How would you touch up the DT/SC system?

[mrmatt]

For me - changes should be about bring more diversity into the teams. It's just annoying having the top 100,000 teams sharing 25+ players... and mostly using a total talent pool of about 60 players.
I reckon retaining the 33 player squads but increasing player pricing is the way to go. I mean, no real AFL team has the amount of guns that our dream teams do. Coaches would then be more discerning on the premium choices and more creative about their mid-pricers (who there'd be a lot more of in each side).

Also the structure of the game-day 22 no longer reflects the actual game. I'm not sure on the answer here but is seems to me a re-working of this could really add to variety. Instead of backs, mids, rucks forwards, why not:
TALLS: Rucks, Key-Position defenders, Key Posi Forwards (A lot of players would have DP across these categories.
SMALLS: Mids, Fors, Backs (again with a lot more DP).
Starting 22's could maybe have some flexibility in structure (ie playing one ruck or 2), number of KPP's etc.
Bench players can come from any category - Min. of one tall.
Sub - again from any category - option to use his score to replace another.
DP could also combine KPP and midfielder - eg Pavlich to add uber flexibility.
Seems like a lot but I think this could all be reflected in a simple way that wouldn't alienate the casual coach while it would add a whole hell of a lot for the veterans.

 

[BulbStar]

My recommendations for both SC/DT after reading this thread:

- Players price changes after 2 games (waiting 2 games before the bubble is too easy, would be picking up rookies during the season more risky).

- Higher price variance (players averaging 100+ should be like 200-300k more than players averaging 80), this will make picking premiums harder and will add more diversity to teams. Right now everyone picks the same players, it is quite boring.

- 5% interest per round on your bank sounds really good. Will add alot more strategy to the game.

- More midfielders, most of the time the game is played in midfield hence all the midfielders are always the highest scoring. Makes sense to increase the amount (maybe less forwards).

 

[yogibbear]

For me - changes should be about bring more diversity into the teams. It's just annoying having the top 100,000 teams sharing 25+ players... and mostly using a total talent pool of about 60 players.
I reckon retaining the 33 player squads but increasing player pricing is the way to go. I mean, no real AFL team has the amount of guns that our dream teams do. Coaches would then be more discerning on the premium choices and more creative about their mid-pricers (who there'd be a lot more of in each side).

Also the structure of the game-day 22 no longer reflects the actual game. I'm not sure on the answer here but is seems to me a re-working of this could really add to variety. Instead of backs, mids, rucks forwards, why not:
TALLS: Rucks, Key-Position defenders, Key Posi Forwards (A lot of players would have DP across these categories.
SMALLS: Mids, Fors, Backs (again with a lot more DP).
Starting 22's could maybe have some flexibility in structure (ie playing one ruck or 2), number of KPP's etc.
Bench players can come from any category - Min. of one tall.
Sub - again from any category - option to use his score to replace another.
DP could also combine KPP and midfielder - eg Pavlich to add uber flexibility.
Seems like a lot but I think this could all be reflected in a simple way that wouldn't alienate the casual coach while it would add a whole hell of a lot for the veterans.

Nope. You'd still be left with the same 25+ player commonality between the top sides.

 

[AJP123]

The ability to three-cycle three players:
e.g.:

Player A is FWD-DEF,
Player B is DEF-MID,
Player C is MID-FWD.

Swap A in FWD, B in DEF and C in MID, to make A in DEF, B in MID, C in FWD.

Extend this to however many combinations there are possible of these. Even though I study maths, I can't be bothered working this out .

Also, TPP's (triple position players) would be awesome, although a little broken, IMO.

Liking some of these other suggestions, too:
~Interest on cash in bank
~4 Emergencies
~Keep the trades and squad sizes the same even after no-byes start again next year
~Price rise after two rounds (would the 3-round rolling average rule for price changes still be the same, though? Or would it go to a 2-round rolling average).
~More DPPing of Rookies. Jasper Pittard should DEFINITELY have been a MID/DEF Mzungu, too, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Arthur Mongrel]

The whole concept of Fantasy Football is to put you into the coaches box. As such, it should be based along similar lines to coaching an AFL side.

The AFL doesn't have 16 teams all being captained by Dane Swan. Therefore you need to start with a player draft and a salary cap. This would ensure unique teams. You also need to have a "squad" that resembles an AFL list - ie. something like 40 players, with a spread of positions. That would take up 640 out of about 800 listed players and leave an undrafted pool of roughly 160 players.

When selecting a team, the same principles should apply - ie. lock in before bouncedown on Friday, but you can name a squad of 25 - starting line-up of 22, with 3 emergencies. You can make one change to your starting 22, prior to commencement of action, say Saturday evening (or you could make it the bouncedown for the 4th game of the round, or something) from your emergencies, only.

Positions and scoring are fairly right - so wouldn't mess with that aspect too much. Trading could be limited to one per week from the "undrafted pool". You could also allow for a small number of trades between coaches, providing they are acceptable to more than 50% of rival coaches.

Perpetual Leagues is another option that I think deserves a look into. You can take your team from one year into the next. Perhaps at the end of the season you could cull your squad back to 25 players and then have rookie and pre-season drafts, the same as the AFL, to top back up to 40 - still keeping within the new salary cap for the coming year. The sides finishing lowest the previous year, get first tilt at the new players. Coaches could resign and new coaches be appointed - just like the real thing. The drafts also give the competition more of a year round feel.

Does kill of the people entering multiple teams - will be difficult managing one squad, let alone 2 or more and you will need to have a slot in a league to play.

This is a bit like Pro, but also takes in aspects from FantasyFooty.net.au - which I think has a lot of the right ideas in its competition.

Not sure the AFL and sponsors would like it - possible less competitors, due to time involvement required - but the fantasy footy purist I think, would be in favour.

Just my thoughts - let rip - I'm sure there are some gaping holes in this design.

 

[yogibbear]

The whole concept of Fantasy Football is to put you into the coaches box. As such, it should be based along similar lines to coaching an AFL side.

The AFL doesn't have 16 teams all being captained by Dane Swan. Therefore you need to start with a player draft and a salary cap. This would ensure unique teams. You also need to have a "squad" that resembles an AFL list - ie. something like 40 players, with a spread of positions. That would take up 640 out of about 800 listed players and leave an undrafted pool of roughly 160 players.

When selecting a team, the same principles should apply - ie. lock in before bouncedown on Friday, but you can name a squad of 25 - starting line-up of 22, with 3 emergencies. You can make one change to your starting 22, prior to commencement of action, say Saturday evening (or you could make it the bouncedown for the 4th game of the round, or something) from your emergencies, only.

Positions and scoring are fairly right - so wouldn't mess with that aspect too much. Trading could be limited to one per week from the "undrafted pool". You could also allow for a small number of trades between coaches, providing they are acceptable to more than 50% of rival coaches.

Perpetual Leagues is another option that I think deserves a look into. You can take your team from one year into the next. Perhaps at the end of the season you could cull your squad back to 25 players and then have rookie and pre-season drafts, the same as the AFL, to top back up to 40 - still keeping within the new salary cap for the coming year. The sides finishing lowest the previous year, get first tilt at the new players. Coaches could resign and new coaches be appointed - just like the real thing. The drafts also give the competition more of a year round feel.

Does kill of the people entering multiple teams - will be difficult managing one squad, let alone 2 or more and you will need to have a slot in a league to play.

This is a bit like Pro, but also takes in aspects from FantasyFooty.net.au - which I think has a lot of the right ideas in its competition.

Not sure the AFL and sponsors would like it - possible less competitors, due to time involvement required - but the fantasy footy purist I think, would be in favour.

Just my thoughts - let rip - I'm sure there are some gaping holes in this design.

BAHAHAHAAHAH if these were the rules for the competition then I'd end up with about 3-4 players that I was happy with MAX.

 

[mezaire]

Really need to fix the DT system if the sub rule continues.

I have B.Smith playing today and against GC at home that was the right choice over Stanley but due to no error of my own it looks like i'll basically get a zero.

Now if that was an injury I'd be happy to cop it sweet but sttarting as a sub is bloody annoying.

They should give you the opportunity to swap a starting sub or a subbed player for your nominated emergency. Pretty simp,y and can't be hard for them to do.

 

[yogibbear]

Really need to fix the DT system if the sub rule continues.

I have B.Smith playing today and against GC at home that was the right choice over Stanley but due to no error of my own it looks like i'll basically get a zero.

Now if that was an injury I'd be happy to cop it sweet but sttarting as a sub is bloody annoying.

They should give you the opportunity to swap a starting sub or a subbed player for your nominated emergency. Pretty simp,y and can't be hard for them to do.

OR the afl should just scrap the sub rule. OR the afl should make teams nominate the sub when the teams are named.

 

[mrmatt]

Nope. You'd still be left with the same 25+ player commonality between the top sides.

Interested to know the logic behind the statement, yogi. If the MN was raised to such a level that there guns and rookies strategy wouldn't be possible then I feel diversity can be the only result. Each year every club has a number of players who potentially could take their game 'to the next level' but coaches rarely pick any of these guys as they don't fit with conventional fantasy footy strategy. I reckon bringing these players into calculation would make the overall FF experience a better one.

 

[Jolldo87]

The whole concept of Fantasy Football is to put you into the coaches box. As such, it should be based along similar lines to coaching an AFL side.

The AFL doesn't have 16 teams all being captained by Dane Swan. Therefore you need to start with a player draft and a salary cap. This would ensure unique teams. You also need to have a "squad" that resembles an AFL list - ie. something like 40 players, with a spread of positions. That would take up 640 out of about 800 listed players and leave an undrafted pool of roughly 160 players.

When selecting a team, the same principles should apply - ie. lock in before bouncedown on Friday, but you can name a squad of 25 - starting line-up of 22, with 3 emergencies. You can make one change to your starting 22, prior to commencement of action, say Saturday evening (or you could make it the bouncedown for the 4th game of the round, or something) from your emergencies, only.

Positions and scoring are fairly right - so wouldn't mess with that aspect too much. Trading could be limited to one per week from the "undrafted pool". You could also allow for a small number of trades between coaches, providing they are acceptable to more than 50% of rival coaches.

Perpetual Leagues is another option that I think deserves a look into. You can take your team from one year into the next. Perhaps at the end of the season you could cull your squad back to 25 players and then have rookie and pre-season drafts, the same as the AFL, to top back up to 40 - still keeping within the new salary cap for the coming year. The sides finishing lowest the previous year, get first tilt at the new players. Coaches could resign and new coaches be appointed - just like the real thing. The drafts also give the competition more of a year round feel.

Does kill of the people entering multiple teams - will be difficult managing one squad, let alone 2 or more and you will need to have a slot in a league to play.

This is a bit like Pro, but also takes in aspects from FantasyFooty.net.au - which I think has a lot of the right ideas in its competition.

Not sure the AFL and sponsors would like it - possible less competitors, due to time involvement required - but the fantasy footy purist I think, would be in favour.

Just my thoughts - let rip - I'm sure there are some gaping holes in this design.

You sound like you'd enjoy AFL Team Manager. The rules you've described are very similar to those of AFL Team Manager.

There's a couple of free teams at the moment so check it out and if you're keen let me know.

 

[Arthur Mongrel]

You sound like you'd enjoy AFL Team Manager. The rules you've described are very similar to those of AFL Team Manager.

There's a couple of free teams at the moment so check it out and if you're keen let me know.

Wow - contracts and everything. Bit more involved than I was suggesting, but I am interested. Wouldn't mind having a look into it, Jolldo!

 

[Pocket_Pears]

For me - changes should be about bring more diversity into the teams. It's just annoying having the top 100,000 teams sharing 25+ players... and mostly using a total talent pool of about 60 players.
I reckon retaining the 33 player squads but increasing player pricing is the way to go. I mean, no real AFL team has the amount of guns that our dream teams do. Coaches would then be more discerning on the premium choices and more creative about their mid-pricers (who there'd be a lot more of in each side).

The reason everyone goes Guns & Rookies strategy is because rookies are seriously undervalued. If every rookie was priced at 150-175k instead of 100k, you would see more mid-price strategies being played, and therefore more diversity.

This is still less than all but the worst mid-pricers so is not entirely unreasonable and is more in line with the sort of cost-output ratio you would expect from a first year player.

 

[igotthepower]

The whole concept of Fantasy Football is to put you into the coaches box. As such, it should be based along similar lines to coaching an AFL side.

The AFL doesn't have 16 teams all being captained by Dane Swan. Therefore you need to start with a player draft and a salary cap. This would ensure unique teams. You also need to have a "squad" that resembles an AFL list - ie. something like 40 players, with a spread of positions. That would take up 640 out of about 800 listed players and leave an undrafted pool of roughly 160 players.

When selecting a team, the same principles should apply - ie. lock in before bouncedown on Friday, but you can name a squad of 25 - starting line-up of 22, with 3 emergencies. You can make one change to your starting 22, prior to commencement of action, say Saturday evening (or you could make it the bouncedown for the 4th game of the round, or something) from your emergencies, only.

Positions and scoring are fairly right - so wouldn't mess with that aspect too much. Trading could be limited to one per week from the "undrafted pool". You could also allow for a small number of trades between coaches, providing they are acceptable to more than 50% of rival coaches.

Perpetual Leagues is another option that I think deserves a look into. You can take your team from one year into the next. Perhaps at the end of the season you could cull your squad back to 25 players and then have rookie and pre-season drafts, the same as the AFL, to top back up to 40 - still keeping within the new salary cap for the coming year. The sides finishing lowest the previous year, get first tilt at the new players. Coaches could resign and new coaches be appointed - just like the real thing. The drafts also give the competition more of a year round feel.

Does kill of the people entering multiple teams - will be difficult managing one squad, let alone 2 or more and you will need to have a slot in a league to play.

This is a bit like Pro, but also takes in aspects from FantasyFooty.net.au - which I think has a lot of the right ideas in its competition.

Not sure the AFL and sponsors would like it - possible less competitors, due to time involvement required - but the fantasy footy purist I think, would be in favour.

Just my thoughts - let rip - I'm sure there are some gaping holes in this design.

You could create that setup at www.ultimatefooty.com, might want to give it a look

 

[Pocket_Pears]

Thought I might add another idea...

Non-Positional Bench:

Maintain the player position restrictions on the field, but have no position restrictions for the bench. Its basically one big group of 11 players that you can rotate your on-field players with.

Gives players the following advantages:

- Can trade a player in one position for a player in a different position when they are on the bench. Cos it sucks when you have a plethora of forward options, yet are copping multiple zeros in the back line. You could effectively upgrade a forward rookie to a backline keeper then put him in your backline.

- Lets you pick the player balance that YOU want, rather than being restricted by positions. Meaning if you know your backline is slightly injury prone you can select an extra backline rookie instead of a 4th ruck you will never use.

- Can move that MMP forward into the midfield without needing another FWD/MID in your midfield to swap with.

- 3-way or even 4-way MMP swaps become possible.


Would like to see this combined with 'soft' position restrictions on field (which I've suggested before), where you can put a player in any position on the field, but if its not their natural position, you get a % decrease to their weekly score(say, -30% for example).

 

[faquito]

I don't think the DT system needs to be changed much, I like some of the suggestions regarding subs. But I think with new rules comes new strategies, so I like adapting each year to the changes.

I personally think if they could add an icon on the players (like the bandaid/green dot), that you can hover over with a text box appearing to add comments.

E.g: you'd highlight over a player you'd be looking at downgrading/upgrading and you'd have your notes on who you wanted to trade in. (Curnow: injured 4-6 weeks, trade in Mundy)

I think it would make for easier planning and might keep you grounded from impulse trades.

 

[timster]

I don't think the DT system needs to be changed much, I like some of the suggestions regarding subs. But I think with new rules comes new strategies, so I like adapting each year to the changes.

I personally think if they could add an icon on the players (like the bandaid/green dot), that you can hover over with a text box appearing to add comments.

E.g: you'd highlight over a player you'd be looking at downgrading/upgrading and you'd have your notes on who you wanted to trade in. (Curnow: injured 4-6 weeks, trade in Mundy)

I think it would make for easier planning and might keep you grounded from impulse trades.

+1 great idea!

 

[Portmanteau]

I'd like to see spoils added. The best defenders would get ~6-10 extra points a week from this, yes?

 

[Spider Klein]

Thought I might add another idea...

Non-Positional Bench:

Maintain the player position restrictions on the field, but have no position restrictions for the bench. Its basically one big group of 11 players that you can rotate your on-field players with.

Gives players the following advantages:

- Can trade a player in one position for a player in a different position when they are on the bench. Cos it sucks when you have a plethora of forward options, yet are copping multiple zeros in the back line. You could effectively upgrade a forward rookie to a backline keeper then put him in your backline.

- Lets you pick the player balance that YOU want, rather than being restricted by positions. Meaning if you know your backline is slightly injury prone you can select an extra backline rookie instead of a 4th ruck you will never use.

- Can move that MMP forward into the midfield without needing another FWD/MID in your midfield to swap with.

- 3-way or even 4-way MMP swaps become possible.


Would like to see this combined with 'soft' position restrictions on field (which I've suggested before), where you can put a player in any position on the field, but if its not their natural position, you get a % decrease to their weekly score(say, -30% for example).

Like that idea. Can only play on field though in the positions they are but I like the idea of trading players for anyone.

Not a fan of the -30% thing though.

 

[Arthur Mongrel]

You could create that setup at www.ultimatefooty.com, might want to give it a look

OK - I'm playing "FantasyFooty" this year and that is draft based and you can have a 40 man squad and flexibility in number of teams in each league. You can trade in and out of the "undrafted pool". So, it's a bit like DT Pro, except it doesn't cost you anything and you can have a bigger squad.

Like the idea of AFL Team Manager, but a little worried that it takes it a little too far - just reading the boards and the rules, the "protocol" involved. I like the idea of contracts, but think it might be just a little bit too much.

"UltimateFooty" has great features and better graphics than "FantasyFooty" and seems to give you a bit of an option, so far as "emergencies". It allows you to name a starting 22 plus 3 emergencies, from any position. Other than that, pretty similar.

The main thing I think these sites all lack, is the ability to combine the player draft, with a salary cap and a realistic squad size. If DT and / or SC could bring these features in, I reckon it would be unreal. They have the on-line scoring, fantastic graphics, but every team is similar. I know this will probably kill off trading to some extent, as a skill, but you still have to get a good and versatile group of players and then you have to manage them through the season - injuries, poor form, suspensions and so on.

Also, the perpetual concept has appeal and becomes an important part of getting your squad right and then trading comes in through rookie and pre-season drafts and topping up your squad with the right players.

Willl have a more in depth look at AFL Team Manager over the off season - would love to play them all, but if you're in DT and SC and you do the Pro, then it starts getting a bit hard to track 6 or 7 different comps.

 

[Pocket_Pears]

Not a fan of the -30% thing though.

This is in relation to 'soft' position restrictions on the actual field. You can chop and change your team anyway you like, but if you put a defender in your forward line for a week, they cop a -% to their weekly score.

Basically to stop you putting midfielders everywhere.

Unless you think -30% is too harsh? Perhaps -20%?

 

[power-ade]

Don't think it should be changed much at all only a few extra ways to score points would be good IMO.

1 point for a marking spoil like a hit out (this way Prestigicomo would have been higher priced than rookies.)
1 point of a running bounce
1 point smother
2 points for a bump
-3 points for a 50 metre penalty (currently not included as a free kick)

 

[Unrivaled Mach]

I would give smother around 4 points rather than 1, its not all that common

 

[Benno_900]

Smother should just be recorded as a tackle. Maybe the same for 50s as FA.

I wouldn't add any other stats though.

 

[GiantForce]

No changes point scoring wise.

I would like the 2 man benches to return next year and 20 trade limit to return.

4th Ruck spots is pretty pointless..maybe in 2012 we have 9 Defenders, 8 Midfielders, 3 Rucks, 9 Forwards and we're able to choose were the 30th player goes and able to change throughout the year via DPP.

Maybe make that amount of trades you can use per week unlimited to trap some of the trade happy people too.

 

[Pocket_Pears]

Don't think it should be changed much at all only a few extra ways to score points would be good IMO.

1 point for a marking spoil like a hit out (this way Prestigicomo would have been higher priced than rookies.)
1 point of a running bounce
1 point smother
2 points for a bump
-3 points for a 50 metre penalty (currently not included as a free kick)

Smothers and spoils should be equal to tackles in my opinion. In both cases you are stopping your opponent from disposing of the ball, just like with a tackle. (with the spoil you are stopping your opponent marking and then disposing).

One point for a running bounce is great too, as long as they end up disposing of the ball. Not much point running it down the wing if you get tackled and lose it.