| Author |
Message |
Indigo |
|
Post subject: Modified Fan Factor System
 Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 03:33 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Every team playing Blood Bowl in the Old World has a following of some sort. Teams languishing at the wrong end of the league tables will probably only be watched by die hard local supporters, grimly aware that the best they can expect from their team is not to finish bottom, whereas high-profile teams often have a huge following of fanatical supporters, but who only watch them when they???re winning. Success demands success, and a bad run of form can often see a team lose many of it???s fans, only for more to return when winning ways resume.
I came up with this system to account for differences in team ratings and how poor teams do not expect to win often, whereas high-flyers demand repeated victories or they get shirty. Let me know what you think.
(This has been playtested in many leagues and has proven to be pretty popular)
Ditching the old ???roll a D6??? system, the new system adopts a roll of 2D6 after the match, then the application of modifiers based on how the match turned out.
Match Event Modifiers
Code:
Won the match +1
Lost the match -1
Scored 2+ TDs +1
Scored 4+ TDs +2
Each TD scored >4 +1
Caused 2+ CAS +1
Caused 4+ CAS +2
Each CAS caused >4 +1
Conceded 2+ TDs -1
Conceded 4+ TDs -2
Each TD conceded > 4 -1
Conceded 2+ CAS -1
Conceded 4+ CAS -2
Each CAS conceded > 4 -1
Semi final* +1
Final* +2
For every 10 FF -1
* - If playing a team with a TR 51 or greater than your own, add an extra +1 to the modifier (glamour tie)
Opponent Team Rating modifiers
Code:
Opponent Team Rating Modifier
<-101 -4
-100 to -76 -3
-75 to -51 -2
-50 to -26 -1
-25 to -11 0
-10 to +10 0
10 to 25 0
26 to 50 +1
51 to 75 +2
76 to 100 +3
>101+ +4
When you have rolled 2d6 and applied the relevant modifiers, look up the final score on the following table:
Code:
Final Dice Score Result
Less than HALF your current FF -2 FF
Less than your current FF -1 FF
Equal to your current FF No change
More than your current FF +1FF
More than DOUBLE your current FF +2FF
This may appear complicated, but trust me it isn't, and this forum does not lend itself well to displaying how it works! Any comments or questions are gladly received. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 04:57 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 05:25 AM
|
|
da Veiz-Prez
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Netherlands
Posts: 895
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
|
|
| I agree it might be better but it's a bit on the complicated side... |
_________________
First ever poster on the NAF site, Former Prez' proverbial pain in the bum and NTO-Netherlands
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Valen |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 05:37 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2003
England
Posts: 315
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
I agree, far too complicated, maybe less variations. for instance cut the split between +2 and +4 CAS & TD.
And the opponent thing looks very strange! |
_________________
I'm coming at you with razor blades and lemon juice... I'm talkin' pain, boy. Searing, mind-numbing pain!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 06:55 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| I agree it's more complicated. It came about as a result of too many people getting pissed off when their TR100 team beat a TR150 team 2-0 and killed 3 players, only for their FF to go down. Although it's still possible under this system, a good performance is more likely to be rewarded and a poor one punished. It makes FF a lot more "fluid" but still retains the capping that the current system has. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Valen |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 07:05 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2003
England
Posts: 315
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
What about just making that a roll of a 6 or 1 is not always an automatic increase or decrease?
Therefore if you win it is immposible for you FF too go down! |
_________________
I'm coming at you with razor blades and lemon juice... I'm talkin' pain, boy. Searing, mind-numbing pain!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 07:17 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| true, but you can also hammer someone 6-0 and kill 5 players and still see your FF not go up which seems a tad unfair. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 07:47 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Indigo wrote: true, but you can also hammer someone 6-0 and kill 5 players and still see your FF not go up which seems a tad unfair.
But the fans could get bored of such 1 sided victories...
I like the 1 & 6 rule (except when I roll a 1  ) as it means winning teams are just on a straight upward path of FF, meaning more money and better teams. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 08:01 AM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
[quote="Doubleskulls"]But the fans could get bored of such 1 sided victories...
quote]
lol I don't believe that could ever happen
but I see your point in terms of game mechanics. |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Valen |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 10:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2003
England
Posts: 315
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| I can vouch for the getting bored thing, I am a Glasgow Rangers fan, and I assure you, a fan gets little pleasure from watching there tonk a team 6-0 in 30 minutes then stop playing! |
_________________
I'm coming at you with razor blades and lemon juice... I'm talkin' pain, boy. Searing, mind-numbing pain!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Tutenkharnage |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 09, 2003 - 11:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 620
Status: Offline
|
|
Fair, shmair! My Chaos Pact team won our league title last season. I rolled at +4 on the FF table:
+1 for win
+1 for 2+ TDs
+1 for 2+ Casualties
+2 for Finals
-1 for FF > 10
What did I roll? Yep, you guessed it - I rolled a 1. We don't use the 1-and-6 rule here for FF, but the point is that I just clinched the title as best I could and my FF stayed pat.
Them's the breaks, man.
-Chet |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mordredd |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jun 10, 2003 - 04:59 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 03, 2003
England
Posts: 728
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Wouldn't it be simpler to use Cas and TD difference to calculate the modifier, instead of your 2+/4+/per extra 1 splits and win/lose modifiers? It would produce nearly the same result but would require no reference to a table and look much less complicated. (There's an extra +1 for the third TD and an extra +1 for the first and third Cas).
The table would then be:
Quote: TD difference (yours - opponents)
Cas difference (yours - opponents)
Semi Final +1
Final +2
For Every 10 FF -1
TR modifier +/-?
My big worry about this system is that it would seem to keep FF very low, unless you play teams with a much higher TR. Lets say that you win by 2 TDs and Cas. Your modifier is then +3, average roll 9/10/11. This would suggest that most FFs are not going to get much higher than 12, and I don't think that is right.
I do, however, like the idea of including the degree of victory and the TR difference in the roll. I suggest that instead of rolling to beat the FF you roll on a table instead. Perhaps one where it is only possible to get +/- 2FF if your roll has an overall modifier on it of at least 1 or 2.
One last comment. I don't think that the negative modifier for playing a weaker team should be as big as the positive modifier for playing a stronger team. For example changing the table to read TR difference (yours - opponents) >101 = +4 / <-101 = -3, or something like that. Also the table would be easier to look at if you grouped all the 0 modifiers into 1 range, i.e. -25 to +25 = 0. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Apedog |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 02:17 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 146
Status: Offline
|
|
Sorry to bump this thread after so long but I just saw this system in Indigo's 'A League of their Own' compilation and I really like it
It would keep the FF moving and mean that teams are only as good as their last few games. This keeps players on their toes and means that only the consistently good players reach the higher FF's.
I thought the same things as Modredd, and running some numbers on my league results these suggestions do make very little difference whilst greatly simplifying the table.
I would also change the Win/Lose modifiers to +/- 2 to counter the increased modifier from scoring/casulties.
I guess it does produce slightly lower FF than current leagues are used to but this can be countered if it causes you a problem by adjusting the winnings table, or only using the positive modifiers to get a higher FF (personally I think it's fine as is).
One other thing that I like is that it allows greater freedom when selecting an initial team, no longer is it 'compulsary' to take a FF of 9, and teams willing to suffer low income for the first few games can go for a FF of 1. (I would go in around 5-7 I think). |
_________________
Munkey
Boom! He's on his back!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Indigo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 02:28 PM
|
|
Da Warboss
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
England
Posts: 2168
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
| I don't mind you bumping it - I was recently using it a mini league I've been doing at home... still think it's pretty good |
_________________
NAF #60
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Nov 10, 2003 - 02:55 PM
|
|
Joined: Oct 24, 2003
Posts: 1671
|
|
| Way too complicated. I'd choose the original system over this 11 times out of 10. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
