players will retire, encouraging coaches to maintain a 'rolling' team development system. It also helps combat teams which rely too heavily on one or two stars and have nine Joes.

Hopefully, the peaking table will help rookie teams integrate more quickly into a bigger league, since it 'tops off' the level teams can reach, and more importantly, maintain. It doesn't stop you getting very tough teams, but it does encourage coaches to keep buying new players etc. In my opinion, this is very fun, since it has the dual effect of making leagues more fun for Rookies (since they will quickly catch up with bigger name opposition) and also importantly makes leagues more fun for Veteran coaches (because they have to maintain a tough team, and can't just rely on the same old players forever.) It's not too tough on old coaches - I think you ought to be rewarded for having coached your teams to the heights, but it introduces an very basic element of management into the game.

Now, less waffling from me and more action!

I'd really appreciate some feedback.

Peaking rolls are taken in addition to Aging rolls:

For every player who gains a skill upgrade, roll 2D6 and consult the following table
<2-7: No effect; the player is still in the prime of his career
8-10: The player 'peaks', and is a good as he is going to get. He may no longer gain any skills from SPPs, for any reason, and as a result, may never progress. Note that you should still note down SPPs he receives, as he may swallow MVP awards, and still suffers from aging.
11->12: The player decides to pack up his armour and settle down with a nice cottage in the country/hut in the wasteland/Patch in the mud. The player retires, and is deleted from the team roster. He may be used as an assistant coach for free.

The following modifiers apply:
First skill/upgrade from SPPs: -4
Second skill/upgrade from SPPs: -2
Third skill/upgrade from SPPs: -1
Fourth and Subsequent skills/upgrades from SPPs: +/-0
Player has Niggling Injury: +1 for each niggling injury.

This stops teams from getting better and better. In addition, if you maintain the same teams from one year to the next, all players with three or more skills/upgrades retire, as 11-12 above on a D6 roll of 3+ (no modifiers)

Well, that's it. Any constructive comments will be appreciated. (Any flames will be laughed at - Ha ha!

)

Post by **Thadrin** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 8:03 pm

Not bad....I like the concept if not the execution.

Retirements should be a coaches decision and not a roll.

I'd prefer a positive modifier for number of skills and a higher "peaked" score.

I'd like to see some testing.

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Sat Aug 31, 2002 11:05 pm

I don't mind the idea of a roll for retirement and your idea doesn't look too bad. You might continue the mods on you table, give a +1 for fifth upgrade, +2 for sixth , etc. Maybe have the roll after every niggle past the first (inj tend to force players to retire early or reduce their playing skills).

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 12:26 am

You could try putting an interseason player transfer system in place. Force coaches to pay a certain amount to keep players.

One system we toyed with involved allowing you to pay 10k per die. For every die you had you could select a number of them to roll to try to beat a player's SPP total. If you succeed the money is gone and the player stays. If you fail you keep the money and the player is transferred to another league (removed from the roster) and replaced with a rookie.

Marcus

sean newboy · Post by **sean newboy** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 1:01 am

I would rather make "peaking" a result of the aging table, that is on a roll of x the player is peaked and may no longer get any advances, although he does still accumulate spp's.

Lucien Swift · Post by **Lucien Swift** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 2:02 am

with the current winnings table and aging system (and any slight variation on that aging system that'll come along sooner or later) yo just won't see teams around tr 400 anymore....

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 1:32 pm

The top out with the current rules is definitely somewhere between TR 250 and 300.

Galak

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 1:40 pm

CplSaint: very fine rule you made.

We have an very similar rule in our league (without the peaking) and it works just fine.

Very good way to go and much better than ageing. Let me hear how it works in your league.

wesleytj · Post by **wesleytj** » Sun Sep 01, 2002 2:51 pm

I think this concept would be great instead of ageing, but I don't like both. Now for every skill roll a player gets to get better, he has to roll TWICE to see if he gets worse? That seems like way too much for the average coach to swallow.

OTOH, I do think the "peaked" special play card had a definite role to play in keeping team ratings reasonable, and keeping individual players from getting out of hand, which is what you've said you're working on here.

The thing is I'm still trying to push the artificial cap the current rules have set up, and this brings it down even more.

Relborn · Post by **Relborn** » Mon Sep 02, 2002 7:00 am

I thought of it instead of ageing ... sorry

Lucien Swift · Post by **Lucien Swift** » Mon Sep 02, 2002 2:12 pm

even if you dropped the aging system altogether, the new winnings table would still top-out teams under 400... when they've got zero cash coming in each game, and a player getting killed every once in a while, your tr doesn't go up as fast on spp's as it goes down on corpses carted off...