UTG Season 2: Discussion & Banter Thread

[_wato]

Love the utility call Holz !!

And Rd 7 is sweet for me too.

Now I just need another Adam Treloar like last year :P

[GoLions]

There's no point introducing a utility position halfway through. By then people will likely have plenty of mids (or will very very soon after), so it may as well be a mid spot.

However, I'd be a big fan of the utility from round 1, as early on you might have plenty of forwards but no defenders, or 2 rucks but only 2 mids, etc.

Basically, do it from the start next year, no point putting it in now :P

[_wato]

Why don't we play a 3-4-1-3 with a utility as well?

[_wato]

@Wato

Gorringe, Daniel   Bronze
Stretch, Billy   Bronze
Treloar, Adam   Gold

Also, this was what dreams are made of.

[fanTCfool]

The concept of having a utility in UTG is a good one, as, unlike other competitions, you don't have control over what position the players you have are when you pull them from packs, compared to off-season trading to ensure you have all positions covered as we see in WXVs and whatnot.

However, I now see it as too much of an advantage to some to introduce permanently for the remainder of the season. If we wanted to have a utility, it needed to have been in the rules from the start to be fair to all parties.

I am keen to see how the utility would work in practice though, so have this proposal to make,
During bye rounds, we could run with a 3-3-1-3-1 structure as somewhat of a test to see if it works, and could then implement for UTG Season 3 as a permanent part of the structure. Everyone will be missing a few players each bye week, so, in my opinion, it is the best time to try it out.

It is a little while to wait to get the utility into the game, but does that sit well with you Holz and others keen on introducing a utility spot?

[Holz]

The concept of having a utility in UTG is a good one, as, unlike other competitions, you don't have control over what position the players you have are when you pull them from packs, compared to off-season trading to ensure you have all positions covered as we see in WXVs and whatnot.

However, I now see it as too much of an advantage to some to introduce permanently for the remainder of the season. If we wanted to have a utility, it needed to have been in the rules from the start to be fair to all parties.

I am keen to see how the utility would work in practice though, so have this proposal to make,
During bye rounds, we could run with a 3-3-1-3-1 structure as somewhat of a test to see if it works, and could then implement for UTG Season 3 as a permanent part of the structure. Everyone will be missing a few players each bye week, so, in my opinion, it is the best time to try it out.

It is a little while to wait to get the utility into the game, but does that sit well with you Holz and others keen on introducing a utility spot?

honestly dont think its much of an advantage. Realistically we all know that most teams will want to field a mid over a ruck forward and especially a defender.

realistically it wont affect anyone negatively as teams just play their mids but it might help teams at the bottom who are struggling and then as i said teams in the long term if they want to target 2 premium rucks then thats a legit future strategy. So if say a Gawn Grundy Martin comes onto the auction market it will play differently.

so in summary everyone should want to play a mid in the utility spot but if your unlucky and not getting mids then seems fair enough to play an inferrior forward or defender rather then a donut.

Like this week im coping a donut and top teams

LS has Touk Miller at M3
BM has Stehpen Hill at M3
Hawka had Mitch Robinson at M3 and Zahar at M4
JV has Dom Tyson at M3

if there was a utility then i could play Rance who is averaging 60. Now im still behind every other team but instead of being 80 behind im only 20 behind.

The cards are also stacked as people can play an all out attack card to play one less defender which Hawka has done. I have that card but it does not help  me as the postion im missing is mids and i have enough defedners.

So really all the utility does is decrease the disadvantage to teams who struggle in the mids. We Already dont have a card like all out defense where i could play one less mid and stick a guy in defense.

if we know its coming in round 7 cant see how teams with lots of mids are disadvantaged except for the fact that struggling teams are less disadvantaged then before. Miller, Hill, Robbo, Tyson will still crush Rance and i obviously would like mids im just not getting any.

[GoLions]

But Holz, while you're fielding Rance as a utility, aren't the stronger teams fielding a mid or a forward?  So they go further ahead instead :p

That's why i think it's better for round 1 and not like 2 months into the season

[Holz]

But Holz, while you're fielding Rance as a utility, aren't the stronger teams fielding a mid or a forward?  So they go further ahead instead :p

That's why i think it's better for round 1 and not like 2 months into the season

isnt it better to field rance rather then a donut?

with a 3 4 1 3 system teams can only field a Mid at M4 but if the utility is introduced then team cans a field a Mid, Forward, Ruck or Defender at U1.

The utility is much better in round 1 but if your unlucky enough to not have enough mids by 2 months then why by further disadvantaged.

plus also some of the elite guys dont have DPP

Nroo
Buddy
Lynch
Lynch
JJK

teams could go into week 7 with say Nroo Buddy Lynch JJK and a weak midfield and have to drop a forward for a weaker mid.

Just seems to give felxibility and stop it being a midfield game. Its already a midfield game so why restrict postions.

I dont mind if its not introduced, just seems to have only positives in my books. Certainly will push for it next year but for this year the only disadvantage is for teams lucky enough to get good mids arent they cant pull away from the field as much so if your a team with good mids you wouldnt like this rule. Dont think anyone would not plan to have strong mids though so its not like they would have played differently.

why would i want Rance when i could have Stephen Hill for example.

[GoLions]

Ahhh ok, i thought you were suggesting 3-4-1-3 with a utility when i saw wato's comment.

I still think though, that by the time we would be introducing this, everyone will be filling their utility with a mid anyway :p

[Holz]

Ahhh ok, i thought you were suggesting 3-4-1-3 with a utility when i saw wato's comment.

I still think though, that by the time we would be introducing this, everyone will be filling their utility with a mid anyway :p

whats the negative in having it though?

also what if you get lucky and have Grundy and Martin?

you can only play 1.

or as i said you have Nroo Lynch Buddy JJK and can only play 3 when you dont have a strong mid.

[elephants]

I just dont like the idea of changing rules mid-season. It could be seen to benefit some teams over others which just isn't right.

And before you ask, it would improve my side.

[Holz]

I just dont like the idea of changing rules mid-season. It could be seen to benefit some teams over others which just isn't right.

And before you ask, it would improve my side.

fair enough benefits the weaker teams giving them less of a disadvantage rather then an advantage in my opinion.

but all good either way.

I love the comp even though im realistically no shot at even competing at this stage because of the no utility.

[fanTCfool]

I just dont like the idea of changing rules mid-season. It could be seen to benefit some teams over others which just isn't right.

And before you ask, it would improve my side.

fair enough benefits the weaker teams giving them less of a disadvantage rather then an advantage in my opinion.

but all good either way.

I love the comp even though im realistically no shot at even competing at this stage because of the no utility.

As you know Holz, the winner of the UTG is determined in the finals series, every side will be involved again.
Your scores at this point in time are in some ways irrelevant, of course, bigger scores bring more gold, but there's no ladder.
You can suck all year but produce the goods in the finals with an underrated side and take the whole thing out.

I'm sure you'll be able to complete your midfield within a couple of weeks, there will continue to be auction players to fight over and the packs certainly aren't going anywhere. Stacking up good players in a position is not necessarily a bad thing, if you have all the top notch defenders, you might have an enjoyable trade week(s).



One thing I am reconsidering is the rarity of an All Out Attack, unlike an Extra Player, it doesn't actually give you an additional score, just a different score. It is probably not 'special' enough to warrant its gold rarity. As well as this, it would make sense to have a 'Spare Man' card to play an extra defender rather than M/F, as if there is one for the forwards, it would be fair that one exists for the backs too. This could join the AOA as a silver collectible card. I'd love some thoughts on that.

[elephants]

One thing I am reconsidering is the rarity of an All Out Attack, unlike an Extra Player, it doesn't actually give you an additional score, just a different score. It is probably not 'special' enough to warrant its gold rarity. As well as this, it would make sense to have a 'Spare Man' card to play an extra defender rather than M/F, as if there is one for the forwards, it would be fair that one exists for the backs too. This could join the AOA as a silver collectible card. I'd love some thoughts on that.

Yeah love both changes to be honest, nice man

[Holz]

I just dont like the idea of changing rules mid-season. It could be seen to benefit some teams over others which just isn't right.

And before you ask, it would improve my side.

fair enough benefits the weaker teams giving them less of a disadvantage rather then an advantage in my opinion.

but all good either way.

I love the comp even though im realistically no shot at even competing at this stage because of the no utility.

As you know Holz, the winner of the UTG is determined in the finals series, every side will be involved again.
Your scores at this point in time are in some ways irrelevant, of course, bigger scores bring more gold, but there's no ladder.
You can suck all year but produce the goods in the finals with an underrated side and take the whole thing out.

I'm sure you'll be able to complete your midfield within a couple of weeks, there will continue to be auction players to fight over and the packs certainly aren't going anywhere. Stacking up good players in a position is not necessarily a bad thing, if you have all the top notch defenders, you might have an enjoyable trade week(s).



One thing I am reconsidering is the rarity of an All Out Attack, unlike an Extra Player, it doesn't actually give you an additional score, just a different score. It is probably not 'special' enough to warrant its gold rarity. As well as this, it would make sense to have a 'Spare Man' card to play an extra defender rather than M/F, as if there is one for the forwards, it would be fair that one exists for the backs too. This could join the AOA as a silver collectible card. I'd love some thoughts on that.

all good. reckon utility is a must for next year.

but yes your right all out attack isnt gold value.

all out attack and spare man should be silvers in my opinion.

big difference in their value in Captain and Extra Player.

basically i just you the all out attack as a trade in, its value is far less then 12 gold or its retrade value. if it was silver I would use a extra defender this week so its a good card.

wouldnt mind seeing the all out attack let you play one less mid and a extra forward too.

a 3rd card of Twin Towers would be interesting where you can play 2 rucks and one less mid/forward or back. Again i would probably use that card this week with Tippett Witts.

can see all 3 cards being very usefull early on.