Winning, is it worth it ?

[neverdodge]

I often myself what you get above your opponents when you win, and for now it s only +1 in the winning and +1 in FF. I always try to give around 100.000 to the champion, 70 to 80 to runner up etc.
I wonder if that s enough gold or if anyone ever tried giving +2 to winning cash for the winner of the game ?

[wesleytj]

it's a tough balance you have to worry about...

you have to make winning some form of in-game bonus, a winning team SHOULD get better faster than a losing team.

at the same time, though, you don't want to overdo it, because then it becomes a self-repeating system. you keep winning and getting bigger bonuses and more money, so then suddenly the losing teams have even LESS chance of winning!

my general suggestion is to be very careful about adjusting winning conditions. if you do want to give winners a bonus, one thing i'd suggest would be to undo one of the LRB changes from a while back, and eliminate the 1/6 rule for the FF table. A winning team that gets its 2td and/or 2 cas should not have to worry about an ff drop early on.

if you like that, then i'd suggest continuing on (if you think you need to) with a further +1 to winnings. in fact, if your league uses draws, it makes a very good progression...lose +0, draw +1 each, win +2.

again, though, be careful with it.

[narkotic]

I wouldn't change the modifiers, alternatively could you house rule to remove the +1 for winning the match and let the match winner roll 2D6: the winner gets the higher dice, the loser the lower. If the match was tied take the average of the two dice for both. Then apply the modifications based on TR/Gate.

Thie removes odd results like the loser getting twice as much money as the winner bc of a single dice roll.

[neverdodge]

I wouldn't change the modifiers, alternatively could you house rule to remove the +1 for winning the match and let the match winner roll 2D6: the winner gets the higher dice, the loser the lower. If the match was tied take the average of the two dice for both. Then apply the modifications based on TR/Gate.

Thie removes odd results like the loser getting twice as much money as the winner bc of a single dice roll.

I like that one, seems fair, i ll propose it to the coaches.

Thanx for both answers

[narkotic]

You might want to adjust the winnings table a little, like giving teams that are TR>200 an extra -2 (?).

If a team passes TR200 under the current LRB winings system without many deaths/player turnovers, it beginns to amass money. With a system where the winner gets the higher dice this might lead to even more money if you have a mixed league with high TR differences.

[Bikerbob]

I like that idea very much Narkotic.

I dont have any problem with the TR200 thing either.. extra money can only do so much, if they amass more.. so what??

But the current rules that you you can win with 2 td etc..etc.. and the other guy still kicks your butt on winnings because of die roll and TR seems crazy.. and even crazier if you manage to roll a FF decrease...

I think I will suggest that rule for our league for next season as well. I will at least keep it in my House Rules file.

James

[Bikerbob]

OR,,, just had a thought.

What about you make TR difference a facter for winnings.. not if you are over 200 or any preset point value, but you get a -1 for every 50tr above your opponent..

I like that, it means that people are not so excited you are picking on weak teams..

James

[plasmoid]

Hi all,
in the past we had a problem in our "fun" games - i.e. games that didn't have a direct impact on league standing:
People would generally ignore winning, in order to go SPP hunting with the right players instead.
Ugly.

We solved it by saying that the winning coach decides which one of his players gets the MVP. (The loser still rolls randomly).

Cheers
Martin

[matkov]

Hi all,
in the past we had a problem in our "fun" games - i.e. games that didn't have a direct impact on league standing:
People would generally ignore winning, in order to go SPP hunting with the right players instead.
Ugly.

We solved it by saying that the winning coach decides which one of his players gets the MVP. (The loser still rolls randomly).

Cheers
Martin

Hmm, nice idea, but seems too strong to me. I think that it will be better if winning coach will choose 6 players and roll randomly from them (instead whole team).