NAF World Headquarters :: View topic - Team treasury adding to team rating

NAF World Headquarters

House Rules - Team treasury adding to team rating

Mordredd - May 23, 2003 - 05:09 AM
Post subject: Team treasury adding to team rating

In the days of the special play cards the amount of money that a team had in it's treasury could be used to effect the game, most notably through buying a cheap reroll through extra training. Now it seems to have no effect except to boost team rating. As the team treasury has no effect on a teams ability to play the game should it still contribute to the handicap?

I propose that the team treasury should no longer be added to the team rating, and that the full value of freebooters should be added to the team rating before calculating the handicap (e.g. +18 for a 180,000 vampire lord).

Agentrock - May 23, 2003 - 07:18 AM
Post subject:

I voted to keep the system the way it is. Even though you do not get the large amounts of money from games anymore (due to special cards no longer being used) the amount of money in the treasury still highlight's the team's buying power to purchase something...whether it be rerolls, assistant coaches, cheer leaders, and most importantly players.

jmccubbin - May 23, 2003 - 07:33 AM
Post subject: Re: Team treasury adding to team rating

Mordredd wrote:

Not true. some games the handicap rolls require money for players to still play. If I got hit with that roll, then my treasury pulls me through. If I don't have the money, then I loose players for the game.

GalakStarscraper - May 23, 2003 - 07:52 AM
Post subject: Re: Team treasury adding to team rating

Mordredd wrote:

Now it seems to have no effect except to boost team rating. As the team treasury has no effect on a teams ability to play the game should it still contribute to the handicap?

Really ... huh ...

You can freeboot wizards before a game starts.
You can freeboot players before a game starts.
You can freeboot Stars before a game starts.
Annual 2003 added the ability to buy Secret Weapons before the game starts.

Seems to me like your treasury can very much still affect a game and thus should still be part of the Team Rating.

By the way also in the works that I've seen are Dirty Tricks and Magic Items that you could buy before the game starts. Don't know if they will become experimental ... but I've seen them.

No Gold should definitely be part of TR.

Galak

Indigo - May 23, 2003 - 10:33 AM
Post subject:

it's like saying the vast fortune sitting behind manchester united has no impact at all on their progress in the league & europe - simply not true

Mordredd - May 23, 2003 - 11:17 AM
Post subject:

"Really ... huh ...

You can freeboot wizards before a game starts.
You can freeboot players before a game starts.
You can freeboot Stars before a game starts.
Annual 2003 added the ability to buy Secret Weapons before the game starts."

Sorry Galak, but at the risk of sounding rude please try to read the posts. Mad

In my proposal FREEBOOTERS were accounted for after you paid for them by adding their full value to the TR for the purposes of calculating the handicap. This would include ALL players that you freeboot AND secret weapons. This, mathematically, better represents a teams true ability on the field than the current system, which undervalues the presence of freebooters.

I have not seen the Dirty Tricks and Magic items that you speak of but it seems to me that they can probably be accounted for at the same time. Besides if you choose not to use them, as I know many players will, then you are being penalised for being rich.

There is one result on the handicap table, appearance fee, which causes you to pay or not play one player. It is a lighter version of it wasn't me! where the most you have to pay is 30,000. Not really a good enough argument for maintaining the status quo.

The players that will be replaced, and the new rerolls that will be bought do not effect play in the current game. They will in the next one, where they will already be taken account of in the TR on the team sheet at the start of the pre match sequence.

With Man U the money is represented on the field by the best players that money can buy. In BB the money in the treasury is not represented on the field, which was my whole point in the first place. BB, as you may have noticed, does not entirely work like real life.

Indigo - May 23, 2003 - 11:27 AM
Post subject:

two teams, one very rich the other with nothing. both have identical players.

if both teams have a player killed, then obviously the richer one is in a better position to replace him than the other, and therefore a stronger team. Weaker teams need a handicap system to stay remotely competitive... (trust me I've played leagues with no cards/handicap table containing teams of TR 290 vs 100 - aint pretty).

In a league, a team's performance is not measured by it's players alone, but also it's re-rolls and staff. Anything that has a bearing on how a team performs in a league should impact the TR.

Undead teams typically get stacks of cash as they dont need to replace players very often. If they DIDNT count cash towards TR then they would be at a huge handicap advantage - their players are good but their team rating would be low.

Try a league where TR is not affected by cash and you will see certain teams simply do unfairly better than others.

Indigo - May 23, 2003 - 11:29 AM
Post subject:

This isn't to say, however, that the system shouldnt be tweaked and your suggestion invalid. How about not counting any cash above 100k, or dividing the total cash by 2 and rounding down - I've never tested these alternatives though.

I'm firmly of the opinion "If it ain't broke..." and IMO this isn't broke

GalakStarscraper - May 23, 2003 - 12:24 PM
Post subject:

Mordredd wrote:

Sorry Galak, but at the risk of sounding rude please try to read the posts. Mad

:evil.

I read your post ... just completely disagree with your recommended changes. House rules ... wonderful ... official ... no way. No need for the evil faces.

Cash can be used on several things before a game now, and while I understand that your recommended change tries to account for those things. Your system leaves out something Deathwing explained very well a long time ago.

Cash represents unspent potential. Should a good team be allowed to have less handicaps against them for matches during the regular season because they are saving all their money for Stars and Wizards for the playoffs. DW argued "heck no" ... and I 100% agree. Not spending your cash is a coaching decision just as valid as buying a reroll or freebooting to reduce TR. A coach should not be allowed to soften his TR by hording cash. IN MY OPINION, this allows some very beardy regular season tactics that I just could not approve of.

Galak

Dave - May 24, 2003 - 02:33 AM
Post subject:

I agtree there galak, can be very beardy

Mordredd - May 24, 2003 - 02:04 PM
Post subject:

Two identical teams, one rich one poor, have an identical chance of winning and the TR should indicate this. If one cannot recover from losses then it's strength, and it's indicator of strength (TR) will be reduced. If they have the same chance of winning why should one receive a handicap bonus because they are less likely to recover from bad luck?

True, a teams performance is not measured by it's players alone, however all these other factors have an 'on the pitch' effect at some time during the game and their relative value is added to the TR. Treasury only affects the team before and after the match, not during.

And playing without any sort of handicap system is just wrong.

Yes Undead teams, like mine, do end up with stacks of cash in the long run. This is mostly because once you have a full roster and 8 rerolls there is not much to spend it on except support staff and replacements. No teams in my league currently make use of any star players.

The last 2 seasons of my current league tried this house rule, and no team seemed to be unfairly penalised by it.

Mordredd - May 24, 2003 - 02:29 PM
Post subject:

Galak, your post came across, to me at least, as glib and patronising, and not a specific response to what I said. Hence the angry faces. If you'd made your second post first that would have been a lot better.

I have not heard Deathwing make that explanation, but I don't think it is a good one. BB is the only GW 'campaign type' game to do this. Treasury is not added to ratings in Necromunder or Mordheim for the simple reason that it doesn't affect the game at hand.

As for saving your cash, that's a very risky strategy. Other teams will be spending theirs on rerolls, more position players, reserves etc. whilst your team stays stagnant. And if you did manage to make it past these stronger teams to the final and spent it all on freebooters then you may indeed win easily, but your team will be substantially weaker than everyone else's next season. I just can't see how that is unacceptable beardiness.

My experience of teams that save their cash is that they don't make it. I have in the past, however, seen teams giving away a handicap due to their treasury whilst not being able to spend it.

GalakStarscraper - May 24, 2003 - 04:31 PM
Post subject:

Mordredd wrote:

And if you did manage to make it past these stronger teams to the final and spent it all on freebooters then you may indeed win easily, but your team will be substantially weaker than everyone else's next season. I just can't see how that is unacceptable beardiness.

Because I got 150,000 gold for winning the league championship plus the gate was FF with +2 to each of the dice for both teams for finals match. The Gold I win from winning or taking 2nd in the finals assures that I'm not substantially weaker.

Quote:

I have in the past, however, seen teams giving away a handicap due to their treasury whilst not being able to spend it.

There is no such creature. Rerolls, freebooters, and wizards are all cash dumps. So I don't agree with this point.

And if I sounded glib, Mordredd, I apologize. This is one of those topics that I've seen brought up some many times over the last 6 years on the internet boards that I responded to quickly and curtly ... sorry. Deathwing got in trouble for the same thing on TBB once leading to the classic quote about him and newbies. So sorry.

The bottom line is that the BBRC has said they agree with Deathwing's position that allowing hording treasury to reduce TR in the present and having it available to spend on the playoffs is not a good change for the BB rules. Gold has a lot of impact in BB and the powers that be have agreed that it should be factored into TR for every game. If you don't like it ... as I said, I think if your league agrees its a fine house rule to not count it. You are just not going to convince me or the rule makers that gold doesn't matter.

Galak

Mestari - May 26, 2003 - 12:58 AM
Post subject:

Earlier on we used to have two TR's for every team: the real TR with everything factored in and the effective TR, which was the TR with the treasury and missing players subtracted.
The effective TR was used for calculating handicap and determining which team was expected to win, while the real TR was used when teams rolled for money.
That's a quite functional system especially if you live in a aggressive league: badly beaten up teams are not giving handicap if they have 5 players missing the game etc. Sure it allows hoarding up money, but you could always reduce only missing players from the effective TR if you wish.

Mestari - May 26, 2003 - 01:15 AM
Post subject:

However, I must add, we no longer use that. The reason is mostly the fact that we want to be LRB 2.0 compliant. It's an excellent and well-thought out ruleset (well, maybe Piling on isn't so well-thought out but mostly).

noodle1978uk - Jun 18, 2003 - 06:49 AM
Post subject:

Hmm. We stopped counting treasury in team rating in 1998. Its hardly a major change to the LRB but it is one our league uses. We need team rating to reflect ACCURATELY the power of the team on the field. And besides, we are now going to have debt rules aswell.... Counting treasury in T/R would confuse matters Very Happy

I've no real problem with it being counted, except when people started dumping off cash for a fee to lower their team rating! Of course I banned that.... Very Happy

McDeth - Jun 18, 2003 - 07:45 AM
Post subject:

Of course it should be added to TR, Otherwise you could sit on your 240k in the kitty until you need it.

Whats more relevant is should Missing players be added to the TR calculation

noodle1978uk - Jun 18, 2003 - 08:09 AM
Post subject:

Er - we DO sit on 240K until we need it. Its called "saving up". Don't know why you should have a problem with it or why it somehow makes your team better - because you're loaded....

Less important now with no special play cards - but we still use those too Wink

McDeth - Jun 18, 2003 - 08:19 AM
Post subject:

noodle1978uk wrote:

Because it means you have the ability to replace any lost players immeditaely, whereas the Team with 0k, wont. I think you may have missed the point, if you have the ability to use 240k, then it should be accounted for.

As an example the option suggested means when calculating someones wealth, then you should exclude the money in your bank account

Doubleskulls - Jun 18, 2003 - 09:14 AM
Post subject:

You have to include money in the treasury for one very good reason - freebooters.

I have 100k in the treasury - it adds 10 pts to my TR - I use the money to freeboot Griff. If it didn't count against TR then I'd effectively not have any penalty for having him on the team.

noodle1978uk - Jun 18, 2003 - 09:28 AM
Post subject:

I haven't missed the point at all. Team rating should be used to measure how good it is - for handicaps and the like. Its not very fair if yours is elevated because you are rich Surprised

However I will concede the point about freebooters, which by the way, are banned in our league Very Happy

Doubleskulls - Jun 18, 2003 - 09:47 AM
Post subject:

noodle1978uk wrote:

freebooters ... are banned in our league Very Happy

Why? I've never seen them as even vaguely unbalanced.

Do you still have to hire wizards for the game?

Deathwing - Jun 18, 2003 - 12:35 PM
Post subject:

Galak's pretty much covered it. I guess the question here is whether you want TR to be a reflection of team strength overall or the team strength for that particular game. IMO it has to be the former.
If 2 teams are on otherwise equal TR, yet one is sitting on 240K and you don't apply the 24 point handicap then it becomes a positive advantage to hoard GP. What if the teams take 2 fatalies/career ending SIs each during the game? The rich team can replace them immediately and be in fine shape for the next game whereas the poor team can't. Take away the inclusion of treasury in the TR and (assuming the fatalities are roughly equal) the TR would drop by an equal(ish) amount. What then happens should those two teams play back to back?
That's why I believe TR should be (searching for the right terminology here and not finding it Rolling Eyes

) globally representitve (league structure in general) rather than locally representitive (what a team puts on the field for one particular game).

noodle1978uk - Jun 19, 2003 - 02:56 AM
Post subject:

Makes sense Very Happy

Our teams hardly ever play back to back...

Re: Freebooters - long story. They were hardly ever taken, except in cup matches or in particular grudge matches. People got upset blah blah Very Happy

So now they're banned.

You can still buy AND KEEP a wizard in our league - since we still use cards. All the more to jump on with "Sorry Sir" Very Happy

Though this will probably change this autumn with our yearly review...

Mordredd - Jun 19, 2003 - 08:52 AM
Post subject:

It does not make sense.

To take up the example of 2 identical teams. Assume their winnings are the same, and that they lose the same value of players (equal gold and SPP). The handicap would reamain the same if you include treasury in TR, but if you do not include the treasury then it gets better for the poorer team.

If 2 teams of equal TR (not including treasury) suffer casualties and one is rich enough to replace the losses and the other is not then one will lose more TR than the other. Should they play 2 games back to back the poorer team would then have a more favourable handicap (it would actually get one) in the second game than in the first.

In the same case (with treasury included) the handicap remains the same despite the fact that one team is stronger on the field in the second game than the other.

The identical teams have the same strength and the same chance of winning, and should therefore have the same TR (i.e. no handicap).

Mordredd - Jun 19, 2003 - 09:04 AM
Post subject:

When hiring freebooters you currently get a 1 game bonus. You pay 90k, say for Griff, and get a team that is 18TR points better. A net gain of 9TR points. It would be better if this was taken account of before calculating the handicap.

For example:
A team of TR 150 spends 90k freebooting Griff.
They need to add the full value of Griff (180k) before the handicap is worked out.
Their TR thus becomes 168 (150 +1 Cool

.

If their opponents hired a wizard they would need to add 15 points to their TR for the purposes of working out the handicap.

Galak has pointed out that unscrupulous players might save all their money for freebooters for the final. I'm still not convinced they would make it. But just in case you would need to limit the number of freebooters you could hire, or impose availability rolls on star players to compensate.

Doubleskulls - Jun 19, 2003 - 09:29 AM
Post subject:

Mordredd wrote:

Galak has pointed out that unscrupulous players might save all their money for freebooters for the final. I'm still not convinced they would make it. But just in case you would need to limit the number of freebooters you could hire, or impose availability rolls on star players to compensate.

I don't really see that freebooting star players is much of an issue. I've been saving my money because I'm certain to make the play offs - even so I may well only be able to afford to freeboot 2 or 3 stars (total not for each game) and thats from 6 games worth of income that I'm not spending on new players or TRR and getting penalised for having a high TR because the money is accumulating in my treasury.

There is a limit on freebooter. You can only have 16 players - so you can't freeboot at all if your roster is full. Similarly you can't freeboot a 3rd War Dancer. So for normal roster players this isn't going to be a big factor.

I can see an argument for saying TR ought to reflect your strength for that match - but its much more complex to work out and the current system does a reasonable job in the long run.

Tutenkharnage - Jun 19, 2003 - 06:00 PM
Post subject:

How many of you have actually freebooted regular players? I have. I've done it several times in the MBBL and twice in my own NFL.

You freeboot normal players when you absolutely have to, not to gain some imagined "TR bonus" that must be "accounted for" in handicap. You do it to keep warm bodies on the field, nothing more.

-Chet

Mordredd - Jun 20, 2003 - 05:03 AM
Post subject:

I totally agree with you about freebooters doubleskulls, stars, staff and normal players. However Galak has made it quite clear earlier on this thread that he does not. I was simply trying to avoid a circular argument by putting forward a limit that would prevent what he described as "very beardy tactics" that he could not condone.

Freebooters aren't an issue in my league as no one ever takes them. Even when reduced to seven men against a full strength team coaches prefer to save their cash for a permanent addition to their team.

I just added the post about freebooters as they needed to be accounted for in a system where treasury in not added to TR. This was a response to the point you rightly raised earlier.