Reduce the trade limit. Yes or No?

[LanLion]

Wonder if they could introduce a bonus for picking a player with <5% ownership at the time of lockout? Say a +10 bonus? Though I daresay that's too complicated for VS... seeing as they can't get a simple 3-way DPP to work.

I understand the folks that want to reduce the trades significantly (even though this is my 1st year DTing), but my guess is they're trying to force/funnel the old school guys into SC and Fantasy Elite, and main DT is gonna be more and more friendly for the casuals and noobs like myself.

I would like to see the ability to cash in/buy trades. I don't want to see the base number of trades reduced significantly (maybe to 40?) as trading is the most fun aspect for me, and probably is so for most casuals. However I can see the benefit in not just having a stock 2 per week every week, as obviously that increases the value and thought placed into each trade.

I've actually enjoyed this year, got hooked. Even though I was late to round off my team of 22 premo's, to me the trades enough at the moment to keep me interested at this time of year, when I had no chance in eliminator, no chance to chase overall, but am playing for top spot in my league this week.

 

[Spider Klein]

Phase 1 more trades
Phase 2 more website traffic
Phase 3 Advertising Profit.

Give VS credit for figuring out phase 2

The trend every year is increase in trades, I doubt they go backwards from this.
And if they do have extra bye rounds next year they are only going to give us more trades to accommodate.

 

[Spider Klein]

My opponent & I have one different player this week, game decided on Friday night. Dislike

out of interest who?

 

[dylan123]

Phase 1 more trades
Phase 2 more website traffic
Phase 3 Advertising Profit.

Give VS credit for figuring out phase 2

The trend every year is increase in trades, I doubt they go backwards from this.
And if they do have extra bye rounds next year they are only going to give us more trades to accommodate.

Which is why I was very surprised that they didn't introduce the rolling lockout as it generates plenty of traffic over the weekend.

 

[Narkee]

Which is why I was very surprised that they didn't introduce the rolling lockout as it generates plenty of traffic over the weekend.

The day they introduce rolling lockout is the day my fantasy playing days are over. I play to win the comp and spend enough time on it as it is without having to check across the weekend if my players are playing or not. Good luck to those that have the time to do it, but I am not one of them.

 

[dylan123]

The day they introduce rolling lockout is the day my fantasy playing days are over. I play to win the comp and spend enough time on it as it is without having to check across the weekend if my players are playing or not. Good luck to those that have the time to do it, but I am not one of them.

Agreed, really isn't something that's needed in the game either as the way it is now is perfectly fine. That said, I can see it coming in. the same way as they won't reduce trades as it just means more web traffic.

 

[raymagoo]

out of interest who?

Enright & Harry Taylor. 'twas nice to have the points on Friday!

 

[RustNeverSleeps]

I'm coming 38th in SportsBet (lockout on Friday) and 60th in CentreBet (rolling lockout) and find the CentreBet competition much more onerous to manage.

I like my weekends free and won't do the CentreBet competition again in it's current format.

I'd prefer #AFLFantasy to continue with a full lockout on the Friday and limit the trades to 24.

 

[dylan123]

I'd prefer #AFLFantasy to continue with a full lockout on the Friday and limit the trades to 24.

Agree with this 100%, 24 was actually a pretty good number, gives you a few extra to help with a few potential starting picking errors whilst still keeping a bit of a uniqueness between everyones teams.

 

[Narkee]

Agreed, really isn't something that's needed in the game either as the way it is now is perfectly fine. That said, I can see it coming in. the same way as they won't reduce trades as it just means more web traffic.

Surely one of the fantasy sites will maintain a "Friday" lockout competition as I think there is a market for it. Not only will they be able to grab the hardcore players who play all formats but cater for those who prefer not to monitor teams over the weekend.

 

[dylan123]

Surely one of the fantasy sites will maintain a "Friday" lockout competition as I think there is a market for it. Not only will they be able to grab the hardcore players who play all formats but cater for those who prefer not to monitor teams over the weekend.

Hopefully they do this rather then go with the mentality that other pro rolling lockout fans use in the "If you don't like it, don't use it" whilst ignoring the obvious advantage it gives to those that do use it.

I just like full lockouts, I know by 7.40pm (well 7.50pm now) on a Friday (apart from the Monday game weeks) I won't worry about my team again for the weekend, all decisions are locked and loaded for best or worse. The ways to abuse the rolling lockout are massive and I just can't be bothered worrying about that each week with teams in all the different comps as it takes too much time yet if I don't, I'm losing to those that do.

 

[HenrikLundqvist]

Would they consider allowing multiple DPP trades at a given time?

E.g. Trade Nicholls out, swing Rowe from forward to ruck, Staker from back to forward allowing you to trade in a backman?

Would be one way to reduce the impact of injuries/suspensions in a reduced trade season.

 

[Mattrox]

Would they consider allowing multiple DPP trades at a given time?

E.g. Trade Nicholls out, swing Rowe from forward to ruck, Staker from back to forward allowing you to trade in a backman?

Would be one way to reduce the impact of injuries/suspensions in a reduced trade season.

This x10

 

[West123]

Just raise the magic number and make player's prices higher. People were starting with around 13 premiums at the start of the year. Maybe raise the prices to a point where starting only around 11 premiums is possible and some of the luxury trading that I suspect will happen during finals won't happen. 44 trades is good. It was getting to a point where too many trades were being used on injuries last year.

It's not as simple as higher magic number. Bring rookies closer to mid-levels too. This opens up the entire competition. At this point, Gun/Rookie will always be the best option.

 

[West123]

The more I think about it the more I like it. Up rookies prices keep the trades. The problem with just higher magic number is with 2 trades every week you just jump on rookies as they hit the bubble. Sure, we won't have the GC/GWS rookie access like previous years but with the trades like they are you rarely miss getting on a rookie cash cow.

 

[Crawb]

The more I think about it the more I like it. Up rookies prices keep the trades. The problem with just higher magic number is with 2 trades every week you just jump on rookies as they hit the bubble. Sure, we won't have the GC/GWS rookie access like previous years but with the trades like they are you rarely miss getting on a rookie cash cow.

I think there will be a large amount of mature aged state league players at Essendon next year though

 

[gazzathegreat]

The day they introduce rolling lockout is the day my fantasy playing days are over. I play to win the comp and spend enough time on it as it is without having to check across the weekend if my players are playing or not. Good luck to those that have the time to do it, but I am not one of them.

agree 100% with this. I do shift work and once a month ill spend 10 hours on both saturday and sunday working. I dont have the time to look at a rolling lockout. I havent played supercoach this year, but when i log on to fanfooty im constantly reading people in chat talking about changing their captain, etc and it sounds like a lot of hard work. Sadly though, im sure the herald sun supercoach will experience a lot more traffic this year than last year, and VS dream team upon learning about the increase, will follow suit. There are very few things in this world that dont get bastardized for the almighty dollar. Dream team will be no different.

The only thing that might save it is if they charge a pay to play. Right now some of us spend $20 for the assistant coach, but a lot of players dont. There is an opportunity to charge $10 for the whole season to sign up. If they do this and there are still 200,000 people playing, thats 2 mill in their coffers. Surely that offsets a few people looking at a bigpond or NAB advert?

 

[ashley12]

agree 100% with this. I do shift work and once a month ill spend 10 hours on both saturday and sunday working. I dont have the time to look at a rolling lockout. I havent played supercoach this year, but when i log on to fanfooty im constantly reading people in chat talking about changing their captain, etc and it sounds like a lot of hard work. Sadly though, im sure the herald sun supercoach will experience a lot more traffic this year than last year, and VS dream team upon learning about the increase, will follow suit. There are very few things in this world that dont get bastardized for the almighty dollar. Dream team will be no different.

The only thing that might save it is if they charge a pay to play. Right now some of us spend $20 for the assistant coach, but a lot of players dont. There is an opportunity to charge $10 for the whole season to sign up. If they do this and there are still 200,000 people playing, thats 2 mill in their coffers. Surely that offsets a few people looking at a bigpond or NAB advert?

No way in hell they keep 80% of their current fanbase if they make it pay to play.

 

[ashley12]

RE: rookies

The trades can stay if you make the average price of a rookie 100k more then it is now. Its makes it less desirable to go guns and rooks, not only because the average rookie will make less, but the decision to go 500k and 200k player vs 400k and 300k is much closer.

A lot of rookies wont actually make money (you need to average around ~40 to breakeven as a 200k player) and basically you can discount 100k off of every rookie transaction (it costs 100k more to buy obv)

If this was the case, most teams would have roughly 2million less of total team worth, and a team with 19 premos would be as close to complete as you could get by the end of the game.

Putting it another way, the current format of 2 trades a week, current prices would be fantastic if the season was 12 weeks long rather then 23.

 

[blackdiamond]

Only allow a trade to be made if a player has been dropped or injured (still need emergencies for late changes), this could potentially mean there are no trades in one week but maybe six in another week if your team gets decimated.

Also means you really want to get your Round 1 team right, last thing you want is to be carrying a player like Zac Dawson who plays every game but is nothing more than a dreamteam spud.

 

[Borshk]

Trades need to be reduced and the magic number should be increased. This would make the game much more challenging and thus more exciting.
Sadly, it will not happen.
They have made it this way (low magic number, lots of trades) to appeal to the casual Dream Teamer (which is understandable- it is a business). Unfortunately, this makes it easier to pick a gun initial starting team and trade your way to a team full of guns sooner than in years gone by. I personally cant see them changing this because it probably keeps interest levels high for a greater % of the year.

I wouldn't mind, therefore, seeing them introduce changes to other aspects of the game. Perhaps having a cap on the amount of players you can have from one team (ie/ 3 per club. Imagine the difficulty on having to pass on brodie grundy because you already have swan, pendles and beams- adds a new dimension to the game)

Despite what changes they make to the game, I will continue to play as long as they never introduce a rolling lockout!

 

[West Coast Weasel]

Reduce, playing against people with the exact same players ain't fun. Also increase the amount of DPP players!

 

[dylan123]

Even having something like the first 20-25 trades being 'free' where every extra trade costs you 100 odd points would make things a little more interesting.

Still like the 24 trade system the best but I'm keen to try anything anything that isn't 2 trades (or more) a week.

 

[blackdiamond]

How about the price of players only increasing/decreasing if they are in your starting line up, meaning that if you brought in a player like Tom Mitchell this year you would need to field him in your starting team rather than on your bench to receive the increased dollar value - I think it would make people gamble more on points v profit.

This would of course mean that the players value will not be the same for each team but it really comes down to how you manage your team.

 

[ashley12]

Waaaaaaaayyyyyyy to much coding effort involved in that as well as general confusion.

I dont get why everyone is hating on the trades aspect. The trades were/are awesome, the bad part is the fact teams were "complete" with 5 rounds to go.

Read any thread from rounds 3-12 this year. The additional trades were generally considered to make the game more fun.

Plus everyone started with O'Meara, Wines, B. Goodes, 2 of Pittard, Stevenson and Heath, Viney, Dwyer, Macaffer and Blicavs anyway, teams weren't THAT much different at the start of the season compared to now.