Player Management and additions

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Two extra features I wouldn't mind seeing since it is causing issues with
team management:

Allow full control over a player for an Admin.  I switched my league from
LRB 5 to 6, and I saw the big warning on not doing this with OBBLM.  Since
it wasn't going to impact many teams(small league ATT) I decided to do it
anyways.  This isn't too high priority since once LRB 6 is official word is
no updates for a long time.  Would still be handy for leagues slower to
adopt the new rules and keep using OBBLM without wrecking many established
teams with no way to fix them.  The teams that had player types
changed(Khemri) might have problems with being unable to change the
character type, but that can be noted elsewhere and not impact each game as
much.

The only issue it caused was a Wood Elf Catcher switching to the new LRB6
version.  As an Admin, it would be nice if I could just give his one
Catcher +1 Movement, and remove the Sprint skill.  I can't add movement and
since Sprint is now a base skill it doesn't want to let me remove it.(OBBLM
.7)  

Also, being able to adjust a Players Value for non SPP advancement reasons.
 For example, winning the Chaos Cup lets you add Mutations ect. but it
doesn't change the players value at all when you do with OBBLM.  This makes
the coach update their PDF print out by hand every game after this point. 
I would wager this one is an easier change, just adding an extra variable
used to calculate total player value.

Also, is there a better place to put general requests/ideas in?  This seems
more like a dev forum for working on things, not general public chatter.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by meini...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 9:53

[GoogleCodeExporter]

No, this is the place to post stuff like this - your right on ;-).

The reason for the warning is exactly that. 
Player position names have changed, which needs to be corrected in the DB 
because we
don't (unfortunately, in retrospect) use position IDs. This requires some SQL
scripting, which I won't do before lrb6 is official.

The sudden changes in your wood elf character is because his base properties 
(those
defined in the LRB) have changed from lrb5 to 6, as you have noticed yourself. 
You
can't change this, and I don't see why you want to? It wouldn't be a lrb6 
player type
then... if this IS your wish I suggest changing the character in 
lib/game_data_lrb6x.php.

Extra value for players was actually implemented not long ago in r99 for the 
same
reason (issue 106) (it's a post v. 0.7 change).

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 10:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Is there a proper place for discussion of ideas?  I didn't see anything on your 
site
outside of a direct email link to you, and I figured you had better things to 
do than
read email spam.  Not that this isn't doing just that :)

The reason you would want to change older players back to their pre new version
change is according to page 24:

"Any team rosters that are not ‘legal’ under the new rules can carry on 
using the
players that are in the team, but any replacements should be purchased from the 
new
rosters."

Original comment by meini...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 10:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Darn. Never saw that in the rules review. Then I would've spent my cash on 
buying
catchers for my wood elf team before switching to LRB6. :P

I dont have a solution for different "copies" of positionals, Nicholas. We 
converted
our old teams straight to LRB6 with no arguments from coaches allowed. (I think 
I was
the only one that got any negative impact on my team. The other coaches would've
labeled me whiner if I had complained, since I won that league. :P)

Regarding a forum for OBBLM - I've had that thought too. This tool is for issue
reporting and is not optimal for (idea) discussions. But if Nicholas is fine 
with us
having discussions here - so am I. ;-)

/Daniel

Original comment by blodae@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 11:23

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I don't either see how we can support the rule of page 24. It would require two
rulesets being activated at once in obblm, which is impossible due to obblm's 
design.

I don't really care where we discuss stuff. I just thought it would be a good 
idea
having all posts go the same place.
After all, this is kind of a forum? Isn't it? I can't really see the big 
difference
to phpbb, for example. 
Plus, here you don't have to log in, which is important!

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 11:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

...if leagues want to convert to lrb6 I see no other possibility than making 
house
rules which ensure fairness in the transition.

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 11:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yeah, I agree having two different rule sets try to remain implemented is too 
hard. 
That's why i was saying, give the Admin menu full control over adding skills, 
stats,
and player value.

If that was possible then the site admin could go in and "downgrade" positional
players back to what they were before updating the site/team to LRB 6.  No need 
to
try and keep two rule sets active, it just makes one person sit down for a while
converting teams.  Not ideal but likely the cleanest way.

Original comment by meini...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 5:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It's easier said than done :-). 
There is no where (as it is now) to define "subtractionable skills", the same 
way
extra/additional skills are defined, so to say. 
I would prefer for now, since there is a lot of other stuff being worked on, 
that we
officially support either lrb5 and 6, but not transitions. 
I can't see anywhere else this could be used expect for house rules - but there 
are
tons of those, and our limit for implementing everyones request for house rules 
has
to be set somewhere.

Either way, it's not a priority from my side and I'll be postponing it until 
tasks
with higher priority have been resolved.

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 16 Jun 2009 at 10:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think this relates to issue 124 a little bit.

Of course it would take even more to have a team with both LRB5 and LRB6.

Maybe a player's table could have an LRB column that would be LRB5 to begin 
with and 
when the league switches to LRB6 the players all still draw from LRB6, but 
existing 
players get their data from LRB5.

Original comment by funnyfin...@hotmail.com on 1 Jul 2009 at 5:55

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I really really don't want to mix rulesets since one of the fundamental obblm 
design
principles is that only one ruleset is enabled/used at any time.

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 6 Jul 2009 at 10:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Verdict:
--------
I have decided that, since both giving full player control and mixing lrb6 with 
lrb5
rules are equally (too) large jobs, converting to lrb6 from lrb5 will have to 
be done
by agreeing on house rules to ensure fairness in the transition.

Original comment by Nimda...@gmail.com on 15 Jul 2009 at 9:22

• Changed state: Done