World 15 Discussion

[meow meow]

Or we could make it a max of 40, and 2 veterans, but your vets have to be 28 years or older when round 1 kicks off.

[ossie85]

When people retire or get delisted some people are going to need to top up their lists, and they might not recieve as many draft picks as players they lose.

Yes they will :) Shall be rigged so (much like the real draft)

You lose players if:
- A player retires
- A player is delisted
- A player is sacked or walks-out
- You can delist your own players


So if people have an abnormal amount of rookies, that will likely be there fault. They can choose to delist there rookies, and at most people will only have 4-5 rookies as it stands.


My goal is for everyone to have even squad numbers....

I'd also like to put in a 'games' cap that I mentioned before, but it may need some tweaking....

[meow meow]

Okay so let's presume I finish last, and only have one player who retires (won't be Fletcher).

I'd get pick 1. If I don't delist anyone, do I forfeit pick 19, 37 etc? Shouldn't I get those picks, and be able to trade them to someone in the trade period instead? Why should I be disadvantaged for having a full list?

Do I get those picks, and have the option to pass in the draft? What happens if during the trade period I end up with 40 players and 10 picks? Do I forfeit those picks, and they go to someone at the end of the draft who needs them to fill their list? What's stopping people from trading away all their picks if they're going to get freebies in the draft when people pass?



What I am saying is that if someone has ten retirements, they will receive 10 rounds of picks. That's fine. But there should be a rule in place where at the end of the trade period, they have to ensure that they end up with enough players and ND picks to fill a list (or a minimum required amount of AFL listed players). Otherwise people will just trade away as much as they can in an attempt to better their picks in the ND.

- I'd be able to trade picks #19, #37, #55, #73 and 6 AFL listed players for pick #12 and 9 rookies (that this trader would have swapped for their NDS picks for with various other teams). I'd end up with a better pick, but also with a heap of rookies, and only 30 AFL players.

If we cap the maximum amount of AFL listed players, that will ensure that there will be enough of them remaining in the draft for everyone to have similar sized lists. A cap of 42 now, and 40 when GC/GWS have normal sized lists in 2 years.

[hawk_88]

I think a good balancing rule would be to have mandatory de-listings. Currently the AFL mandates 3, but I would suggest 5+.

Retirements and players no longer on AFL lists would be included in that. However if a player is de-listed by their AFL club and picked up by another you could have an system similar to the father-son where you have to match the round another club would be willing to pick him up in to take him with priority.

That on top of minimum and maximum list sizes should allow a fair balance when it comes to drafting and list roll-overs.

[PowerBug]

Why don't we just follow the AFL lists?? There's 18 AFL teams, 18 W15s teams. We just follow everything as close as possible. :)

[ossie85]

I see your point meow, but still not worried

I'd get pick 1. If I don't delist anyone, do I forfeit pick 19, 37 etc? Shouldn't I get those picks, and be able to trade them to someone in the trade period instead? Why should I be disadvantaged for having a full list?

That is how it works in the real AFL. If you only have 1 list spot to fill, they'll only give you 1 pick

Is your choice to delist players, if you feel pick 19 is worth more than PLayer Y, than delist player Y before the draft

[hawk_88]

Pretty sure the AFL requires 3 de-listings and a minimum of 3 draftings, one of which can be a rookie upgrade.

[Ziplock]

well, that explains why coad was delisted and picked up again in the draft I guess :P

[PowerBug]

Just wondering, will there be a rolling lockout for each week? Coz i would like that idea.

[ossie85]

Just wondering, will there be a rolling lockout for each week? Coz i would like that idea.

Probably not if we have a sub rule

[c4v3m4n]

The Pacific Islanders are currently holding a LIVE press conference in their thread NOW

You're going to love this one.  ;D

[meow meow]

The Pacific Islanders are currently holding a LIVE press conference in their thread NOW

You're going to love this one.  ;D

Perhaps they should take their pick in the psd/rookie draft instead.

[c4v3m4n]

The Pacific Islanders are currently holding a LIVE press conference in their thread NOW

You're going to love this one.  ;D

Perhaps they should take their pick in the psd/rookie draft instead.

I've got time for both.

[ossie85]

So..... a cap.

This is another thing that I'm wary of. Don't want a team to become untouchable.

So if you could answer these questions please.

So... cao?

a) - No, I don't want a cap.

b) - Yes, should be a SuperCoach salary cap.

c) - Yes, should it be a 'Games' cap (i.e. the total amount of AFL games your squad play in 2012)

d) - Yes, other....

[ossie85]

Or something like this... If you have a player that has played more than 10 AFL games, but you haven't played him more than half the time, he can be poached?