The Fourth RedCafe Sheep Draft

DavidG said:
Well that's good news because I definitely tried to
Click to expand...
And that's why I wrote back explaining we would take the first post with a player name as your pick and ignore the random follow-up post stating "protect" with no player name attached to it.

This doesn't mean the player wasn't protected, mind, just that you didn't do it
:covershisbackagainstfuturemisinterpretationcomplaintsmilie:
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
It should not be. Using Shithead in P3 is a surefire way of making someone else get a sheep. Makes for a dirty play draft. You should restrict shithead to P1 only (let's not even push to P2).
Click to expand...
Thanks for the feedback.

You all have a shithead card and are entitled to use it whenever you want and for whatever purpose.

We hope you enjoy being a shithead.
 
Sorry guys, was away for a couple of days, didn't even realise I was meant to be involved.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Protector and Cheat are OK in P2/P3, but a shithead use guarantees sheep and will only lead to meltdowns...not the good kind. Just dirty play.
Click to expand...

Well...define dirty play. If you mean personal agendas and the like, then yeah. But people who have those, will act on them regardless - and you can always find some way in a draft to be an arsehole.

Making sure an opponent gets a sheep ain't dirty play in itself, though - that's the game.
 
Downcast said:
Let's be clear.

Let's say all the cards can be used whenever we want.

What are the exceptions?
Click to expand...
Pass card only Turn 1, else it would be a get out of jail free card.

Budgets and bidding only relevant to first turns as well.

Some special cards, but only those receiving them will be briefed on them.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Protector and Cheat are OK in P2/P3, but a shithead use guarantees sheep and will only lead to meltdowns...not the good kind. Just dirty play.
Click to expand...
To be honest ideally this should be included in your risk calculations - if you make more risks earlier it's not just increases the chance that you yourself will feck up but also a chance that someone will use the douche card on you. The only way you can't influence it is if 3 players decide to block you in 3 consecutive picks, which is highly unlikely.

Using the card in the p3 is a very dirty play though, on that I agree.
 
The thing here is that you will get plenty chances to build quite a big squad and so there needs to be counter measures to ensure enough sheep are being handed out.
 
antohan said:
And that's why I wrote back explaining we would take the first post with a player name as your pick and ignore the random follow-up post stating "protect" with no player name attached to it.

This doesn't mean the player wasn't protected, mind, just that you didn't do it
:covershisbackagainstfuturemisinterpretationcomplaintsmilie:
Click to expand...

And you're talking about dropped standards in reading comprehension? If it wasn't blatantly clear that my post saying protect directly after my player choice were connected then I'm at a loss.
 
DavidG said:
And you're talking about dropped standards in reading comprehension? If it wasn't blatantly clear that my post saying protect directly after my player choice were connected then I'm at a loss.
Click to expand...
It was the only scenario. It just didn't make sense given the rules.

Unless you are arguing for the removal of your protector card, I'm not seeing your point here either.
 
harms said:
Using the card in the p3 is a very dirty play though, on that I agree.
Click to expand...

I’d call it brutal but not necessarily dirty.

Down the line, let’s say a couple of favourites have emerged: One such favourite finds himself at the P3 stage - and you deliver the blow. That’s fair enough for my money - part of the game.
 
For clarification, are players notified of who used the "shithead" card on them?
 
antohan said:
It was the only scenario. It just didn't make sense given the rules.

Unless you are arguing for the removal of your protector card, I'm not seeing your point here either.
Click to expand...

My point is your hypocrisy. It's unwavering.
 
The Stain said:
I'll publish a "budget used" list at the end of the round. We need to decide whether we should do the same with the cards. You guys can give your thoughts on that.
Click to expand...
Personally I think all cards used should be annouced.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
I’d call it brutal but not necessarily dirty.

Down the line, let’s say a couple of favourites have emerged: One such favourite finds himself at the P3 stage - and you deliver the blow. That’s fair enough for my money - part of the game.
Click to expand...

A protect card should take care of that. Risk for both parties. Shithead has no risk for the user and all for the recipient.

And what is the same manager receives shithead more than once? Makes him lose interest in building the team at all.

At least there should be a rule that shithead can only be used on a manager once.
 
Cal? said:
For clarification, are players notified of who used the "shithead" card on them?
Click to expand...
I'd probably won't reveal that as it makes it more interesting without possible agendas - you used it on me I'll use it on you etc...
 
DavidG said:
My point is your hypocrisy. It's unwavering.
Click to expand...
You don't seem to realise we chose the interpretation that was best for you, i.e. "he probably interpreted this, so is trying to do this, let's ignore the instruction on the grounds he specifically didn't say who he was protecting and clarify how this works".

Yet you are calling people names.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
A protect card should take care of that. Risk for both parties. Shithead has no risk for the user and all for the recipient.

And what is the same manager receives shithead more than once? Makes him lose interest in building the team at all.

At least there should be a rule that shithead can only be used on a manager once.
Click to expand...

I think it would balances teams out, which is a good idea to make it more interesting. If you get 3-4 super picks in you are a more probable target and have to play a sheep alongside your stars.
 
Cal? said:
Personally I think all cards used should be annouced.
Click to expand...

With the exception of the 'shithead' card, not necessary to disclose the other cards IMO

Enigma_87 said:
I'd probably won't reveal that as it makes it more interesting without possible agendas - you used it on me I'll use it on you etc...
Click to expand...

Part of the game I'd say. A shithead head card is an agenda in itself.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
A protect card should take care of that. Risk for both parties. Shithead has no risk for the user and all for the recipient.

And what is the same manager receives shithead more than once? Makes him lose interest in building the team at all.

At least there should be a rule that shithead can only be used on a manager once.
Click to expand...
Either he has the makings of a great side already or karma is a bitch. Fair game.

You've done enough crazy events to know people worry unduly about extreme outcomes.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
I’d call it brutal but not necessarily dirty.

Down the line, let’s say a couple of favourites have emerged: One such favourite finds himself at the P3 stage - and you deliver the blow. That’s fair enough for my money - part of the game.
Click to expand...
Maybe - I don't see "dirty" as a necessarily bad thing in games, it's part of the fun, so I'm probably closer to your definition of brutal

same to @antohan
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
A protect card should take care of that. Risk for both parties. Shithead has no risk for the user and all for the recipient.

And what is the same manager receives shithead more than once? Makes him lose interest in building the team at all.

At least there should be a rule that shithead can only be used on a manager once.
Click to expand...

Well, sure - but you may have used your protect card already.

Look, if it gets a bit brutal - so what? You should be prepared to get fecked - it’s not more complicated than that. It’s a sheep draft with bamboozle elements - it ain’t supposed to be fair.
 
DavidG said:
And you're talking about dropped standards in reading comprehension? If it wasn't blatantly clear that my post saying protect directly after my player choice were connected then I'm at a loss.
Click to expand...
At this point even I start to question your comprehension skills - it's clear as day that they understood what it meant but anto gave you a bureaucratic point of view which allowed you to save your protector card. And yes, I am, like Chester, trying to get myself a preferential treatment by the sheep committee
 
I won't be using the shitehead card at any stage, let alone to guarantee someone a sheep. It's an absolute dick move as far as I'm concerned and I'm not going to have one's time and effort in researching go to waste just because I have the power to do so. It's a pretty shit feature, honestly.
 
Enigma_87 said:
I think it would balances teams out, which is a good idea to make it more interesting. If you get 3-4 super picks in you are a more probable target and have to play a sheep alongside your stars.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the idea is you guys have tools to rebalance the game (be it by holding back runaway managers or clawing your way back into contention).

It's better than mods making shit up to try rebalance a game (which invariably ends up being designing slmething to screw X).

You have the tools, up to you how you use them.
 
Moby said:
It's an absolute dick move as far as I'm concerned and I'm not going to have one's time and effort in researching go to waste just because I have the power to do so.
Click to expand...

It’s a game. Fecking up your opponents is part and parcel. You’re landing a blow on someone who has entered the ring voluntarily. I’d hardly call that a dick move.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
It’s a game. Fecking up your opponents is part and parcel. You’re landing a blow on someone who has entered the ring voluntarily. I’d hardly call that a dick move.
Click to expand...
To each his own, mate. I know it's a game, and it also involves people giving up their time and plenty of effort (especially if the criteria are going to be tricky) to be involved in it. I ain't gonna piss all over that, sorry.
 
Moby said:
I won't be using the shitehead card at any stage, let alone to guarantee someone a sheep. It's an absolute dick move as far as I'm concerned and I'm not going to have one's time and effort in researching go to waste just because I have the power to do so. It's a pretty shit feature, honestly.
Click to expand...
I will never understand why you were excited about the format when you think about it that way.

I once put a lot of time and effort into a game of werewolf only for the idiot getting the top village role being a dick all day and then suddenly shouting "I am Spartacus!" without any time left for anyone to do anything to save him.

Same shit really, and many criteria don't require much research tbh.
 
antohan said:
I will never understand why you were excited about the format when you think about it that way.
Click to expand...
Because it didn't have any such completely random feck people up features? It's one thing getting fecked because of bad luck like the monopoly draft etc but this is just added to ensure meltdowns and nothing else, clear as day.

Anyway, like I said, to each his own. I have the option to not use it, and I'll take it.
 
Moby said:
To each his own, mate. I know it's a game, and it also involves people giving up their time and plenty of effort (especially if the criteria are going to be tricky) to be involved in it. I ain't gonna piss all over that, sorry.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I find it a puzzling stance, though, I must say. It’s not like you’d be fecking randomly with people who have signed up for a “serious” draft in which building proper teams is part and parcel. This is bamboozle as well as sheep - and there are ‘boozle elements which havent’ even been announced yet. So, yeah - personally I’d just take it as a pure laugh - but like you say, to each his own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.