DreamTeam is way harder than SuperCoach. Do you agree? Poll.

TheMailman · March 25, 2012, 04:30:43 PM

If you want difficulty, you should base it on the amount of people you have to beat.

The more people playing, the harder it is to win.

Justin Bieber · March 25, 2012, 04:32:07 PM

Quote from: TheMailman on March 25, 2012, 04:30:43 PM
If you want difficulty, you should base it on the amount of people you have to beat.

The more people playing, the harder it is to win.

Therefore SC.

Holz · March 25, 2012, 05:25:35 PM

I would say SC is not harder to research, the reason i like DT is you know the socring system so when you do your research and predicting who will kick goals, who will take marks etc... if they do it you get the points. In SC you kind of have an idea that if you research a player and they look good they will do well, but your never sure. A player could be average all game and kick the winning goal and double his points. Also im not a fan of the 3300 scoring system. Kicking the first goal in the game should get the same amount of points as kickcing the last goal in the game no matter if the difference is a point or 100 points.

Both are good and i play both, i just think its better to know what will actually score points.

I voted NO not because i think SC is harder i just think they are the same game just different scoring.

jabroni · March 25, 2012, 05:51:17 PM

i play both and SC is a bit harder but thats due to the arbitary 3300 pt rule and 'adjustment' after the game.

While a goal a the death is worth extra points the adjustment is arguable and thats where the problem lies and lowers its credibility.

Oh and yes its nice to research which players are good at SC but thats only for rookies cos the price of the premium player tells you how good he is at SC.

Spite · March 25, 2012, 05:53:58 PM

I have played both for many many years (since SC started!) and this summarises my experiences:

-SC is harder to be happy with a starting team
-SC feels like it is harder however there are MANY more CRAPPY teams in SC than in DT.
-Less research is needed to finish top 1% in SC compared to DT where you have to be very very good to finish top 1% rather than just good in SC
-Finishing in the top ~500 feels harder in SC than in DT but that may just be me.

I find the top 100 SC players are the kind of guys like jay to (last years winner) who thinks of "moneyball' ways to win and use what I feel is more thought and effort than the top 100 DT players (I mean no disrespect to anyone)

I worked bloody hard one year to finsh ~250 in SC but after the next year of ~3-4k, I found using less than a few days of research I could consistenly finish 3-4k in SC which is top 1%, which has happened for the last 2 years. This year I did a single day of SC only research (obviously there is a crossover in DT though) and it will be interesting to see how I go.

In contrast, I find that DT needs a consistent effort every year and a lot of research to finish higher up the rankings. In 2010 I found myself around the 100 mark for 13 rounds before fading in the final 3 rounds to finish just around the 2k mark. If you dont do any reserach for DT, a top 1% finish is near impossible.

Overall, they both have their pros and cons, but I think the original posters definition of 'harder' is where the problem lies. IMHO, DT = harder to finish top 1% but SC harder to finish top 100.

Thanks for reading this, sorry it was long haha :)

TheMailman · March 25, 2012, 05:56:50 PM

Plus its all relative

If DT is easy, then its easy for everybody

If SC is hard, then its hard for everybody

Holz · March 25, 2012, 05:59:11 PM

Quote from: Spite on March 25, 2012, 05:53:58 PM
I have played both for many many years (since SC started!) and this summarises my experiences:

-SC is harder to be happy with a starting team
-SC feels like it is harder however there are MANY more CRAPPY teams in SC than in DT.
-Less research is needed to finish top 1% in SC compared to DT where you have to be very very good to finish top 1% rather than just good in SC
-Finishing in the top ~500 feels harder in SC than in DT but that may just be me.

I find the top 100 SC players are the kind of guys like jay to (last years winner) who thinks of "moneyball' ways to win and use what I feel is more thought and effort than the top 100 DT players (I mean no disrespect to anyone)

I worked bloody hard one year to finsh ~250 in SC but after the next year of ~3-4k, I found using less than a few days of research I could consistenly finish 3-4k in SC which is top 1%, which has happened for the last 2 years. This year I did a single day of SC only research (obviously there is a crossover in DT though) and it will be interesting to see how I go.

In contrast, I find that DT needs a consistent effort every year and a lot of research to finish higher up the rankings. In 2010 I found myself around the 100 mark for 13 rounds before fading in the final 3 rounds to finish just around the 2k mark. If you dont do any reserach for DT, a top 1% finish is near impossible.

Overall, they both have their pros and cons, but I think the original posters definition of 'harder' is where the problem lies. IMHO, DT = harder to finish top 1% but SC harder to finish top 100.

Thanks for reading this, sorry it was long haha :)

i almost agree 100% in this i think its very easy to get in the top 5k in SC, in DT not so much, the DT talk boys sometimes are sitting outside the top 20k and they do massive amounts of research. This year should seperate the people who put in more effort, i cant believe the number of people who havent put alot of effort into the bye rounds, that will be key to doing well in both comps, starting with a balanced team than trading so your good for the byes.

What i normally do is research all preseason for DT than just pick a SC squad off that info, i think last year my SC ranking was about the same as my DT.

RiOtChEsS · March 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM

32 SC Vs 12 DT

Holz · March 25, 2012, 06:02:20 PM

Quote from: Marcz on March 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
32 SC Vs 12 DT

i think alot of the 32 is people saying they are about equal. So the answer is DT isnt harder, but that doesnt mean SC is harder.

Justin Bieber · March 25, 2012, 06:18:01 PM

I didn't vote? I just view the vote tally?

coolfugitiv0 · March 25, 2012, 06:51:54 PM

Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on March 25, 2012, 03:56:18 PM
Official site of the AFL runs DT .. Thoopercoach is run by the Heraldsun .. i rest my case

It doesn't really matter who runs it, it's how the game works.
DT uses a few important stats, that are tracked on the most AFL websites.
SC (while run by HS) uses Champion Data's stats, which takes much more into account, eg. disposal efficiency.

Quote from: Holzman on March 25, 2012, 05:25:35 PM
A player could be average all game and kick the winning goal and double his points. Kicking the first goal in the game should get the same amount of points as kickcing the last goal in the game no matter if the difference is a point or 100 points.

I can not tell you how much I agree with this.
If a match is won by 3 points, and a player kicked a goal in the last 5 seconds, his goal would be worth heaps more than a regular goal. HOWEVER, that doesn't make any other goal less important - if the guy who kicked the first goal (or any other goal for the matter), for the winning team, missed, then they would still have lost.
Points should be consistent.

MLS · March 25, 2012, 07:18:39 PM

I play both, and I find that SC is harder to get your team structured correctly as dollars don't seem to go as far as DT.

More compromises are required in SC team selection.

essendon2 · March 26, 2012, 12:20:15 AM

Quote from: Kuruki on March 25, 2012, 01:52:42 PM
Quote from: spasticnut on March 25, 2012, 11:55:35 AM
Supercoach requires more footy knowledge and the players prices are also adjusted differently (more expensive) so it is harder. Dream team is for amateurs.

Rubbish . How is it harder when everyone else is in the same boat? It's all relevant. Just because you cant buy the same team you can in DT does not make it harder as everyone else has the same issue it's no different. It hardly requires knowledge when stats and player rankings require the click of a mouse.

+1

chatters24 · March 26, 2012, 06:18:07 AM

My focus is on DT. THis isn't because its easier or harder, this is simply because I can sit on the couch, watch any game that my players are involved in and get excited about everything they do because it is black and white in regards to points. I always love that last twilight game on Sunday afternoon when you're in a close game with you opponent and you hold your head in your hands when your opponents players get's a few touches in a row. In SC you can't really follow it like that as it can be quiet hard to predict SC scores.

As for which is harder, I don't think either is harder than the other. When you select your initial team all the players have their average from the previous year so you know off the bat which players are good at which game.

Just my two cents worth.

MikeSidious · March 26, 2012, 11:17:16 AM

Really they are both the same. In the end the price calculations are defining the game. The stats give us the price but how the prices are derived bares little consequence to the game itself as all players are effected equally. The issue becomes how to solve the games system.

Each is based on the same principle. The player with the better stats gets a greater price tag. Therefore you only need to predict based on performance the players who will get the better price. Other values such as team game strategies and player positioning will also effect this but they will only increase or decrease the players current values. Therefore all statistics effectively become a price tag.

Therefore based on this both games are essentially identical. Hope this helps. Stop looking at stats and relax. ;D