Why are mercenaries +30K?

[el Superbeasto]

It's not that I don't understand the rules per se, so if this is the wrong forum, I apologise. (I was/am a bit unsure as to where this question belong...)

Anyway, I was just wondering; what's the reasoning for making mercenaries +30K in price?
You're the underdog, you hire a player, who is worse than normal (Loner), but you have to pay more for him/her? I just don't understand the argument for the added price, but maybe I'm overlooking something?

[dode74]

He's a private contractor, and they cost more the world over

More seriously, some players don't lose out from having loner: big guys in particular already have it.

[Regash]

This is just a guess but, as an inducement, you basically get them for free if you're the underdog team.
If the stronger teams wants them, they have to pay more, giving you even more money to play with.

Maybe some kind of balancing?
I don't know...

[el Superbeasto]

He's a private contractor, and they cost more the world over

More seriously, some players don't lose out from having loner: big guys in particular already have it.

Even still; why make the underdog pay more for the player? His/her team is already weaker than the opponent's. (Yes, I know. You could also buy a mercenary for petty cash even though you're not the underdog, but that would still raise your TV equally, so there's not much gained as opposed to just buying the player.)

[adhansa]

Higher TV teams are supposed to have an advantage on lower TV-teams. It's the driving factor teambuilding more rewarding. If the best thing was always to choose some inducements over some permanemt parts of your team then there would be no purpose to try to skill players or develop the team.

Sp the most TV-efficient things are supposed to be those permant on your rosters and inducements are supposed to be less TV-effecient.

Beacause of the above,, because inducements are more versatile and because you don't worry about them taking permanent damage there must be substansial perks buying ordinary watercarriers.

[Loki]

Part of it may be that inducements are supposed to close the gap between the High and Low team but it is not supposed to make them equal.

[Darkson]

For all the reasons mentioned above, and because it allows you to temporarily replace a missing skilled positional, something you can't do without them.

For example, humans have a MB/Tackle/Dauntless Blitzer with a MNG. With the Merc rule, the player can take a Merc Blitzer so still able to field 4 (which he can skill up specifically to face his opponent). Without the Merc rule he either has to just play the next game with 3, or cut his skilled player and play with a rookie.

[el Superbeasto]

Part of it may be that inducements are supposed to close the gap between the High and Low team but it is not supposed to make them equal.

Makes sense.

For all the reasons mentioned above, and because it allows you to temporarily replace a missing skilled positional, something you can't do without them.

For example, humans have a MB/Tackle/Dauntless Blitzer with a MNG. With the Merc rule, the player can take a Merc Blitzer so still able to field 4 (which he can skill up specifically to face his opponent). Without the Merc rule he either has to just play the next game with 3, or cut his skilled player and play with a rookie.

This has more to do with the use of mercenaries in general than with the +30K cost. You could still do all of the above without adding 30K to the price.

[Darkson]

This has more to do with the use of mercenaries in general than with the +30K cost. You could still do all of the above without adding 30K to the price.

You could, but then it would make inducements "better" than they're designed to be - the 30k is a "cost" for the flexibility that the other team doesn't get.

In the same vein you can argue that all Star Players are overpriced, which that are deliberately, and thatStars can do the same job without the "Star tax".
If the idea of inducements were to have been to balance the game perfectly (or at least, as near as possible) then there wouldn't be the extras costs involved, but that would have defeated the object of team-building.

[Chris]

I find the adding a skill for 50k to be a bit harsh... 80k over the odds for a blitzer with say guard, I know it should eb less ineffient, but in effect 4 times the cost of the skill?

[babass]

you can argue that all Star Players are overpriced

if i remember correctly an article on Fumbbl.
Not all of them are overpriced.

And the "overpriced" may change a lot depending of the roster hiring a starplayer (example: Roxanna is less overpriced for Amazons than for Dark Elves)

[rolo]

I think the FumBBL article calculates the "value" of star players just by figuring out what a position player with those stats would cost in Team Value.

But some star players are more valuable than that ... for example, Slibli is a Saurus with four "normal" skills and +MV. By the "formula", he should cost 80k + 4*20k + 30k = 190k and actually costs 250k.

But I consider him one of the best value Star Players in the game, because he lets Lizardmen field an extra Saurus! With the Krox, that's 8 +ST players and that's a problem for anyone to deal with. Not to mention 8 players protecting 3 Skinks.

That doesn't affect the calculus for Mercenaries, because you have to have a "free" Roster sport for a Merc. I suspect that the logic behind the extra cost is to make them a little worse than Journeymen. The Journeymen rule is intended to make sure you can always field 11 players, after that it "should" be a little bit more expensive to fill up your bench.

[Wifflebat]

I think it's mostly what Darkson said--if Mercenaries weren't marked up you could game the system by cutting players to keep a low TV, then hire players with the skills you need based on your next match. Make sure your opponents all are 200K higher than you, then hire a blitzer with tackle or a sprinting catcher as need be.

[GalakStarscraper]

Since you can create a Merc to match a situation. Guard to help with strength, Tackle to help with Dodge ... they are a flexible resource. As such that resource needs a tax on it.

Even a base merc is a flexible resource allowing you to not play a positional down. The Mercs are not supposed to perfectly level the playing field ... just give the underdog a chance. We worked to make sure that team development was not meaningless.

[stashman]

Chaos Pact Marauder Merc with Leader 130k
Reroll 100k
A bargain. 130k for a player and a reroll