Discarded, all players left with massive boners in the dugouts. Ludicrous.
BTW, @Chesterlestreet agree on power cards, I liked the sound of them and it allowed me to play the Bamboozle draft with Wicked Wango cards. Lots of options there.
Ideas For Fantasy Draft Match Threads (New Ways Of Playing Out Matches)
- Thread starter Chesterlestreet
- Start date
- Status
Discarded, all players left with massive boners in the dugouts. Ludicrous.
BTW, @Chesterlestreet agree on power cards, I liked the sound of them and it allowed me to play the Bamboozle draft with Wicked Wango cards. Lots of options there.
Yeah I certainly don't mind hosting it. Definitely would appreciate a co host in case I get busy and we need to keep moving on - 2 hosts better than one.
However before we do, let's come to a consensus on
A) how we can make match days more suitable for everyone and
B) the list of criterion.
Aye I like power cards too.
As far as I can see, a TP system and a transfer system is very easy to accommodate in the criteria snake draft idea.
Power cards I'm not sure but I'm sure there is a way.
As far as I can see, a TP system and a transfer system is very easy to accommodate in the criteria snake draft idea.
Power cards I'm not sure but I'm sure there is a way.
Re: scan voters.
A very simple rule could be that your vote doesn't count unless you've posted in the match thread, thus proving that you're at least half interested - and not just voting blindly for your favourite player or whatever the case may be.
A very simple rule could be that your vote doesn't count unless you've posted in the match thread, thus proving that you're at least half interested - and not just voting blindly for your favourite player or whatever the case may be.
This is going to be "The Weakest Link".
Also, on closing match threads early I must say in against it. I like the 24 time. Reason being I can get busy at work or I might have a night out planned. When it's 24h, I know I have time at some point either before I sleep or wake up or crammed into lunch to read and make a valid vote.
There must be a way to keep the time and limit the strain on managers. I put forward my initial thoughts but they're very much off the top of my head and could well be crap!
There must be a way to keep the time and limit the strain on managers. I put forward my initial thoughts but they're very much off the top of my head and could well be crap!
I like that idea. The idea you must at least support your vote with a reason.
Shall I start a thread for brain storming ideas and fixing a set up for the criteria draft? We can run that thread in parallel with this one where we can talk about match days.
Aye, do that. Separate issues.
I'll change the thread title here - ideas about match threads, etc.
I love it too that is bloody brilliant.
Indeed. Kudos to @Chesterlestreet
I have created the thread by the way. Register your interest and discuss!
I have created the thread by the way. Register your interest and discuss!
Count me in, if possible.
One player one Nation sounds most appealing to me. But all ideas under consideration so far sound good.
One player one Nation sounds most appealing to me. But all ideas under consideration so far sound good.
Register interest in the other thread =].
I agree with that the match threads need to be improved. At the moment they are too combatitive, due to the increased competitiveness of the participants. Quite often they aren't pleasurable discussions. You also see a lot of hyperbole and silly statements from managers about the players which is not conducive to a good debate and discussion.
It depends on the purposes of these drafts, whether it's an avenue for generating discussion on different players - Keane vs Robbo, Totti's status as a great - or whether it's a competition. I think recently the balance has shifted more to the latter, and that these have gotten quite competitive. I mentioned the hyperbole from managers, that's a result of trying to win the game rather than stir up some decent debate.
Not sure how you would solve this but there are some really knowledgeable posters who play and read these threads so it would be great if we could develop a format which encourages more chilled out and genuine discussion.
One idea that was suggested in a previous draft was that the managers who are playing the current match can only post a limited amount of times, with the rest of the discussion being led by everyone else. The idea was that this would remove the silly hyperbole/arguments that come with trying to win, and instead you would have a more balanced discussion from everyone else. One problem I can think with that approach is that sometimes other posters who aren't playing dominate the thread or attack one team repeatedly, so not allowing the manager to respond would cause a problem.
Another idea that I seem to remember was having a 'referee' during the matches. Basically they would try and keep the matches flowing properly and stop people from having petty arguments which ruin the threads. I think this would be quite easy to incorporate and may work to make the matches more enjoyable.
It depends on the purposes of these drafts, whether it's an avenue for generating discussion on different players - Keane vs Robbo, Totti's status as a great - or whether it's a competition. I think recently the balance has shifted more to the latter, and that these have gotten quite competitive. I mentioned the hyperbole from managers, that's a result of trying to win the game rather than stir up some decent debate.
Not sure how you would solve this but there are some really knowledgeable posters who play and read these threads so it would be great if we could develop a format which encourages more chilled out and genuine discussion.
One idea that was suggested in a previous draft was that the managers who are playing the current match can only post a limited amount of times, with the rest of the discussion being led by everyone else. The idea was that this would remove the silly hyperbole/arguments that come with trying to win, and instead you would have a more balanced discussion from everyone else. One problem I can think with that approach is that sometimes other posters who aren't playing dominate the thread or attack one team repeatedly, so not allowing the manager to respond would cause a problem.
Another idea that I seem to remember was having a 'referee' during the matches. Basically they would try and keep the matches flowing properly and stop people from having petty arguments which ruin the threads. I think this would be quite easy to incorporate and may work to make the matches more enjoyable.
It would be better to get rid of the poll in that case. It would increase the load a bit as the votes would need to be counted, but then if you have the poll, you would need to cross check who posted a good reason for his vote from the ones who votes, which to me seems a bigger effort. Just posting in the thread isn't that different from a scan vote if someone votes X 2-1 Y as a scoreline or X wins, for example without any reason. So the mandatory requirement should be posting in the thread with a reason, can be a line or a big post but not just the outcome. And in that case imo the poll can be get rid off altogether.
Apart from that I support the idea of reducing the effect of scan votes with such mechanisms. Specially since most managers put plenty of time and effort explaining their thoughts which deserves a lot more than being discarded because they don't have a popular/caf favourite player.
I don't think the scan voter problem is as much of an issue as it used to be. There's nothing worse than folk coming in and voting against a team containing Terry or Gerrard because they "don't like the cnut", but I'm seeing a bit less of that now.
Yes - you have a point. But if it's clearly stated in the thread w/ the poll that you don't vote unless you post, I doubt many would miss the warning - it could even be included in the thread title, say. And people wouldn't vote regardless just for spite - there aren't that many voters to begin with.
And if you're forced to actually post something, even "I think X will win because I prefer cats to dogs", that would eliminate what is meant by "scan voters" in this context. Or so I think.
...on the other hand I agree with this too.
I don't regard scan voters as a big problem. I think we should look into ways of determining the outcome of matches beyond polls - or formats in which polls (w/ scan voters and others who may not be interested in taking part in the debates) count for X and some other factor counts for Y.
Well yeah, when you put it like that.I did send a write up in yesterday, but the world cup as expected did kill all momentum. Hard to resume after a month off
Absolutely agree with Gio here. Theres no issue with scan voting here, just because they don't comment doesn't mean they're not putting the necessary consideration in.
Knowing most of the posters that tend to vote in these drafts, they are almost all pretty knowledgeable about their football
I posted this idea before for a reality draft.
Theme: In real world no manager starts with a team of his choice. He always has to upgrade a existing team to suit his philosophy and attain success.
Players: 16
1) A pool consisting off 3x16 pool of (star / GOAT) players will be formed by each manager nominating one player each in categories Defender, Midfielder and Forward.
2) Normal snake draft to start the game. The 2nd, 4th and 6th rounds will be a random allocation of players belonging to a single category. I.e. On 2nd round the defenders list above will be randomized and a random defender will be allocated to all managers. Same with midfielders in 4th and Forwards in 6th round.
3) Managers have to mould their choices on the fly to create a team around the allocated players with the rest of the picks.
Reinforcement rounds:
4) One random player from each team who played in first game (excl. GK) will be injured/red carded and unable to play next round. The managers have to choose reinforcements to accommodate this.
5) Next round one of the reinforcements will be auto allocated again. Choice of position lies with manager, but not the player!
.
This lessens the control of team resting with each manager and brings about a unpredictability to the tournament. Teams should not only be good, but also flexible, else they perish.....as in reality!
What do you guys think? Can do with a bit of refining, but the concept should make things interesting!
Theme: In real world no manager starts with a team of his choice. He always has to upgrade a existing team to suit his philosophy and attain success.
Players: 16
1) A pool consisting off 3x16 pool of (star / GOAT) players will be formed by each manager nominating one player each in categories Defender, Midfielder and Forward.
2) Normal snake draft to start the game. The 2nd, 4th and 6th rounds will be a random allocation of players belonging to a single category. I.e. On 2nd round the defenders list above will be randomized and a random defender will be allocated to all managers. Same with midfielders in 4th and Forwards in 6th round.
3) Managers have to mould their choices on the fly to create a team around the allocated players with the rest of the picks.
Reinforcement rounds:
4) One random player from each team who played in first game (excl. GK) will be injured/red carded and unable to play next round. The managers have to choose reinforcements to accommodate this.
5) Next round one of the reinforcements will be auto allocated again. Choice of position lies with manager, but not the player!
.
This lessens the control of team resting with each manager and brings about a unpredictability to the tournament. Teams should not only be good, but also flexible, else they perish.....as in reality!
What do you guys think? Can do with a bit of refining, but the concept should make things interesting!
If you guys are ok with the theme, I can run the next one.
I like the idea very much, ye old fruit. You should definitely run it.
Sounds brilliant @Edgar Allan Pillow means that you have to try and get a well balanced team with a lot of flexibility in the side.
Would be nicely timed for me, this. First Trippy's, then EAP's - then I should've finished my own, evil plan for a draft.
I'd like to host the all time British isles one we've been talking about - with some twists. But we'll get back to that in good time.
I'd like to host the all time British isles one we've been talking about - with some twists. But we'll get back to that in good time.
Meanwhile, let's not forget about the (new) main purpose of this thread: ideas about matches/match threads. We still have plenty to discuss there.
*Referee votes(say 5) counting as half the total votes.
*Managers could have 90 minutes matches where they are allowed to comment themselves. It would make it more intense and the effect of tactical changes would be easier to understand. It would also mean that nobody has to spend an entire day of posting and that no manager would get a huge advantage for being able to be online more. Voters/Posters can then ask tactical questions or give their opinion on the match without necessarily voting until the match is finished.
*Managers could have 90 minutes matches where they are allowed to comment themselves. It would make it more intense and the effect of tactical changes would be easier to understand. It would also mean that nobody has to spend an entire day of posting and that no manager would get a huge advantage for being able to be online more. Voters/Posters can then ask tactical questions or give their opinion on the match without necessarily voting until the match is finished.
Great. I will work on getting this refined...
Not just flexibility, but more unpredictability. A team may get Maradona in Round 1, but they may implode if he gets 'injured' randomly in R2....Like Brazil suffered without Neymar in reality. Nothing for granted!
Nice idea. Building on this... Weigted voting can be looked at.... 3 points for votes by playing managers. 2 points for votes by others with a commentry. 1 point for scan votes without commentary.
I think this is definitely worth looking into - IF we're looking to change the impact of so-called scan voters.
I agree, though, with what both Gio and Cutch have touched on in this thread - namely that most of these scan voters are people who know a thing or two. The number of "I'll go for X 'cause he's cute" voters is slender, if not non-existent. But making the more active contributors' votes count for more seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The managers are a bit tricky, mind. The possibility of tactical votes and all that.
Yeah, I don't think it is a good idea as managers are due to the drafts more close to some than the others. Wouldn't give them a higher value than regular voters who actually post reasons.
I'd just completely remove scan voters like someone suggested before, only count voters who post a reason to their thoughts.
Yes. And this wouldn't be hard to enforce either, as I've suggested before. If this is laid out as a clear premise, members voting regardless will not be a significant problem.
And if you're interested enough to make a call based on actually assessing the teams featured - you can take the time to post a reason. It doesn't have to amount to more than a sentence. "X's forward trio is too much for Y to handle." Then the manager can argue all he wants to make other voters think differently - but it's a fair reason for the vote.
Somebody watched a lot of friends.
I loved that particular episode, such random rules are very much up my street.
I'm all for doing a perfectly crazy draft, just for kicks. Random messages from the host being inserted in match threads:
"Streaker runs on to the pitch, headbutts Beckenbauer, who is carried off unconscious. Replacement needed immediately."
The manager then wields his Bamboozle card. Beckenbauer returns, extremely pissed off, beats up the streaker - and is sent off.
Seeing trippys is nearly done, the plans for reality draft are about to be kick started. Ready?
I'll post draft mechanics after the current draft finals.
Many good ideas here. Think I'll steal some.
I'm in next draft no matter what, will think of some new ideas too. @Chesterlestreet
As a cheerleader rather than a manager, I guess its not really my concern, but its fair to say both of the last two drafts have lost momentum due to multiple delays. Maybe its time to consider cutting the participants (if necessary) and making it mandatory to have an assistant manager? The crux being that if real life stops the manager making a pick/submitting tactics/participating in the match thread, his assistant has to step in and make the decisions without consultation, or else the opponent gets a bye.
So basically, stricter deadlines regarding the drafting but more specifically the scheduling of matches.
So basically, stricter deadlines regarding the drafting but more specifically the scheduling of matches.
- Status