|
Post by Fleck on Aug 25, 2013 16:13:42 GMT -8
Come on, Shades! Bob can't take 2 of the top 3 spots!
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Aug 25, 2013 17:54:50 GMT -8
Haha, I know, right? I SWEPT this league! Last tournament, I got 2 and 4. This one, I've got 1 and...? But hey, the Mercs beat the Shades once before... As this season got going, I started to rethink my earlier ideas about Super Goalie. The games didn't tie quite as often. So I'm thinking I'll tone that down for sure. The Keepa package, however, I'm considering leaving alone. I dunno. I'll tell you straight up, Worker 8 has a SHT of 20. If players get that bonus, then they can make a DEVASTATING shot, but at the same time, while the Mercs won the league and might take third, they didn't score amazingly high in games and still lost from time to time. Whatchu guys think? I mean, really, for each 10 levels, because of Keepa and All-Rounder, you can have a goalie with a SHT of 15, but he won't take any Super Goalies (which I'm thinking will be 1.5 CA in the future). I could do 1.5 SHT, too, but really, SHT is still the lowest bonus stat a goalie could have, even with the Keepa package. All other packages have a +3 joined with 1 CA or a couple +2's joined with 1 CA, making it possible to average 2.0 to any stat. With SHT, there's a 2 (Keepa) and a 1 (All-Rounder), making a possible 1.5 SHT. Changing Keepa's SHT to 1.5 would mean the highest SHT per level is 1.25. Not a huge difference, honestly, so I'm considering keeping the Keepa package as-is. But then again, SHT is the most important stat, so it's really a choice to give up the possible other stat advantages. *shrug* I suppose this could wait, but I've got blitz on the brain today, even though I should have work on the brain
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Aug 25, 2013 21:55:53 GMT -8
I think we can stand to get by with minimal changes. Like you said, we didn't tie very often towards the end of the season, so I don't feel the need for drastic change. I think that the natural progression of SHT versus CA will give SHT an advantage next season, plus the keepa package would help in that regard too. I'd say, if you want to do anything, then tone Super Goalie down to 1.5, but I think that would be the most we'd have to do.
|
|
|
Post by wyvernxk7 on Aug 26, 2013 7:43:14 GMT -8
I'm cool with minimal changes and reducing Super Goalie to 1.5, although I think that should mean that we can rework our goalies like last time, independent of the one reworked character limit.
Sorry for all the slowness recently - we've been packing and visiting people before we move and to top it all off, we both got sick a week ago and have been battling it off since. I'll get my NS lineups in shortly and you can get your third place (most likely - things have not been going smoothly for me the second half of this season).
EDIT: One thing I would like to see is the ability for each of us to make (a) custom formation(s), should we want it(/them)... WIDE-NORMAL-CENTER are fun, but more formations (with certain parameters) could be the next thing to amp up the fun and individual challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Fleck on Aug 26, 2013 14:53:42 GMT -8
I have nothing against customizable team formations, but if we do go that route, I have some stipulations I would like to add, to keep things fair and balanced (Fox News style).
1: New formations can only be made in the off-season. No mid-season additions.
2: All formations must be public and available for all teams to use. No team-exclusive formations.
3: All formations must be given time to be tested to make sure that they're not unfair/game-breaking.
4: No crazy, game-ruining formations, like "All out offense" or "all out defense." Formations like that would just produce silly and/or meaningless results.
I may think of more stipulations, but I think those are good for now.
|
|
|
Post by countlieberkuhn on Aug 26, 2013 15:30:46 GMT -8
I think super goalie being at 1.5 is in a nice spot! Also Keepa is fine, since it does sacrifice stats and only gives 1 CA, so it is the choice for a dedicated shooting team, if that's what you want to focus on. Hopefully I won't be taken out in the first round next time!
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Aug 26, 2013 15:53:56 GMT -8
I'll sim the third-place match in a bit. I'm on the wrong computer right now, but it's coming up.EDIT: Match simmed. Spoilers: Dangit! Fail fo' me. Too much defense and nobody able to get rid of the ball. I need more passing. I should say, I need ANY passing. I kind of assumed packing was going on, Wyvern, but adding sick to it is a whole lot of Hopefully things turn around. For changes, I'll pretty much agree with everybody here. We'll stick with Keepa as-is, but adjust Super Goalie down to 1.5 CA. I'm reworking the Risk situation to, as I mentioned before, having smaller or larger intervals for shots, but all having the same mean and therefore the same basic fairness. Might add in that whole "specialization" thing I mentioned before, but that'll depend if I can get it balanced within the next few days, and since the next few days are work days, that is not a definite thing...though I do feel like doing it right now, so I might do that I'm definitely in favor of adding more formations, but as Fleck said, it needs limits and all formations should be public use. I'll try to post up a template for you guys so that I don't have to program every single one. I'll just show you how it's done and you can fill in the blanks, then I'll just copy/paste. I like Fleck's stipulations, but I'd argue a tad on the "crazy formations" part. Yes, if it's unbalanced or makes for silly results, it's gotta go. I don't mind an all-out offense or all-out defense, but they'll definitely lead to bunch-ups, so I'd say "no players within 3 units of each other" (I'll double-check that number). I believe the visual distance to spot the ball-carrier is 3 units, so if too many spot the ball at the same time, it'll mean total clustersville. Or, at least, a maximum of two in any one general area. Pairing a forward and defender might be kinda nice, or even pairing both defenders, but any more than that could get too clustery.
|
|