AXVIII DT: Rule Changes and Idea's for America's DT End of Season and 2017

LF · March 20, 2016, 09:31:33 PM

Have a few things Atto and I have discussed in regards to the comp and keeping track of them here seems like a good place to start so coaches can get involved and discuss things.

The main one we discussed and are going to change is that we will be removing the 1 for 1 trades for the comp when trading at the end of this season.
This should make it easier for coaches to work trades with each other and should also help us as admin when assessing trades.

Another one we have looked at is making on trading not included in the trades movement cap

Any one that wants to suggest anything is welcome to so the coaches can consider it and discuss it

Anything that requires a vote from coaches will be sent out when we need to

R.Griffen · March 21, 2016, 09:45:29 AM

Even though it has made my team extremely strong. Protect the first 4 draft picks

LF · March 21, 2016, 12:27:31 PM

Quote from: R.Griffen on March 21, 2016, 09:45:29 AM
Even though it has made my team extremely strong. Protect the first 4 draft picks

You can't make them untradeable high draft picks can be used to help a team gain a decent player that is best 22 making them immediately more competitive than an untried rookie that may or may not play straight away.
With the removal of 1 for 1 trading pick 1 + player can equate to someone pretty decent for a team especially a team that might not have good currency taking away their ability to use a high draft pick with is good currency only hurts teams

R.Griffen · March 21, 2016, 05:46:07 PM

Quote from: LF on March 21, 2016, 12:27:31 PM
Quote from: R.Griffen on March 21, 2016, 09:45:29 AM
Even though it has made my team extremely strong. Protect the first 4 draft picks

You can't make them untradeable high draft picks can be used to help a team gain a decent player that is best 22 making them immediately more competitive than an untried rookie that may or may not play straight away.
With the removal of 1 for 1 trading pick 1 + player can equate to someone pretty decent for a team especially a team that might not have good currency taking away their ability to use a high draft pick with is good currency only hurts teams

I'm happy to trade up to number 1 again and then trade multiple of them away to superstars

LF · June 06, 2016, 01:18:28 PM

So we don't have an actual rule in place at this point for if people forget to name a Captain,VC or EVC and also if they forget to name enough emergencies for the week as one team has discovered this week copping 2 outs and only having one E named.
So we will look at this for next season likely using preference lists for this type of thing

R.Griffen · June 06, 2016, 05:24:14 PM

Quote from: LF on June 06, 2016, 01:18:28 PM
So we don't have an actual rule in place at this point for if people forget to name a Captain,VC or EVC and also if they forget to name enough emergencies for the week as one team has discovered this week copping 2 outs and only having one E named.
So we will look at this for next season likely using preference lists for this type of thing

Only myself to blame plus both coaches of Queensland football clubs

R.Griffen · June 14, 2016, 02:48:39 AM

this open to anyone?

I feel like the game over the byes could be a bit harder to name a team. I'm not sure about everyone else's team but I am sure we could manage each week
Def:2
Mids:3
Fwd:2
Util:3

My theory is 2/3 of the AFL teams still play each week over the byes and even with the structure I suggested we name less than 2/3 of what we normally would

Pkbaldy · June 14, 2016, 08:23:54 AM

Ehhh. Even with 18 teams playing my selection choices are pretty well limited. Let alone when only 12 teams are playing.

LF · June 14, 2016, 11:11:47 AM

Quote from: R.Griffen on June 14, 2016, 02:48:39 AM
this open to anyone?

I feel like the game over the byes could be a bit harder to name a team. I'm not sure about everyone else's team but I am sure we could manage each week
Def:2
Mids:3
Fwd:2
Util:3

My theory is 2/3 of the AFL teams still play each week over the byes and even with the structure I suggested we name less than 2/3 of what we normally would

Atto just came up with a concept for something to do during the bye rounds,next season we may do something entirely different.

Atto · June 14, 2016, 11:46:45 AM

My logic behind the current setup is that by the end of it all, you would have had 3 defenders, 6 midfielders, 3 forwards, and 6 utilities, which adds up to 18 players and hence you should have a similar score (likely lower since no C, VC, HGA or bonus points) than you normally would if it was a normal round.

popedelio · September 17, 2016, 10:32:41 AM

Are we going to keep the positions locked like last season? Or can we update them when AFL fantasy updates positions during the season?

Nige · September 17, 2016, 11:24:38 AM

Quote from: popedelio on September 17, 2016, 10:32:41 AM
Are we going to keep the positions locked like last season? Or can we update them when AFL fantasy updates positions during the season?

We use DT which locks positions I believe.

Probably wouldn't be fair to change it after trading season has started anyway.

Atto · September 17, 2016, 12:18:41 PM

Quote from: Nige on September 17, 2016, 11:24:38 AM
Quote from: popedelio on September 17, 2016, 10:32:41 AM
Are we going to keep the positions locked like last season? Or can we update them when AFL fantasy updates positions during the season?
We use DT which locks positions I believe.

Probably wouldn't be fair to change it after trading season has started anyway.

We will be going by RDT positions. So positions will stay locked, it makes it fair for everyone.