Reduce the trade limit. Yes or No?

[Butler]

As we are nearing the last part of the season, it seems like a good time to discuss how the new 44 trade system is working out.

Personally, I was keen to give it a go but I'm starting to really dislike it. My initial thought was that it would open up different strategies on upgrading teams and making cash and also give people more opportunities to take the risk on uniques.

Unfortunately, it hasn't really worked out that way. My reasons for me being against having unlimited trades:

• It reduced the research and skill of picking the right rookies at the start of the year. In other years, if coaches didn't select the right rookies then they had to use valuable trades to get them in. This gave an advantage to those who put in the time and made the right selections.
• Jumping on a unique that performs has less rewards in previous years. It's too easy for people to also bring them in early because if they don't perform then it's just as easy to trade them back out.
• Teams are too easy to complete. Look at all the injuries this year and still most people already have a complete team on the field.
• This year, 2-3 week injuries means they are gone where as in previous years it's a tough choice. The decision to keep/ditch was far more interesting and entertaining.
• No patience is required. Using trades wisely to make a run at the end has been taken out of it.
• Teams are way too similar at this stage of the year. This would be the main one and I see posts complaining about it more and more. Every premium that scores well is swamped.

I'm still interested in DT at this year, it hasn't completely killed it off like it has for some others but it is definitely less interesting than at this stage last year. Would love to hear other peoples thoughts on this.

 

[CaptScott]

Completely agree with you, however I'm happy for DT to remain unlimited if SC has limited trades. Best of both worlds.

 

[lmach]

I'm definitely of the belief that the trades should be reduced, though I think there should be a little more than previous years - maybe around 28?

 

[Schulzenfest]

I didn't like it at first, mostly for the same reasons you've listed above, but I've grown to like it as the year has gone on. I like that it keeps giving the player something to do every week, I like that the player is able to constantly improve their team rather than making a team of 'keepers' and sticking with them to conserve trades for injuries, and I like that the bad luck factor of players copping injuries and suspensions aren't the team killers that they used to be.

 

[oddsok]

Definitely reduce it for next year. I'm really bored with the game at the moment, with everyone having very similar teams.

Mid twenties-30 would be good.

 

[JDWCE]

Teams are all the same. I'm with lmach. Take it away but have a higher trade limit than in previous years... 28-30 or something

 

[Butler]

I didn't like it at first, mostly for the same reasons you've listed above, but I've grown to like it as the year has gone on. I like that it keeps giving the player something to do every week, I like that the player is able to constantly improve their team rather than making a team of 'keepers' and sticking with them to conserve trades for injuries, and I like that the bad luck factor of players copping injuries and suspensions aren't the team killers that they used to be.

I see that side of things and of course, luck with injuries is a major part of it all but trade management then usually comes into it. People that preserved trades by making good selections or being patient then have the advantage over those that are short on trades.

I probably agree with the above posters that a larger amount of trades from previous years would be ideal.

 

[swans4eva]

It makes your start to the season so crucial because it is super hard to make up ground now with so many similar teams.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

I think we are possibly forgetting that the reason the teams are all the same this year is that

There are barely any standout players - across the board players are just playing poorly.
Gary, Swan, Pendles, Barlow, ROK, Griff, Mundy.... and it trails off fairly quickly (K)ornes? Jack? McVeigh? Ebert?, Dangers/Watson injured, Cotchin/Murphy playing poorly, Beams out all season, Boyd basically out all season, where are the McLean's of last season, the average players who put up big numbers? There arent any real uniques like that this season.

 

[Suma Magic]

Strongly against the current system.

25-30 trades, max three a week. Or 5 a fortnight.

 

[amazingjoshy]

Teams were more similar last year imo...people have short memories. Im finding at least 7/8 differntials per matchup compared to this time last year where there were max 4/5

Look at this board too..this time any previous year would be completely dead by now.

Lots of room to take a punt or two in the remaining weeks imo...someone like Gibbs is a prime example. Im thinking most will hold ( I am) but a ballsy trade down to someone like Henderson could really pay off.

 

[VSTone]

without 2 trades per week i would be absolutely shot... as my injury run has been horrific... i think the two trades per week is going to also make the league finals series much more exciting...

without doubt missing injuries,reports and late changes along the way are still the name of the game.

i'd like to see the starting salary cap reduced by 30% to make all teams struggle early on.

 

[SureBuddy]

Everyone keeps saying that the teams are too similar... Have you looked at SC teams? I am in the top 1k for SC and have barely moved up or down a spot for weeks. Everyone has pretty much the same team there. I am seeing much different teams in DT as people are able to take a risk and pick up some POD's they think will do well. SC/limited trades does not allow this as you generally always take the safer option.

 

[beez]

I like the idea of two trades per week, the flexibility it brings makes the game just that little bit less stressful and thus more enjoyable. However, I would advocate for an change in the magic number making it harder to generate cash so quickly.

 

[Jessbek]

Everyone keeps saying that the teams are too similar... Have you looked at SC teams? I am in the top 1k for SC and have barely moved up or down a spot for weeks. Everyone has pretty much the same team there. I am seeing much different teams in DT as people are able to take a risk and pick up some POD's they think will do well. SC/limited trades does not allow this as you generally always take the safer option.

I disagree with this.

Strangely enough my SC is complete with a premo in every bench position and still have trades to spare. Whereas I havent even fully complete my DT yet. I also have a relatively unique team to most and I'm doing alright I think; guys like Mundy, McEvoy, Hibberd Lewis, etc. At the start of the season I was fairly disinterested as I'm more of a DTer so my ranking was way out there. Over the past six or so weeks I have managed to come from around 50k to 3k now with picking players not everyone else has and actually paying attention to my team haha. Safer option might be safer, but it never gets you anywhere close.

Anyway lower the trade count to whatever SC is, that seems to be a good amount.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Was initially against it (unlimited trades), starting off decently in DT.

However during the bye rounds and a couple of rounds thereafter, my team was shot. With some good trading I've now been pumping out scores of 2300+ the last two weeks, and look to be on the rise. Definitely for it.

 

[nefarious]

I don't really care either way.

I believe people just aren't researching hard enough for the good unique players. There's plenty out there, but most people seem too quick to hop on the bandwagon of an in form popular premo. Think David Mundy (3.45%), Trent McKenzie (4.08%), Chris Masten (1.53%).. They're out there.

 

[lmach]

Why not make it 22 trades a week?

 

[Jessbek]

Why not make it 22 trades a week?

Will never happen.

 

[lmach]

Will never happen.

 

[Jessbek]

Lol. U mad?

You asked a question, I answered it.

 

[btemplar88]

Lol. U mad?

You asked a question, I answered it.

sarcasm dude

 

[Jessbek]

sarcasm dude

thanks i got it.

 

[btemplar88]

thanks i got it.

i was waiting for that "ya dont say" picture back at me. that would of been hilarious

 

[lmach]

Lol. U mad?

You asked a question, I answered it.

Rhetorical question, dude.