The 4th Sheep Draft - R16 Voting - Thread 1

[antohan]

Not sure what others make of this, but we've just had 48 hours worth of gamethread done in 12. Hurrah!

It certainly works for me in this context: nothing much to learn about players, no boring focus on individual battles with the weak links that always feature in a R16... just some discussion to be had re: how a team has been constructed.

Wouldn't work as well in drawing out stories on unsung heroes, etc. which you would want in a thematic draft with a limited and more obscure pool.

 

[P-Nut]

Not sure what others make of this, but we've just had 48 hours worth of gamethread done in 12. Hurrah!

It certainly works for me in this context: nothing much to learn about players, no boring focus on individual battles with the weak links that always feature in a R16... just some discussion to be had re: how a team has been constructed.

Wouldn't work as well in drawing out stories on unsung heroes, etc. which you would want in a thematic draft with a limited and more obscure pool.

Yeah I think it's worked well. The only thing I feel would have been better was to do it the way stain first announced it. So me and Cal would be up against each other etc but still all in the same thread. Gets the games done in the same time but adds a degree of tactical influence to it

 

[Annahnomoss]

Not sure what others make of this, but we've just had 48 hours worth of gamethread done in 12. Hurrah!

It certainly works for me in this context: nothing much to learn about players, no boring focus on individual battles with the weak links that always feature in a R16... just some discussion to be had re: how a team has been constructed.

Wouldn't work as well in drawing out stories on unsung heroes, etc. which you would want in a thematic draft with a limited and more obscure pool.

Agreed.

 

[antohan]

Yeah I think it's worked well. The only thing I feel would have been better was to do it the way stain first announced it. So me and Cal would be up against each other etc but still all in the same thread. Gets the games done in the same time but adds a degree of tactical influence to it

As mentioned, for a first round of games I think this works best because it removes the focus on the usual weak link targeting that go with R16. Also, it removes the luck of the draw element which often eliminates very strong sides in deadly matchups while pretty shite teams advance beating an even bigger pile of garbage.

Not the case here seeing as we have an All-Time pool, but it happens to one side at least every single draft.

I think it's probably a good thing if you have to build a team that survives a round like this, as opposed to one that isn't exactly balanced but has the right weapon for a specific match at hand.

 

[P-Nut]

As mentioned, for a first round of games I think this works best because it removes the focus on the usual weak link targeting that go with R16. Also, it removes the luck of the draw element which often eliminates very strong sides in deadly matchups while pretty shite teams advance beating an even bigger pile of garbage.

Not the case here seeing as we have an All-Time pool, but it happens to one side at least every single draft.

I think it's probably a good thing if you have to build a team that survives a round like this, as opposed to one that isn't exactly balanced but has the right weapon for a specific match at hand.

Yeah true I suppose if it's known from the start of drafting then it would be better. That way you can build a side to match. The league idea of 5 teams top 2 go through is the perfect mixture for me

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Not sure what others make of this, but we've just had 48 hours worth of gamethread done in 12. Hurrah!

It certainly works for me in this context: nothing much to learn about players, no boring focus on individual battles with the weak links that always feature in a R16... just some discussion to be had re: how a team has been constructed.

Wouldn't work as well in drawing out stories on unsung heroes, etc. which you would want in a thematic draft with a limited and more obscure pool.

Fully agree.

And to repeat what I said back when this idea first started to get some traction, this is a concept designed for drafts loaded with familiar players who really don't need the airtime, and who are very unlikely to generate interesting discussions.

For regional drafts, era drafts and other drafts with a specific theme we can, and should, do the full monty with traditional match-ups.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Yeah I think it's worked well. The only thing I feel would have been better was to do it the way stain first announced it. So me and Cal would be up against each other etc but still all in the same thread. Gets the games done in the same time but adds a degree of tactical influence to it

It's mainly about the pool/theme, though. With too many obvious names involved it gets a bit pointless for neutrals.

The involved managers may feel the need to get tactical points across - but in my opinion these drafts should not cater firstly to the managers. They will be more or less involved and interested regardless of what sort of players they're arguing for - not so for the neutrals (who vastly outnumber the managers in any given match thread).

 

[crappycraperson]

Not sure what others make of this, but we've just had 48 hours worth of gamethread done in 12. Hurrah!

It certainly works for me in this context: nothing much to learn about players, no boring focus on individual battles with the weak links that always feature in a R16... just some discussion to be had re: how a team has been constructed.

Wouldn't work as well in drawing out stories on unsung heroes, etc. which you would want in a thematic draft with a limited and more obscure pool.

Works well and also means that you don't end up with ouster of a manager who drafted the second strongest team going to one who drafted the best in the very first round itself.