Change niggling injury?

Evolve To Anarchism · Thu Jan 01, 2004 11:00 pm

A few questions that might be worth discussing:

Q1) Would this rule change disproportionately affect certain races?
D1) Teams that are more resilient would probably benefit from this rule change but that's just my first impression. More discussion is welcome.

Q2) How would this affect handicaps?
D2) FUMBBL, which is where I primarily play, uses an effective strength system to help coaches find balanced matches, so I don't feel overly qualified to address this issue. Teams with niggled players would suffer more in a conventional league that used a handicap table because they would be carrying even more useless TR than they already are.

Q3) Is this meant to encourage coaches to retire players with a single niggling injury?
D3) I hope this is not the goal, as this would seem to be a blow to low AV teams. Do low AV teams dominate leagues that use handicap tables? On the other hand, I'd like to believe that this might be a measure to encourage coaches to retire players with 2 niggling injuries. It might be informative to see the math for the average number of turns missed with rolling at half time.

Q4) Isn't it important to discuss this proposed change in conjunction with the concept of removing ageing from the game?
D4) If ageing is removed, the frequency of those important double nigglers would decrease and seriously effect the severity of this change.

Q5) Is this proposed changed based motivated by seeing the number of high TR teams with lots of nigglers on FUMBBL and other online "leagues"?
D5) As a coach who's got a few high TR teams with alot of nigglers (I keep them largely for roleplaying reasons), I can tell you that if a handicap system were implemented, I think you'd see the number of multi-niggled stars drop immensely. I'd be tempted to think that a 2nd niggle would probably send you right into an assistant coach position. I think a good handicap system would encourage more player turnover.

Q6) Why do you want to increase the severity of niggling injuries?
D6) I'll conclude with probably the most important question.

I hope this helps spur some discussion much needed discussion.

As Always,
Evolve To Anarchism
Free Theme Music For Your Blood Bowl Team

kadu-c · Post by **kadu-c** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 12:17 am

I voted "roll before each drive", because I'm fed up to fail my Nig rolls before the game... Seriously, it sounds good.

Another alternative would be to roll at the start of each turn, and if you fail, your player is placed prone (or stunned maybe). This system makes the Nig players less efficient on the pitch, which is more realist. But it can turn very fastidious if you have a lot of Nig Players in your team to roll for them on each turn...

Ithilkir · Post by **Ithilkir** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 1:23 am

Or treat each niggle as a bonehead roll?

"Oooh, oww.. Hold on guys, damn knee playing up 'ere"

Colin · Post by **Colin** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:00 am

The only problem I see with that, though it would work ok, is that you would start to get a game where everything is starting to be the same, not much variation. Right now we have neg traits starting to look very similar (new WA just a version of RS) so I don't think we need niggles to act like BH, it would make the game seem too homogenised.

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 3:31 am

yeah niggles like bonehead would not be fun...just another thing to remember to do. At least when u look at an ogre he looks stupid so you remember.

Sixpack595 · Post by **Sixpack595** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:03 pm

We have too many BS rolls like Bonehead, WA and RS as it is. Pretty soon you will need a roll for every player on the pitch. "OK, my blitzer was getting too many SPPs, and someone cried on TBB about it so he needs to roll a 3 or better to do something..."

With some beat up Skaven teams you would need to roll for half the players.

Cooper · Post by **Cooper** » Sun Jan 04, 2004 10:02 pm

I like the "for every drive" thing. That way it has an average impact on every one of your games, instead of you missing your two most important players in that most important match.
W

ORTHODUB · Post by **ORTHODUB** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:34 am

I like it the ways it is realy but if i had to change it i would like the roll to remain the same but have a penalty for playing the player.
So if he failed a nig roll then the coach could still play him but he would not be match fit so would move slower or have a lower ag or st for that game. Again it would be something else to remember but it would be a bit more like real life.

lawquoter · Post by **lawquoter** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:53 am

I think I like rolling for niggles before each half. After each drive would make it too much like the "sweltering heat" effect, and doesn't give it it's own flavor.

ORTHODUB · Post by **ORTHODUB** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 1:09 am

how about rolling after each time the player is knocked over, to see if his injury starts to play up. Then he has to sit the rest of the game out or something at the end of that drive?

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 1:24 am

Evolve To Anarchism wrote:A few questions that might be worth discussing:

Here are my answers to them ... hope they make sense ... got a bad headache.

Q1) Would this rule change disproportionately affect certain races?
D1) Teams that are more resilient would probably benefit from this rule change but that's just my first impression. More discussion is welcome.

My experience is that I've seen is that despite having higher AV ... bashy teams get hit more so the number of hits eventually catches up with the AG teams who set up to suffer one hit a turn from the blitz. So yeah they break easier to begin with but after some skills, I see the bashy teams start to equalize on Niggles ... ie I don't think Niggle on the half favor any type of team.

Q2) How would this affect handicaps?
D2) FUMBBL, which is where I primarily play, uses an effective strength system to help coaches find balanced matches, so I don't feel overly qualified to address this issue. Teams with niggled players would suffer more in a conventional league that used a handicap table because they would be carrying even more useless TR than they already are.

It does't effect handicaps at all. Yes the player is worth less ... if you choose to keep them on then its an extra risk that you assume. If you choose to retire the player the handicap issue is self solving.

Q3) Is this meant to encourage coaches to retire players with a single niggling injury?
D3) I hope this is not the goal, as this would seem to be a blow to low AV teams. Do low AV teams dominate leagues that use handicap tables? On the other hand, I'd like to believe that this might be a measure to encourage coaches to retire players with 2 niggling injuries. It might be informative to see the math for the average number of turns missed with rolling at half time.

Yes this is meant to encourage coaches to retire the player. Again I don't think this is bais against low AV teams ... I have lots of teams in my league and looking over FUMBBL I see plently of Niggles on ST and AG teams and High AV and low AV. Some from aging some not. As for the math ... I did it on the first page of this thread. Currently the Niggle rule means you miss 2.7 turns a game average. rolling on the half is 3.8 turns a game average.

Q4) Isn't it important to discuss this proposed change in conjunction with the concept of removing ageing from the game?
D4) If ageing is removed, the frequency of those important double nigglers would decrease and seriously effect the severity of this change.

Part of the reason for the change would be in consideration to dropping aging. However aging doesn't seem to be doing its job to be honest in several of the leagues that I've seen as there just isn't enough umph behind Niggle which is the main penalty from aging.

Q5) Is this proposed changed based motivated by seeing the number of high TR teams with lots of nigglers on FUMBBL and other online "leagues"?
D5) As a coach who's got a few high TR teams with alot of nigglers (I keep them largely for roleplaying reasons), I can tell you that if a handicap system were implemented, I think you'd see the number of multi-niggled stars drop immensely. I'd be tempted to think that a 2nd niggle would probably send you right into an assistant coach position. I think a good handicap system would encourage more player turnover.

FUMBBL is one ... but other online leagues are showing the ability to creep high without penalty as well. The handicap table will help FUMBBL but I still expect to see a lot of TR 300+ teams there which is not where JJ wants the game.

Q6) Why do you want to increase the severity of niggling injuries?
D6) I'll conclude with probably the most important question.

The goal of BB is to have teams reach a maximum point between 225 and 300 of TR. The current system doesn't do that as its too easy to ignore the negative roadblocks in place at present. Changing niggles is one way to improve reaching the goal of the game developer.

Galak

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:51 am

GalakStarscraper wrote: FUMBBL is one ... but other online leagues are showing the ability to creep high without penalty as well. The handicap table will help FUMBBL but I still expect to see a lot of TR 300+ teams there which is not where JJ wants the game.

I think u are believing in demons that really aren't there. 26 teams over 300 tr in fumbbl. That's out of 10000+ teams.

Post by **GalakStarscraper** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:06 am

gken1 wrote:
GalakStarscraper wrote: FUMBBL is one ... but other online leagues are showing the ability to creep high without penalty as well. The handicap table will help FUMBBL but I still expect to see a lot of TR 300+ teams there which is not where JJ wants the game.
I think u are believing in demons that really aren't there. 26 teams over 300 tr in fumbbl. That's out of 10000+ teams.

Problem is Ken ... it should be more like 26 teams over TR 275 not 26 over 300 and 10000 of teams ... yeah ... a lot of them being properly managed or played very little.

The 5 part plan had detours:

Step 1 was a better handicap table ... that's got very strong approval.
Step 2 was make Niggles matter more ... any some change has strong approval.
Step 3 & 4 is a toss up between two ideas. You need some type of long term management stopper either Aging ... or Negative Winnings. The whole hating skill rolls and effecting early teams is something I'd rather not see in the game if it can be avoided.
Step 5 is optional. Freebooted Apothecaries. With either system it will help make sure that upper TR is controlled a little better. I'm not convinced though that its a must have. I am convinced that with it the systems are going to work ... but without it they might be just fine without this.

So I'm not really swinging at demons here. Step 1 and 2 are valid based on looking over a lot of leagues even with TRs under 300. Step 3 and 4 is pick your long term balance method. Step 5 is icing and its icing I'm not convinced is needed as long as 1 and 2 are in place, but its still a chance that I think locks some stuff in place and gives a small leg up to teams with 70k lineman (Elves and Dwarves) that start slow.

So really there are no demons here at all ... FUMBBL and everything else backs what I'm trying to do even if you removed all the teams over TR 300 in FUMBBL.

Galak

gken1 · Post by **gken1** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:21 am

10000 teams is 10000 teams....in every league your gonna have a poorly managed team or played very little.. people quit, they retire their team after a butt whoopin. It happens or they're just poor managers.

i believe that fumbbl is a pretty good cross-section of bloodbowl just from the sheer amount of players and games. With handicaps now implemented to some extent teams now need to be managed more so than before and you'll see TR's drop more and hover around 200-250.

Sixpack595 · Post by **Sixpack595** » Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:06 am

FUMBBL isn't that great of an example if Handicaps were just implimented or not even using the official ones, and there are no challenge rules. Both will help to lower TR. I'd hate to see changes to real leagues based on problems with online leagues that occur because not all the rules are used in them. Am I correct, or do they use those rules?