no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Just expand number of draftees Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Mücke
|
posted: 2017-09-01 18:03:22 (ID: 100113322) Report Abuse |
|
Tag!
There are 3 draft rounds. A league consists of 32 teams. It seems there have to be exact 32 x 3 = 96 draftees each season. Why is that? (rhetorical q, no answer needed). Wouldn't be a more real life simulation in this regard a way more fun? Also, I can imagine that this feeling of "a choices torture" (Qual der Wahl) is not given for every team with 96 draftees only at the moment. Gameplay expands also by having bigger numbers to work through to prepare yourself for a draft. On top: people have something to talk about afterwards like "The whole league missed drafting that one of a kind prospect." Any drawbacks ...  ... no (imo)
Sure, I'm all-in for that suggestion 
- - - I don't have a particular number of draftees in mind yet. Not sure how many NFL draftees are eligible every year for draft, but think for RZA N=128 (4 x 32  ) could work just fine.
The surplus of draftees that are not drafted could be handled either as UDFA on TM 1 day after draft (and perhaps only for 1 day for example to thrill thrings up) or just let them "retire" and die the digital death ... but let this be another thread to discuss if any. 
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-09-01 19:07:33 (ID: 100113323) Report Abuse |
|
Mücke wrote:
Tag! There are 3 draft rounds. A league consists of 32 teams. It seems there have to be exact 32 x 3 = 96 draftees each season. Why is that? (rhetorical q, no answer needed). Wouldn't be a more real life simulation in this regard a way more fun? Also, I can imagine that this feeling of "a choices torture" (Qual der Wahl) is not given for every team with 96 draftees only at the moment. Gameplay expands also by having bigger numbers to work through to prepare yourself for a draft. On top: people have something to talk about afterwards like "The whole league missed drafting that one of a kind prospect." Any drawbacks ... ... no (imo)
Sure, I'm all-in for that suggestion
- - - I don't have a particular number of draftees in mind yet. Not sure how many NFL draftees are eligible every year for draft, but think for RZA N=128 (4 x 32 ) could work just fine.
The surplus of draftees that are not drafted could be handled either as UDFA on TM 1 day after draft (and perhaps only for 1 day for example to thrill thrings up) or just let them "retire" and die the digital death ... but let this be another thread to discuss if any.
Then i could Tank a year, drop to 2.2, get three very good prospects against a draft league of bots and snap up some good young talent as UDFA. Repeat for a few years load my roster or load my bank through sales. Sadly this seems easy to exploit and some will if it exists. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Hunter550
|
posted: 2017-09-01 19:23:38 (ID: 100113324) Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Mücke wrote:
Tag! There are 3 draft rounds. A league consists of 32 teams. It seems there have to be exact 32 x 3 = 96 draftees each season. Why is that? (rhetorical q, no answer needed). Wouldn't be a more real life simulation in this regard a way more fun? Also, I can imagine that this feeling of "a choices torture" (Qual der Wahl) is not given for every team with 96 draftees only at the moment. Gameplay expands also by having bigger numbers to work through to prepare yourself for a draft. On top: people have something to talk about afterwards like "The whole league missed drafting that one of a kind prospect." Any drawbacks ... ... no (imo)
Sure, I'm all-in for that suggestion
- - - I don't have a particular number of draftees in mind yet. Not sure how many NFL draftees are eligible every year for draft, but think for RZA N=128 (4 x 32 ) could work just fine.
The surplus of draftees that are not drafted could be handled either as UDFA on TM 1 day after draft (and perhaps only for 1 day for example to thrill thrings up) or just let them "retire" and die the digital death ... but let this be another thread to discuss if any.
Then i could Tank a year, drop to 2.2, get three very good prospects against a draft league of bots and snap up some good young talent as UDFA. Repeat for a few years load my roster or load my bank through sales. Sadly this seems easy to exploit and some will if it exists. Could always limit how many UDFA's to sign, and maybe make it a bidding war for the player however it stays in league so that, for example, you don't see 2.1 players getting UDFA's from the Elite League draft pool or something and it's also not just a race to see who can stay up for the draft results |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Mücke
|
posted: 2017-09-01 20:31:15 (ID: 100113329) Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Then i could Tank a year, drop to 2.2, get three very good prospects ... I don't get that Oak. You can do that already, bad Karma included. Have fun with that approach
Dear Managers, please stick with the threads theme "Just expand number of draftees" All other can be discussed later if any. step by step. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-09-01 20:36:26 (ID: 100113330) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
Mücke wrote:
oakbark wrote:
Then i could Tank a year, drop to 2.2, get three very good prospects ... I don't get that Oak. You can do that already, bad Karma included. Have fun with that approach
Dear Managers, please stick with the threads theme "Just expand number of draftees" All other can be discussed later if any. step by step. This is completely relevant i was explaining an exploit with more draftees and UDFA signing, which was after all the threads topic..... Last edited on 2017-09-01 20:38:02 by oakbark |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Rock777
|
posted: 2017-09-01 21:05:40 (ID: 100113332) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Sadly this seems easy to exploit and some will if it exists. The only exploit you've pointed out is that you can tank for a higher draft pick... That exploit exists today, there is no exploit introduced by the idea as posted. I'd say just let the undrafted guys go away, but if you didn't they would be available for everyone, so tanking would be pointless. I think if you were going to tank because of a slightly better draft pool, you are probably tanking already anyhow. I don't see how this would really incentivize that behavior any more than it is already. Regardless, more draftees doesn't necessarily mean more better draftees. Even if it was just double the amount of 3rd round quality draftees, at least it would give team picking at the bottom something to choose from. I like the idea. Last edited on 2017-09-01 21:09:56 by Rock777 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-09-01 21:18:46 (ID: 100113334) Report Abuse | |
|
Sorry, but more draftees with the same number of rounds just means same quality of draftees for first picking teams, but better quality of draftpicks for following teams.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Mücke
|
posted: 2017-09-01 22:06:51 (ID: 100113335) Report Abuse |
|
As real life Pete
Doesn't it depends on each managers skill in sorting out the draft list. One say player A is best, another may vote more for player B, this can be continued until end of alphabet. Finally one will be surprised who hasn't been picked by any team. Despite, Pete, you are on the good side of the force and it is up to you to determine the depth in quality of draftees in the background either. Nobody needs to know. At the moment i feel the last picking teams dont have a real choice when it comes to round 3. And with more draftees to choose from it's easier to miss a good early pick. Would like to here some other comments or count votes before making decision. But overall, thank god this isnt a democracy, and if you decided and declined it already Pete, i'm fine with it. Did you? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Rock777
|
posted: 2017-09-01 22:23:22 (ID: 100113336) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Sorry, but more draftees with the same number of rounds just means same quality of draftees for first picking teams, but better quality of draftpicks for following teams. This is only true if we assume you don't tweak the overall quality to compensate. You have tweaked the overall quality in past drafts, so it is obviously something that can be done. Even if you just filled in a few extra scrubs at the end (with guaranteed poor quality) it would provide more options for folks to pick from in the 3rd round. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-09-01 22:42:53 (ID: 100113337) Report Abuse |
|
Rock777 wrote:
oakbark wrote:
Sadly this seems easy to exploit and some will if it exists. The only exploit you've pointed out is that you can tank for a higher draft pick... That exploit exists today, there is no exploit introduced by the idea as posted. I'd say just let the undrafted guys go away, but if you didn't they would be available for everyone, so tanking would be pointless. I think if you were going to tank because of a slightly better draft pool, you are probably tanking already anyhow. I don't see how this would really incentivize that behavior any more than it is already. Regardless, more draftees doesn't necessarily mean more better draftees. Even if it was just double the amount of 3rd round quality draftees, at least it would give team picking at the bottom something to choose from. I like the idea. Given the drafting habits of bots and the prevalance of bots in many 2.2 leagues then the UDFA route as mentioned could be exploited. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Just expand number of draftees | |
