1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Big Crunch 2 Rules

Discussion in 'Big Crunch 2' started by cjblackburn, Jan 4, 2016.

  1. Ravers

    Ravers Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,108
    Location:
    Reading, UK
    Cyanide Username:
    Ravers
    Country Flag:
    This actually came up a season or 2 ago and was discussed by the admin team. The prevailing consensus seemed to be that it was not a major issue, would be close to impossible to police, and also that treasury (bank) money is part of a teams overall health. That said I think most of us were of the opinion that we would prefer that people don't abuse their bank, but the hassle of enforcing an actual ruling outweighed the benefits. For what it's worth I kind of self police my teams, would hope other coaches do the same. Don't be a dick is probably a good guiding principle.
     
    Supa, helGn and Mynimo1 like this.
  2. tys123

    tys123 Courier Staff

    Messages:
    2,932
    Country Flag:
    I think that there was 1 occasion in BC2 where the title was decided in the last game of the season and the lower TV coach chose not to spend his cash to get an unfair advantage.

    I would say it was unfair for you to spend all 210K. IMO it would be reasonable to spend the money given for TV difference , the 60K that is already included in your TV and enough of your normal cash to ensure all of that inducement money is spent.
    So if you have 120K left you can put in 30K to get a wiz rather than taking the apoth and having 20 left unspent.

    If you spend everything you are basically saying that because I have the lower TV I get to have a 150K better team than you.
     
  3. RJCarrot

    RJCarrot Member

    Messages:
    196
    Steam Username:
    RJCarrot
    Country Flag:
    I think it is kinda dickly to do but I can go either way on it. Plus im playing halflings so short of playing street in my bracket I doubt there are any other stunties I gotta worry about "out tving" but I can see where people could be ticked about it. My rule of thumb is, if you get TV evening cash, you spend it, if you need to toss in a little more to get the thing you wanted, thats cool. Other than that its a bit of a on the fence thing. Though I personally wont play my halflings without a chef and I would pay out of pocket for it.

    When it comes down to it, I am down with whatever is decided, just need to know the rule because as a stunty this will apply to me a good amount.
     
  4. Veggente85

    Veggente85 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,081
    Location:
    Central Europe (GMT+2)
    Steam Username:
    VeggenteBBT
    Cyanide Username:
    Veggente
    Country Flag:
    If I remember right, @Regor took a wizard this way during a decisive moment of a season. Karma made him lose the game and successively his whole team. But I won't let karma do all the work :D
     
    Ravers likes this.
  5. Mynimo1

    Mynimo1 Active Member

    Messages:
    416
    Location:
    South Carolina, USA (EST)
    Steam Username:
    mynimo6
    Cyanide Username:
    Mynimo1
    Country Flag:
    @tys123 the game with me having 210K in the bank and getting 90K of inducements has not been played yet waiting on Numberwang to set a date and to be honest I am not going to use my entire bank. It is a situation i am in tho and by league rules I could spend it all.

    But how many people would not spend the cash to attempt to beat the defending champ in the semis and go to the finals? At this time I am damned if I do and damned if I don't.
     
  6. tys123

    tys123 Courier Staff

    Messages:
    2,932
    Country Flag:
    Well if it was me then I would just get the wizard which puts you down to 150K in the bank so you aren't giving anything away by having too much cash.
    I wouldn't mind if someone playing against me also got a babe as well but I wouldn't do it.
     
  7. TravelScrabble

    TravelScrabble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,253
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada (UTC -4)
    Steam Username:
    travelscrabble
    Cyanide Username:
    travelscrabble
    Country Flag:
    I see it as a huge issue in playoff format leagues and a small issue in the Big Crunch. For the record I am in favour of the rule and support it but I don’t think the admin team has the appetite to bring it up again since the last time was relaively recent still.
     
  8. JaspersaurusRex

    JaspersaurusRex Active Member

    Messages:
    331
    Steam Username:
    Tasteytaco
    Cyanide Username:
    Jaspersaurusrex
    Country Flag:
    I got 200k..15 players...and I can't buy a stadium enhancements. I am gonna scum a wizard every chance I get to try and win.
     
    Mynimo1 likes this.
  9. Ilgoth

    Ilgoth Courier Staff

    Messages:
    2,233
    Location:
    Finland, GMT+2
    Steam Username:
    Ilgoth
    Cyanide Username:
    Ilgoth
    Country Flag:
    Good-hearted guys level up their stadium. :rolleyes:
     
  10. FemurMuertez

    FemurMuertez Active Member

    Messages:
    424
    Location:
    Finland
    Steam Username:
    FemurMuertez
    Cyanide Username:
    FemurMuertez
    Country Flag:
    Or help the coach to reduce the number of players in the teams roster...:pow::pow::D
     
  11. SlyAnimal

    SlyAnimal Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    996
    Location:
    Thailand
    Cyanide Username:
    PapaNasty
    Country Flag:
    Of course you'd spend the gold. Only reason not to, is if you feel you might need to keep some in reserve for the final (buy new players or top up on inducements there too).

    Everyone plays to the rules.

    Which is why a suggestion has been made to change the rules. As the underdog has a distinct advantage regarding spending from their inducements. When there is a large disparity in TV it isn't a big deal, since inducements have diminishing returns, but in situations where the TV difference is small, that gold you're spending makes a huge difference.

    But yeah, if there's a rule in place, it'd stop the situation happening, if there isn't, then people will spend because it's within the rules. Also a "don't be a dick" rule isn't really designed for financial fairplay situations, it's designed to cover the situations that can't be foreseen and can't be measured. Financial fairplay you can measure the size of a coach's hotdog, and so setting an official BBT standard hotdog size can be achieved, against which all other hotdogs can be measured. imo 40k is a great amount as it allows you to topup to the closest inducement (usually babes), and nothing can be brought if you've both got equal TV.

    I'm Orcs in BC2, so will likely have a huge treasury full of gold to spend if I'm the underdog, thus keeping the status quo is more likely to benefit me, but it would be fairer to have a financial fairplay rule.
     
  12. JaspersaurusRex

    JaspersaurusRex Active Member

    Messages:
    331
    Steam Username:
    Tasteytaco
    Cyanide Username:
    Jaspersaurusrex
    Country Flag:
    I'll save it for you then ;)
     
    FemurMuertez likes this.
  13. cjblackburn

    cjblackburn Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,440
    Location:
    Stockport
    Cyanide Username:
    cjblackburn
    Country Flag:
    I’m pretty agnostic on the rule for BC2. I quite like the rule in general however there is a problem in enforcement for 45 games a week. With the client there is no reliable way to double check after the event. We don’t get a report of TVs at the start of the match and both coaches are free to change them upto the start of the match. Basically it would come down to screenshots of when the inducements are bought. Which can be ended pretty much instantly by clicking confirm (or whatever it is in game). I think that if demand was there we could get it working but I suspect any system would require quite alot of work or would just come down to one coaches word against another.
     
  14. L-Kid

    L-Kid Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    272
    Steam Username:
    L-kid
    Country Flag:
    I think if you have the money you should be able to spend it how you like!

    It's all about that risk and reward! Yes the second player has the advantage in close TV matches but you know his TV! Trim some fat off to drop below him and take that advantage yourself!

    This is blood bowl at the end of the day, you could scum a wizard and then roll a 1 at the end of the day! meaning you didn't buy a second appo which would of saved your star player from being killed by a throw rock or finished the match with no money left to replace lost players!
     
    Zombane, Sataric, Filadeus and 2 others like this.
  15. Dionysian

    Dionysian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,025
    Location:
    Caerdydd
    Country Flag:
    You can see how much petty cash a coach adds (and their starting treasury) in the bb2lm details section: http://www.bb2leaguemanager.com/Leaderboard/match_detail.php?match_uuid=10004aca58

    admin work would be <30 seconds to check a violation report
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2018
  16. cjblackburn

    cjblackburn Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,440
    Location:
    Stockport
    Cyanide Username:
    cjblackburn
    Country Flag:
    Cheers @Dionysian. It looks like we are having a rules discussion in the admin cave.
     
  17. FatZomby

    FatZomby Member

    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Central
    Steam Username:
    FatZomby
    Cyanide Username:
    FatZomby
    Country Flag:
    I totally oppose the rule of "financial Fairplay." I won't go on much here as I did in the other discussion thread.

    With two teams of similar team values, the second team/lower tv team will have an advantage when/if they choose to spend their bank.

    But, with major differences of team values, this rule will hinder the lower tv teams as well as protect the higher tv teams.

    here is the reason I come to that reasoning....

    1st example:
    First team has tv of 1500. Second has 1460. First doesn't spend any bank. But the second does all of theirs in addition to free money. Since the tv is that close, I could whole heartedly agree with "financial fairplay" as this indeed does give the lower rated team an advantage.

    2nd example:
    First team has a tv of 1700. Second has 1300. First doesn't spend any bank, but the second does all of theirs in addition to free money. Since the tv is that far away from each other, any inducements that the lower team gets are overpriced. If you want an additional RR, you pay 100k vs the normal 50k or 70k. That means if you get that RR, you are down in equaling the tv by 30-50k. Same goes for an Apothecary. Those two things alone don't compare to the actual value of what you are buying for the match. Star players are also overpriced (considerably) and also have loner. I think the only thing that really isn't overpriced is that damn wizard...lol. Anyway, in this case, since the tv is soo much different from each other, I would say "let the player spend what they want." And with this example, I dis-favor the whole idea of "financial fairplay."

    And because of my 2nd example, I would have to vote no to the whole "financial fairplay" idea. It would protect the higher team values a little too much and not offer a better (albiet minor at that) competition for them.
     
  18. FatZomby

    FatZomby Member

    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Central
    Steam Username:
    FatZomby
    Cyanide Username:
    FatZomby
    Country Flag:
    I don't think anyone is looking at you as a bad guy. You are simply voicing your point of view and not cutting anyone down for theirs.
     
  19. TravelScrabble

    TravelScrabble Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,253
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada (UTC -4)
    Steam Username:
    travelscrabble
    Cyanide Username:
    travelscrabble
    Country Flag:
    This discussion is very over. That said the trouble with your second example is that no coach in his right mind would spend all of his bank in that case since they are unlikely to win the game anyway and throwing their bank at the problem isn't going to help. Inducements experience clear diminishing returns with wizards being the clear best bang for your buck followed by apos/babes/bribes and then certain star players. Moreover, in games with a big TV differential the overdog has a fairly well documented and significant advantage, Therefore if you're already getting 400k in inducements there is almost never any reason why you would risk the long term health of your team to buy the less value for money inducements chasing a lost cause. In other words you're protecting the underdog from losing the ability to do something they would virtually never choose to do.
     
  20. Orielensis

    Orielensis Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,973
    Steam Username:
    Orielensis
    Cyanide Username:
    Orielensis
    Country Flag:
    That was an amazing way to introduce the rest of your post Travel! ;)