Fixing Journeymen II: the poll

[mattgslater]

Understood. But just because the poll has come up with a most-popular idea here doesn't really mean it's time to stop. What if there's something better that had never occurred to anyone before?

Oh, and there are always near-perfect ideas. There are vastly too many of them for any given purpose. They might not always spring forth unbidden, but they are always out there.

[Oxynot]

Whatever solution you end up using, remember to follow up on how it works out

For the record, I didn't wander from the herd and voted bank a few days back.

[mattgslater]

It's official. Now that I have enough data points to assume a normal distribution, the overwhelming majority in favor of the Bank puts it past even this big whopper of a MoE. I'm going to tell them that TBB likes the Bank idea.

I think I want to leave them off with three options. One will be the bank, one will be nothing, and one will be some kind of personal hose on Journeymen. Yeah, I know a lot of you don't favor that fix, but I want to see how these guys will hash it out. As for the particulars, any advice? Do you think the Bonehead-if-over-TV thing is workable?

I'm still a little concerned that a 100k threshold for the bank is a nerf only on teams that don't need nerfing. I guess it's the part of me that comes from 3e and remembers fondly the agony of giving up a card because you're saving for a TRR, but I'm not the only one of my coaches who feels that way.

Hmmm... how about this as an alternative to the bank? After each match, immediately before rolling winnings, roll 2d6. If the result is greater than or equal to your Treasury/10kgp, that's all well and good, but if it's less, you must add +1 to your Spiraling Expenses rating. If your roll is not more than half your Treasury/10kgp, you must add +2. Some mechanic can be added in to put a little more money in as a base, but that's beyond this thread.

[Aliboon]

Voted for the bank, it should stop teams from cashing in b4 playoffs, which I think is the main problem for your league?

I like the fluff reason for bonehead, but in reality, it would create more problems than it solves as teams that genuinely needed journeymen would suffer too much (loner is enough of a handicap in most cases).

[Darkson]

Hmmm... how about this as an alternative to the bank? After each match, immediately before rolling winnings, roll 2d6. If the result is greater than or equal to your Treasury/10kgp, that's all well and good, but if it's less, you must add +1 to your Spiraling Expenses rating. If your roll is not more than half your Treasury/10kgp, you must add +2. Some mechanic can be added in to put a little more money in as a base, but that's beyond this thread.

Seems to complicated to "fix" something that the simple solution voted for does the job, expecially if it also means you have to fiddle with the winnings.

[voyagers_uk]

Matt, did you ever publish a full list of your house rulez... it is hard to judge the efficacy of our suggestions / random stabs in the dark without something more tangible to base them on.

[GalakStarscraper]

I'm still a little concerned that a 100k threshold for the bank is a nerf only on teams that don't need nerfing.

The only thing I can tell you is that we had many leagues playtesting the Bank rules that gave it a big thumbs up at 100k and we messed with the amount to get there during playtesting.

It does not have the issues you think it does and I would put it in just like the playtesters said would work.

It will work Matt. Have some faith in the playtesters on this one and try it as we worked it out before adjusting it would be my recommendation.

Galak

[mattgslater]

OK, Galak: I'm going to include your recommendation, which may sway some coaches (one of them hates everybody involved in BB, and any endorsement automatically backfires, but the rest think you've done a bang-up job and will probably go that way). But I'm still not done, and I'd like to stab at it from a different angle as well, to see what they all think of two alternatives.

Right now, we're only playing with one house-rule, though over the years I've played literally scores of iterations. Next season, we're pretty confident about another one, and a change to the one. We may do something about JMs next season, or push it off another season.

What we'll have for sure next season:

* You can spend half your inducement cash on long-term inducements, each 0-1. +10k costs 50k, +1d3x10k if you win (a "side bet") costs 50k, and an extra MVP at 150k.

* There's an SPP category called the Dirty Casualty, which is what you get for a Cas off a foul, a stab, a bomb or a chainsaw. It's worth 1SPP. Even with this rule, btw, almost nobody fouls almost ever. But Assassins suck a little less hard.

[Rhyoth]

One of my biggest fear about harming Journeymen (or using a smaller bank account) is that it will encourage bashier coaches to try to slaughter their opponents, regardless of the ball.

I'm still a little concerned that a 100k threshold for the bank is a nerf only on teams that don't need nerfing.

Which teams are your primary target exactly ?
From what i read, it guess it must be some kind of Elves and/or Dwarves

Yet, i am afraid that a smaller bank account will mainly hurt "cheap" light armoured team (I'm mostly concerned about Skavens, but i guess it also concerns Norse and 'Zons*) since those teams need to keep a deep bench, whatever happens.
*not to mention stunties and Vampires of course

One last thing i like to add : even if some of your suggestions are quite interresting (separate TV, or extra SE penalty if you got more than 2d6*10k gp), they are still less attractive than the Bank solution, simply because they don't fix the Petty Cash issue

[mattgslater]

My instinct says that the smaller the bank, the better for teams that have to field a whole lot of players. Instead of either boosting TV or tying money up in suboptimal locations, you're spending it all keeping yourself in 14x mostly AV7 guys, at any level of development.

[Rhyoth]

My instinct says that the smaller the bank, the better for teams that have to field a whole lot of players. Instead of either boosting TV or tying money up in suboptimal locations, you're spending it all keeping yourself in 14x mostly AV7 guys, at any level of development.

True at low TV

However, things get more complex at mid-high TV : since you can easily lose several players in the same match (after several games without significant injuries), you need to be prepared to buy several players together if you want to have more than eleven players available for the next game.

That means you really need some safety founds, and 50 k is just not enough.
(based from my experience with Skavens in a bashy league, where my opponents were, sometimes, more concerned about bashing than winning : i tried to save around 90 k after "soft" games, so i was prepared when i faced massive losses)

[mattgslater]

Does it change anything if there's pretty much no way to get more than 18 games in?

[GalakStarscraper]

Does it change anything if there's pretty much no way to get more than 18 games in?

No

[mattgslater]

One of my biggest fear about harming Journeymen (or using a smaller bank account) is that it will encourage bashier coaches to try to slaughter their opponents, regardless of the ball.

I don't understand why this would be. Bashier teams against opponents with weaker Journeymen would have an advantage, but why not put that advantage into moving the ball? And bashy teams with weaker Journeymen probably would focus more on winnng, no?

At least down here, LRB5+ has all-but killed all bash instinct. We used to foul 16 times a game each, but I doubt there were 16 fouls all last season for the whole league combined. This has caused us to implement a houserule that gives SPP for fouling casualties, because we really missed fouling, but nobody was about to waste an action on something that had no chance to improve a player or affect the scoreboard, and could backfire with no hope of TRR.

You'll never get anywhere ignoring the ball: if you're squishing your opponent, the smart thing to do is then to turn your advantage to running up the score. You get SPP for scoring, passing and blocking, in that order, and passing SPP are a better quality because they can be placed surgically. In context of the game, the best SPP category is TDs, of course, because they help you win directly. Casualties are the odd man out: they're worth getting, and maybe worth developing for, but once you've got the game in hand they're not really worth gaming for, with the usual caveats about good blocking technique.

[Rhyoth]

One of my biggest fear about harming Journeymen (or using a smaller bank account) is that it will encourage bashier coaches to try to slaughter their opponents, regardless of the ball.

I don't understand why this would be. Bashier teams against opponents with weaker Journeymen would have an advantage, but why not put that advantage into moving the ball? And bashy teams with weaker Journeymen probably would focus more on winnng, no?

(...)

I didn't say it would be the smartest thing to do, but i know some coaches who will try anyway.

note : some coaches will also use this tactic just to eliminate 1 or 2 favorite(s), so they will have less competitor(s) to care about at the end of season ...