Improvements for future years of DT

[Kid A]

I would like unlimited trades per round. it would allow for greater depth of strategy and would make cash flow all the more important.

VS will never implement this because 99% of people are too stupid to use this privilege and will just use up all their trades by round 2.

I predict that VS will increase the salary cap by 10% and give us a couple more trades. Whatever makes the game easier for noob players and consequently increases VS's revenue.

 

[twarby]

a bit off topic but something id like brought in, definetly from left field

for our league.. we should have the option to "tag an opposition player" there points are divided by 2..or something similar.
def has its flaws but its something ive always wanted to do

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

I would like unlimited trades per round. it would allow for greater depth of strategy and would make cash flow all the more important.

VS will never implement this because 99% of people are too stupid to use this privilege and will just use up all their trades by round 2.

I predict that VS will increase the salary cap by 10% and give us a couple more trades. Whatever makes the game easier for noob players and consequently increases VS's revenue.

Did i read that right. Wouldnt that mean a brand new team each week. I actually wouldnt mind this to be a separate game in which research is required to figure out the best 22 each week.

This explains why all your teams are so shit. Even by pet standards the coaches are not very bright.

Actually the Pelican flew away and a Chimpanzee decided to play this year

 

[magpies03]

Did i read that right. Wouldnt that mean a brand new team each week. I actually wouldnt mind this to be a separate game in which research is required to figure out the best 22 each week.



Actually the Pelican flew away and a Chimpanzee decided to play this year

I think Kid A means you still have 20 trades for the season however you can use as many as you want in any given round rather than only being allowed to use 2. You can still only make 20 trades tho.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

a bit off topic but something id like brought in, definetly from left field

for our league.. we should have the option to "tag an opposition player" there points are divided by 2..or something similar.
def has its flaws but its something ive always wanted to do

Mentioned already but nevertheless a good idea.

So i reckon you can select 1 tagger in any position. The tagger in that selected position can only tag players in that position. Ala Kornes (Mid) can tag Ablett, Swan, Monty ect) and i reckon whatever the tagger scores for example Kornes 100. Than divide that by 2 = 50 means you can take 50 points off the oppos score. This can only be used in league comp not overall.

 

[Pumbi]

Agree with Kid A in regards to getting rid of the 2 trade per week restriction, if thats what he was referring to. I see no use for it.

 

[Dunn - Well Done]

Something else with DP i thought was going to be used this year but wasnt, i didnt completely understand the concept until i got my team up on the afl site.

But i reckon you should be able to do something like this as an example.
Waite (B/F) backmen
Carazzo (B/C) midfield
Chapman (C/F) forward

I thought you were going to be able to push Waite forward, than push Chappy midfield and Carazzo in the way that would help you benefit most through saving a zero or using bench to advantage. Its a 3 way swap instead of 2 way which i think could be good especially with 1 team missing each week.

 

[Adebisi]

I would like unlimited trades per round. it would allow for greater depth of strategy and would make cash flow all the more important.

VS will never implement this because 99% of people are too stupid to use this privilege and will just use up all their trades by round 2.

I predict that VS will increase the salary cap by 10% and give us a couple more trades. Whatever makes the game easier for noob players and consequently increases VS's revenue.

Kid A, i see merit in the greater depth in strategy of unlimited trades per round. Surely people wouldnt be stupid enough to blow them all in a few weeks...

I like that idea, as well as lowering the sal cap significantly. And skanks idea abt more mids and less forwards and backs seems a good idea too.

What about more players with the possibility of DP.

Could something more be done with captains...? maybe certain weeks putting restrictions on price of your captain. Say round 4, you can only choose a captain under a certain price.

Or maybe giving players more points depending on hot streaks, or cold streaks...?

 

[SkankDanker]

Some good ideas here, but the 8 mids is not my idea, just one I have heard and really liked - so as much as I would like to take credit....

I can't remember to be honest but it was either Dogs or Walesy maybe who first suggested it last year some time. Someone on NP I think, but my brain isn't what it was pre-Pods.

 

[Bonuspoints]

I think the core of DT is fine. I like the salary cap and the rise and fall of a player's value. Adds to the challenge and the interest of watching your players move in value. Gives you something extra to factor in your decisions other than just points output. I've got a team in one where there is no cap and its points based and I barely pay attention to it. For some reason I just like the dollar values more.

I like that you only have 20 trades as it makes your decisions matter. It adds to the challenge and means you have to invest a bit of thought and energy. With the current number of rounds and lack of a bye its enough trades, but for next year I think they'll need to make some changes. If there is going to be a weekly prize and eliminator I think you need to have a limit on how many trades can be made in a week. Two trades per week is fine, but I wouldn't have a problem with it being extended to three.

Lowering the salary cap mightn't be a bad idea. It pushes people to take on more midpriced players and rookies. There is enough information out there to help those that don't know much about the lesser and no name players.

A tagging add in would be interesting, but possibly difficult to implement. How would you measure it? Does a tagger come in with an instant point deduction to your opponent based on their reputation. For eg. Ling deducts 20 from your opponents score. Dunno if I'd like that. With today's footy it would be hard to measure against the drop in their direct opponent's score output versus their average. Seems to tricky to implement.

As for cost it needs to be free as its gives greater engagement for fans. You could have an elite DT where there is an entry fee and thus greater prizes. I don't see a problem with that as long as there is still the free entry with a good prize. I've used DT to get a some people who aren't big aussie rules fans to develop more of an interest. They jump in and play partly because I push them into it and partly because they see the rest of us constantly talking about it. DT and fantasy footy comps are great for interaction with fans and stimulates interest so I think it should be free to ensure you get as much of this as possible. But an elite competition with a paid entry and super prizes sounds like a good idea.

For next year given the bye and the extra two rounds I reckon they should increase the total trades to 24 and one extra reserves spot in each zone. With those changes and the dual position players you should be able to manage the bye comfortably. After that its up to the DT'er to select his/her side wisely and adds to the challenge. Its the challenge and the fact that decisions matter that makes the game fun.

 

[Wooshavich]

In addition to current DP functionality I would like to have the ability to use the DP feature half way through a trade. Example of how this would work:

1. Trade FWD cash cow out - leaves an FWD empty position
2. Switch a DP player (eg. Chappy) from MID to FWD - leaves an empty MID position
3. Trade premium MID in - brings team back up to 30 players

Benefits:

1. Gives you more flexibility in that a single DP player can make the position swap (currently you need 2).
2. You can milk a cash cow in one position and upgrade another position using only one trade (currently you need 2).
3. Could be useful cover if you cop an LTI - allows you to look at premiums to trade into in any position, not just the one where your player went down.

 

[bloody brilliant]

i would like to see next year:
more DP players.

make it easy to work out the players BE, as half my mates have no idea what Break evens do and how they work ect.

decrease the salary cap,.

decrease players pricing.

when the by comes in this year to make it simplemake it so you can trade out the player who has the bye with the same value or less.
eg
if geelong has a bye. trade ablett out for a playing team like hawks and bring in mitchell, hodge ect. then after lock out you get ablett back to your team straight away. and do not loose or again trades or money.

As stated before have option of having a game tagger, eg ling jones ect, but have a real life one.

just some ideas that probs have already been mentioned before

 

[Benatration]

I wouldn't mind having this 1 week sub idea BUT I don't think VS will change DT too much for GC. Who knows they might just even leave it the way it is now

 

[richskee]

TBH I'd like to see a cap on your captain options.

Everyone every week has GAJ as cpt and now it's just a boring factor of DT. Picking your cpt used to be a really important choice so if they capped each player to only 5 cpt lock ins a year you'd obviously have to save GAJ for the finals.

Would make it a lot more interesting, thoughts?

 

[Adebisi]

richskee...i wouldn't mind seeing something done on the captain front.

What about when selecting starting team, having to choose a certain number of players from each price bracket? e.g, must have 4 players in the 250,000 to 350,000 range, or something similar.

I know these are all just ideas..but i am keen to see things changed for the sake of the skill element in the game. Making new tactics relevant etc.

 

[Walesy]

Ha ha - maybe a user name change is in order, I will confess to you I have no idea what it is meant to mean. I set it up quickly to respond to a post but I think there was a cooling off period and then I was stuck with it.

See, I always just assumed that "Danker" was a verb that I wasn't familiar with... Made even grosser by Websters definition...

Anyways, to bring more skill into this game require one simple change.

Rookies are too cheap. Take a look at the highest salary earners for the year, 99% of them are rookies. So the game becomes about picking all the popular rookies that do well in the pre-season and derp, I did good cause my prems didn't get injured.

Bring a 1st round mid rookie in at a 70 average, and think how hard the game suddenly becomes. Make a 2nd rounder and beyond cost 60ppg.

Forwards and backs can be cheaper, maybe a 60/50 average.

And Rucks can still be rucks.

You do that and the game suddenly becomes about picking breakout players- not just lucking it with your premium selections.

 

[PowerOfThePussy]

No matter how hard or how easy the game is, I still think you'll find the better coaches rising to the top.

There's a bit more to it than just getting lucky with the premiums you pick.

I've always found that the more research you do, the better you perform. If you change the rookie prices and make it about selecting breakout players, then the freako emails will just focus on that instead of the rookies.

I think it's a bit disrespectful to suggest that the top coaches just got lucky. Sure there is an element of luck, but research goes a long way. Not just research on figures, but a good football knowledge and a judgement of whom the better teams are likely to be that year are also elements to make a good coach, amongst other things.

 

[andrew81186]

what do you think about a coach selection?

He scores based on how his team performs that week.

 

[Benatration]

what do you think about a coach selection?

He scores based on how his team performs that week.

NO, see the thing is YOU'RE the coach of YOUR team not Michael Voss or John Worsford but YOU.

Rubbish idea IMO

 

[andrew81186]

NO, see the thing is YOU'RE the coach of YOUR team not Michael Voss or John Worsford but YOU.

Rubbish idea IMO

You're the coach, but the coach adds an element of diversity. It will make it interesting at the start adding someone different.

it adds interest to games, over players.. and you take more interest in teams, and therefore increasing your knowledge of all players too.

 

[andrew81186]

benetration, going by the idea that YOU are the coach is stupid.. of course you make your team.

who would you pick for coach this week? ross lyon, fremantle or geelong?? how interesting..

 

[Benatration]

benetration, going by the idea that YOU are the coach is stupid.. of course you make your team.

who would you pick for coach this week? ross lyon, fremantle or geelong?? how interesting..

FFS, this game is where you pick the best players NOT coaches. Whether you win or loose a league game shouldn't be decided by whether the Bulldogs win or loose.

I've heard some werid ideas in my time but this is the most rubbish idea ever. God I hope VS dont ever employ you