The Fourth RedCafe Sheep Draft

Moby said:
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.
Click to expand...

Sheep drafts are notoriously unbalanced and hard to keep balanced, with players doing badly in early rounds losing interest. The idea isn't creating meltdowns but giving players mechanisms to play strategically and change their and others' fortunes.

You are entitled to be a conscientious objector of course. I'd just warn you some special cards are Aldo proof and automatically activate if unused.

BTW, I assume you read the Spartacus story in much the same jocular tone I was reminiscing about it and calling you a moron ;)
 
antohan said:
Sheep drafts are notoriously unbalanced and hard to keep balanced, with players doing badly in early rounds losing interest. The idea isn't creating meltdowns but giving players mechanisms to play strategically and change their and others' fortunes.

You are entitled to be a conscientious objector of course. I'd just warn you some special cards are Aldo proof and automatically activate if unused.

BTW, I assume you read the Spartacus story in much the same jocular tone I was reminiscing about it and calling you a moron ;)
Click to expand...
Let's not drag this on. I'm not asking you to scrap it, I've just stated that I am not going to have any part in it and why.
 
Added to OP in regards to the CHEAT card (it's self explanatory but to make it clear):
To help you even more:

Be aware that if you use the card for P2/P3, you will know what players are being targeted but you won't know whether they have already (been) PASS(ed)/FAIL(ed)/BLOCKED.
Click to expand...
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
It actually is a funny addition...if you use it in P1. Adds to the edge...you put a manager in a spot without actually fecking him up...directly.

I may use it in P1, but not in other picks for sure.
Click to expand...
Tuppet would have got Garrincha and saved him and Pat a lot of money last turn.

As it is, he just screwed both more by not using it.
 
As for revealing cards and budgets I don't think they should be.

Keeps people guessing and not bidding 1m more than another's budget.

Also it keeps people guessing with regards to what power cards others have and how they're going to use em.
 
We'll have a think. From what I hear anonymity may help use being tactical and stop bitchfests.
 
I also like the potential for paranoid managers ranting and raving and trying to work out who screwed their plans.
 
The Stain said:
It's a plan, Satan. Erm, i mean, Stan.
Click to expand...
VH-tumblr_ltqrvtsvEf1qia0kxo1_500.jpg
 
P-Nut0712 said:
As for revealing cards and budgets I don't think they should be.

Keeps people guessing and not bidding 1m more than another's budget.

Also it keeps people guessing with regards to what power cards others have and how they're going to use em.
Click to expand...
Second that
 
I'm against that. It needs to be out in the open.

If you use shithead on a manager, then better get ready, cause karma's a mean bitch. What goes around comes around.

If you intend to play dirty, at least have the guts to do it face to face.
 
R2P2
R2P2:

Moby - FAIL (Already picked)
Enigma - PASS
Raees - FAIL (Already picked)
Downcast - PASS
Skizzo/Annah - FAIL (Already picked)
Invictus - PASS
Gio - PASS
DavidG - PASS
Tuppet - PASS
mazhar - FAIL (Already picked)
Cal? - PASS
Pat_Mustard - FAIL (Already picked)
MJJ/Stobz - FAIL (Already picked)
RedTiger/Peyroteo - FAIL (Already picked)

Block list: Garrincha.

R2P3 Deadline at 10 PM GMT.
 
The Stain said:
R2P2:

Moby - FAIL (Already picked)
Enigma - PASS
Raees - FAIL (Already picked)
Downcast - PASS
Skizzo/Annah - FAIL (Already picked)
Invictus - PASS
Gio - PASS
DavidG - PASS
Tuppet - PASS
mazhar - FAIL (Already picked)
Cal? - PASS
Pat_Mustard - FAIL (Already picked)
MJJ/Stobz - FAIL (Already picked)
RedTiger/Peyroteo - FAIL (Already picked)

Block list: Garrincha.

R2P3 Deadline at 10 PM GMT.
Click to expand...

Ffs Antohan you piece of s..... oh, wait, good news for once ;)
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I'm against that. It needs to be out in the open.

If you use shithead on a manager, then better get ready, cause karma's a mean bitch. What goes around comes around.

If you intend to play dirty, at least have the guts to do it face to face.
Click to expand...
Feel free to openly announce your own moves macho man.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I'm against that. It needs to be out in the open.

If you use shithead on a manager, then better get ready, cause karma's a mean bitch. What goes around comes around.

If you intend to play dirty, at least have the guts to do it face to face.
Click to expand...
This.
 
I like when the budgets are disclosed because it adds a strategic aspect in this draft: risk-takers against risk-adverse acquirers.
 
Downcast said:
I like when the budgets are disclosed because it adds a strategic aspect in this draft: risk-takers against risk-adverse acquirers.
Click to expand...

I think it's the opposite and comes down more to he's got 12 so I'll just bid 13. It's better when you have to decide how much someone is worth to you to gamble.
 
Gio said:
I'll take that. Few better off the ball than big Carlton, which may be quite important if I end up with a shoddy team that isn't going to see much of it.
Click to expand...

:lol:

At the moment, everything is possible.

I understand it's hard to get 14 players so 2 sheeps is the best-case scenario IMO
 
Disclosure: Only upside I can see are potentially entertaining meltdowns followed by potentially entertaining revenge campaigns.

The downside would be potentially tedious meltdowns followed by potentially tedious revenge campaigns.

Other than that it will only serve to make the game easier to play (you know what cards have been played already = obviously easier).
 
Downcast said:
I like when the budgets are disclosed because it adds a strategic aspect in this draft: risk-takers against risk-adverse acquirers.
Click to expand...
Agree the actual bids contain interesting insights. I guess you can work out budgets if we publish them, but we probably will.
 
P-Nut0712 said:
I think it's the opposite and comes down more to he's got 12 so I'll just bid 13. It's better when you have to decide how much someone is worth to you to gamble.
Click to expand...

With more than 20 managers, the success of this strategy is not guaranteed at all.

We can only bid for the 1st pick of a round.

Edit: I'm speaking about the budget. It's not an auction draft ;)
 
Re: Shitehead

I don't see anything wrong with the card itself as it serves some important functions if someone really starts to collect GOATS in multiple positions or just as a means to help you get your desired player. But I do think it should used tactically (can't make a rule for that though). For instance if someone already has 2-3 sheep in round 4, it would not be funny to play the card to screw them more.
 
Downcast said:
With more than 20 managers, the success of this strategy is not guaranteed at all.
Click to expand...

Towards the end of the drafting it could make a huge difference: In effect, the guy with the most money left is guaranteed his pick.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Towards the end of the drafting it could make a huge difference: In effect, the guy with the most money left is guaranteed his pick.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

On the other hand, less high-profile players are available at the end because of the 'early buyers'.

If some of us wants balance, I think it could contribute to it.

In any case, cards play their role.
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
Re: Shitehead

I don't see anything wrong with the card itself as it serves some important functions if someone really starts to collect GOATS in multiple positions or just as a means to help you get your desired player. But I do think it should used tactically (can't make a rule for that though). For instance if someone already has 2-3 sheep in round 4, it would not be funny to play the card to screw them more.
Click to expand...

I’m sure we all agree on this - which is why I find it a bit odd that people are against this, or worried about it. It’s a tactical means at your disposal, not some sort of “haha, I slapped ya, bitch” thing.

I imagine that I’d try to play the card against someone in a very strong position looking to get even stronger - I obviously wouldn’t launch it against some poor sod who’s already ridden with sheep.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
I’m sure we all agree on this - which is why I find it a bit odd that people are against this, or worried about it. It’s a tactical means at your disposal, not some sort of “haha, I slapped ya, bitch” thing.

I imagine that I’d try to play the card against someone in a very strong position looking to get even stronger - I obviously wouldn’t launch it against some poor sod who’s already ridden with sheep.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the way I see it aswell. Someone has 4-5 Goats and no sheep expect to get a shit head card basically.
 
The shitehead card is a genius addition to keep anybody from running away with it which can easily happen here. Nobody will use it out of spite and if it happens they will surely be punished back. I think it should be official though, who played what card against who, while the budget is fun either way so I don't care..
 
antohan said:
Tuppet would have got Garrincha and saved him and Pat a lot of money last turn.

As it is, he just screwed both more by not using it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was the perfect opportunity to use that card. Realized just a tad bit late. Sad !!
 
A consensus could be: no more than 2 punishments (shitehead) applied on a single manager.

What do you think?
 
antohan said:
I repeat, we've given you tools. Every manager then chooses how to use them (inc. how macho they want to be).
Click to expand...
yeah revealing budgets is interesting and gives a lot of insight. There are plenty of managers so it wouldn't make it 'easier' IMO.
 
Downcast said:
A consensus could be: no more than 2 punishments (shitehead) applied on a single manager.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

No, move on.

Enigma_87 said:
yeah revealing budgets is interesting and gives a lot of insight. There are plenty of managers so it wouldn't make it 'easier' IMO.
Click to expand...

We won't keep them updated for you but the data will be availabñe. The "1m more" scenario isn't as realistic as the fun every turn at seeing the ludicrous bids.

Only shitheads will be secret. Running vendettas aren't the point at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.