Talk Fantasy Football

Do you think we should track Games Played for each player?

If i understand u correctly, i say no. I believe there is a big difference between being in the reserves except for one turn and going in every drive. Trying to track who was really in the game and who just popped in to show their faces could cause many arguments. Im assuming your inquiring as a part of some alternative aging system.

Well as I brought up this idea, I have to clarify that I meant to add for simplicity sake every game the player participated (be it on the bench or on the field).

This would keep it simple and is as far as my opinion goes far better than an ageing roll that is tied to star player points.

Keep in mind that under the actual rules an player that receives fortunately some MVPs could also age without any pitch-presence in the past games.

I think its very good to link ageing with leveling up.

It gives player development a nice touch and creates very unique players.
Simply forcing coaches to throw away a player after lets say 20 Games does not add fun. The current system adds a lot of exitement, and Blance to play inferior, younger teams as well.

What i would like to see is the following:

Each niggling injury can only be gained once, forced by ageing or by a casualty. That limits the maximum ever possible niggling injuries to 5, just as statistic changes are limited by +/- 2 from the players Basic value.

Coaches can choose to increase/decrease either Agility or Strength because the chance to suffer a decrease of a statistic during a players career is raised a lot by ageing and in my oppinion it would not be fun to play if high level players are rendered completely unplayable by ageing.

I'm just a newbie still, but...

Toby wrote:Each niggling injury can only be gained once, forced by ageing or by a casualty. That limits the maximum ever possible niggling injuries to 5, just as statistic changes are limited by +/- 2 from the players Basic value.

I agree.

Additionally, it might be nice to remember which niggling injuries a player has, just to give them a bit more personality.

I agree it should be recorded in the injuries box

I voted no, because I'm not sure to see an interest to a personal game played by players... As said before, it's not the same playing an entire match against orcs, from which a player (if he's still alive would have learnt a lot of things, and come on the pitch just after the touchdown, in turn 6 on the second period... So an ageing roll, or experience, or anything which has to see with it linking with the number of matches shouldn't add more realism, or something like that to the game... Of course, I'm sure you have an idea behind this poll; so I would be very happy if exaplining more your idea changes my opinion ;o)

I voted Yes..... but I pressed the wrong button

I meant to vote NO.


What value does tracking games played per player add?


Dave

Dangerous Dave wrote:What value does tracking games played per player add?

Some very minor statistical stuff, like TDs/Game, and Casualties caused per game.

You tell me. I just wrote the poll

...you just record against each game the number of the game (starting with 1). Against each player, when hired, write the number of his first game. This is minimal book-keeping.

Then you will always know how many games he has played (although you won't know if he spent his time eating sticky buns and McMurty burgers on the reserves bench).

Cheers

Smeborg the Fleshless

Toby: I have not told anything about throwing away your player after 20 games.

To me it makes much more sense to make an ageing roll for a player every 10 or 20 games he has participated instead of having it tied to the star player rolls. If you tie the ageing roll to the star player roll, the active players age faster than other players and that feels not very right to me.

DFC: although you are right that a game against orcs is far more demanding than a game against halflings, I am against differing different opponents, or the fact if the player sat on the bench for the whole match.
To add the games played is far simpler and would be enough.

I cannot understand, that there are sane people here that would prefer the actual aging rule over this new try ... until now I did not hear a single logic argument why the actual rules should be better, soenlighten me please.

neoliminal wrote:

Dangerous Dave wrote:What value does tracking games played per player add?

Some very minor statistical stuff, like TDs/Game, and Casualties caused per game.

Exactly.
I loove statistics. That's the why I voted yes.
There is no other reason for keeping record of games played than for statistical purposes: no point making aging dependent on them.

Its not about ageing, its about balancing the high level players and introduce a reason to replace "complete" players from time to time.
Hard in English; A Player without SPP has not changed, thers no reason to balance him and thers no reason to replace him because there are still all options for him to develop.

I think its completely wrong to regard ageing as getting old. Its more about getting screwed up in the heat of battle.

The candles that burn brighter fade faster !

Lol how poetic what i really wantet to say is theres a curve in player development and the avarage Player will have his carrer high with 4 Star PlayerRolls; Few will make it higher and still be "perfect".

I voted no ... i have some players who don't really get that many SPP as i would like, and, say, they have come up with 0 SPP in 5 games. What have they learnt? Experience? (Hobbos have been poking their noses while the chaos Dwarves Smash the field, and i should call them 'experienced'?)

I think the rule of ageing linked to SPP gained is ok IMO

Okay, now at least I understand some of you - I still do not agree because I see ageing as a balancing tool for high experienced players not very fitting.

That opens the point if you need an ageing rule at all - in my homebrew league the balancing tool is an increase in the money you have to pay to a Star Player (I changed fore this sake winnings tablet a bit).

I still like the GP counter for statistic sake.