Wargamers
http://wargamers.freeforums.org/
Spiralling Expenses modification
http://wargamers.freeforums.org/spiralling-expenses-modification-t348.html
Page 1 of 1

Author: snailracer [ 02 Oct 2010 03:13 pm ]
Post subject: Spiralling Expenses modification

Due to the high TV values in the league teams are finding it very hard to build up any kind of treasury. The proposal is to keep the thresholds and payments the same as described in the rules but to stop money being taken from a teams treasury.

So: Spiralling expenses can never remove money from a teams treasury, even if the teams income is not enough to pay for the spiralling expenses. If this happens all income pays the expenses and the team gains nothing. Money left over after paying spiralling expenses goes into the tressury as normal.

High value teams will still pay large amounts of spiralling expenses but should be able to build up cash, even if it is in 10k steps.

I think this is the simplest method to represent teams generating income from other sources, sponsors etc, not just the gate. Teams can always cover their costs but only sometimes make enough to save some in the treasury (especially after the owner has taken his share).

I quite like the idea of adding an option at a later date for teams to purchase something that gets them extra income after every game. Maybe for the cost of a re-roll teams can upgrade their stadium/hire a pr goblin/sell rat ona sticks and after every game get an extra D3 x 10k gold income. A team would have to be worth 2.2 milllion to be able to purchase this option.


Author: RoninOakcleaver [ 02 Oct 2010 07:29 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I definitely agree with the first part. It wouldn’t make that much of a difference, but enough of a difference that at least the top teams could afford to buy back dead players, which at the moment they may struggle to do.


Author: DOOM [ 03 Oct 2010 09:57 am ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

Have the more valuable teams considered releasing experienced (expensive), but less useful players?

I think that’s the reason it takes out of your treasury and becomes so crippling, so that they’re forced to cut back.

There was a rule in a previous living rulebook where once a player got over 31 SPPs you had to make a roll to see if they stayed with your team and as the SPP brackets got higher the chance the player would go became higher. I don’t think this was a particularly good rule, but the spiralling expenses is a good way of replacing it.


Author: snailracer [ 03 Oct 2010 06:34 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I can see why spiralling expenses were introduced but i think it effectively stops teams getting over a certain value and has the feel of destroying a team if you lose one or two players. The other option is to do what it says in the rulebook and move the breakpoint and increments to allow teams to build up more money.

I think this is very much a feel issue, and it feels wrong to me that a team with massive earning potential would struggle to make enough money to replace a player immediately after his death/retirement.

I know we can end up with uber teams with 8 re-rolls and full rosters but the injury and death rolls will stop all 16 players being incredible (but I’d quite like to see such an awesome team). The maximum winnings from a match is 80k before spiralling expenses so it will still take teams a while to build up treasury. There are lots of other complicated ways i can see this being sorted out to make it feel right (expenses for each player/ageing/sponsors etc) but for the ease of it stopping spiralling expenses taking from the treasury seems to work. If it becomes obvious that teams are getting massively uber then we can scrap it.

Also Ju you dont want to play anymore so bugger off. Ner ner ner. :P


Author: DOOM [ 05 Oct 2010 01:33 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I may not play but I like sticking my nose in :D

Pete and I spoke about adjusting the spirallying expenses a while ago, but it never really went beyond a short discussion. I reckon that’s probably the best way of approaching it. I think they only require a small adjustment, maybe 200k intervals from 1.8 million?

My thoughts around it are that running highly successful teams with expensive players gets too cumbersome in the world the game is set, which is why they are eventually forced to drop players to make themselves financially viable. Although that’s just a fluffy answer to give a reason to help level the playing field out for new teams..


Author: snailracer [ 05 Oct 2010 04:08 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

So it would look like this:

<1.8 – 0k
1.81 – 2.0 – 10k
2.21 – 2.4 – 20k
2.41 – 2.6 – 30k
2.61 – 2.8 – 40k
2.81 – 3.0 – 50k
etc.

Ok I can live with that. It allows a team to build up a bit more cash but still stops them getting past a certain point.

If everyone agrees then i say we go with that.


Author: DOOM [ 06 Oct 2010 09:54 am ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

Might need to give people a bell, as I’m not sure how closely some people follow the forums.


Author: RoninOakcleaver [ 06 Oct 2010 04:06 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I e-mailed this around to Luke, Nigel, Giles and Pete.

Pete supports it, Giles disagrees strongly with it. He even said that without a unanimous vote it shouldn’t be allowed to be changed.
I pointed this out:

P.32 of the Rulebook:

There are lots of different leagues, all of which have different cost bases and revenue streams so a commissioner should feel free both to alter the breakpoint (1,750,000 gold pieces) and the step size (150,000 gold pieces) for the spiralling expense rules on page 29 to suit his own league.

And so really it becoms up to Matt.

I’m happy with the change BTW.


Author: DOOM [ 07 Oct 2010 12:58 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I can understand where Giles is coming from.

Changing to the proposed system above will mean that teams can easily get up to 3 million now. We’ve already got some astronomically skilled teams out there! The Hornets haven’t a player with less than 2 skills, the Saints and Renegades are only held in check because of spiralling expenses.

I still think that maybe some of the big teams need to trim back. Yes, you would lose some classic players, but it would keep them financially viable, without losing their star players, and even the playing field up for lower level teams.

I know I don’t have a vote and I must admit I’m not keen on votes anyway, but I am divided on it in my own mind.

Maybe an alternative is to encourage more brutality in the league? At the moment the league frowns upon excessive fouling and hitting people out of play. If there was a general, league wide acceptance of this then maybe more players would be killed, injured and retired and you’d indirectly solve the topic issue by increasing player turn over in teams.


Author: RoninOakcleaver [ 07 Oct 2010 05:55 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

I’m finding that is happening at the moment with my teams anyway Ju.
I’ve had to repalce two star catchers with rookies within the last 4 games i’ve played with the Saints.

BTW Luke pointed out that you’d missed a bracket (between 2.01 and 2.21 I think)


Author: snailracer [ 07 Oct 2010 09:01 pm ]
Post subject: Re: Spiralling Expenses modification

Yes I did. But we all know what I meant so its fine :)

I’m now very undecided on this issue, but I still think high TV teams get crippled by this once they lose a few players and cant afford replacements. So I guess I’m still in favour of making spiralling espenses have less of an impact.

I’m going to have to have a think about it. What would everyone else change it to if they were doing it?


Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC – 1 hour [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/
Advertisements