A very simple For or Against the 2 trades per week Poll

Spite · September 02, 2013, 01:28:19 PM

Hi everyone, I am just curious to see the result.
From the other thread, it seemed as if everyone who did really well this year voted For but no one who ranked outside 10k even commented.
I'm not asking for rank, just wanted to see if you liked the 2 trades per week or did not.
You may discuss it below if you want, just keep it on topic please. Cheers

LF · September 02, 2013, 01:35:54 PM

I liked it in some ways I enabled me to fix some problems/injuries in my starting team.
If you use them strategically enough it can be to your advantage as well.
But on the other hand I felt compelled to use them every week even if I didn`t want because you lose them if you don`t.

nrich102 · September 02, 2013, 02:28:56 PM

In for it. It's better than rolling lock out at least.

Dudge · September 02, 2013, 04:25:07 PM

For me i'd prefer no rolling lockout in all comps + 30 trades. Maybe some sort of help in the byes, but not sure what. I just think the rolling lockout gives some coaches, to much of an advantage over others. Two trades a week, takes the good feeling away, when you've squirrelled away your trades, and the business end of the season is coming

fertalong · September 02, 2013, 10:23:41 PM

They should do something like 40 trades instead of 2 per week. I didn't like finals with 2 trades.

aces-high · September 04, 2013, 12:05:52 AM

I liked it but it takes away alot of trade strategies that keep the better players in the hunt for the top 1000. I dropped from 250th in sc to 1055th in the last 2 rounds not having trades to use. Had i had 2 like we were allowed in dt i wouldve held my rank but the people who used the trades better wouldnt of been rewarded for it. I think it would be better to have something like 30 trades. The poeple who saved trades and used them well in supercoach would have caught up a heap over the last few rounds. 30 would keep people interested and is fair. It still will take skill in choosing when to trade. I think the strategy side was lost a bit having 2 trades a week in 2013, whilst it probs kept the majority of casual players interested the die hards would feel its more of an even playing field and unfair.

For eg
With lesser trades in supercoach if u miss a couple of good rookies in the first few rounds its a risk trading early that could come back to bite you. You have to do your research and nail the picks.

In dream team you could pick up anyone you missed out on early cause of the extra trades. It takes the skill out of it i think.

Thats just my two bob though haha :) was entertaining and different, you can argue for or against quite easily. Extra traded helps the average player i think though, being a more experienced dream teamer i think it may have to be re thought.

Holz · September 04, 2013, 12:20:51 AM

Completely ruins the game. I have been defending dream team for years but I don't think it's even worth playing anymore.

The skill of the game was knowing when to use your trades and taking calculated risks. Now you are forced to trade every week and everyone can build a superstar team with 2 months left. Towards the end of the season I was thinking, hah who do I have to trade now.

Taking risky choices and getting uniques was the most fun in the game. Now you take a punt and pick a unique and everyone just jumps on them.

People just love trading and that's why the 2 votes is popular. However I like planning and making tough choices and building the bestteam possible while trying to hold on with a few trades to limp home in the end.

In sc it wad exciting having 1 trade for the last 2 months and hoping my cover can hold up, and guys like Hanley come back.

You need lows to experience the high properly. Sc this year was a rollercoaster, DT was a stroll in the park.

Was really disappointed to see my game ruined and I fear it won't change or will even get worse. What's next no cap and just pick 18 mids.

At this stage I'm not signing up for DT, if I do it won't be my main comp. Will look at the other comps to play a game with strategy.

Rusty00 · September 04, 2013, 12:20:34 PM

I personally can't see it changing back to a capped number of trades. As Holz said people love to trade so any sort of market research they do to decide on whether to keep the 2 trades per week will more than likely come back in favour.

I assume they tried this option in an attempt to differentiate from SC to try an obtain a greater market share. Will be interesting to see what happens next year.

Holz · September 04, 2013, 12:24:45 PM

the rolling lockout was brilliant, its was great to avoid green vests. Added another level of strategy with emg loophole and VC loophole. Actually gave incentive to have non playing players towards the end of the season.

it was risky though, you play the loophole and you have no cover. You needed to decide when to use it.

SC has it perfect. Except the rubbish scoring system.

Rusty00 · September 04, 2013, 12:33:33 PM

Quote from: Holzman on September 04, 2013, 12:24:45 PM
the rolling lockout was brilliant, its was great to avoid green vests. Added another level of strategy with emg loophole and VC loophole. Actually gave incentive to have non playing players towards the end of the season.

it was risky though, you play the loophole and you have no cover. You needed to decide when to use it.

SC has it perfect. Except the rubbish scoring system.

The only downside of the rolling lockout is it gives a huge advantage to people who are able to be online throughout each weekend. I personally don't have an issue with it, but there are lot of people out there who can't/don't want to be online all the time.

Having said that, it is an online game so the more time and effot you put will naturally give you a better chance of success over someone who logs in once a week.

Holz · September 04, 2013, 01:05:44 PM

Quote from: Rusty00 on September 04, 2013, 12:33:33 PM
Quote from: Holzman on September 04, 2013, 12:24:45 PM
the rolling lockout was brilliant, its was great to avoid green vests. Added another level of strategy with emg loophole and VC loophole. Actually gave incentive to have non playing players towards the end of the season.

it was risky though, you play the loophole and you have no cover. You needed to decide when to use it.

SC has it perfect. Except the rubbish scoring system.
The only downside of the rolling lockout is it gives a huge advantage to people who are able to be online throughout each weekend. I personally don't have an issue with it, but there are lot of people out there who can't/don't want to be online all the time.

Having said that, it is an online game so the more time and effot you put will naturally give you a better chance of success over someone who logs in once a week.

I just log on for a minute or two on my phone, not a major deal.

Ricochet · September 04, 2013, 03:51:53 PM

I didn't like it at all. It completely ruined finals imo

its me lads · September 04, 2013, 05:09:03 PM

Nope. Preferred the way it was last year and before.

dirkdiggler · September 04, 2013, 06:09:50 PM

I am a big fan of the option the buy trades out of your salary cap.
Options to buy before week 1 - before MBR's - and week of finals. 100k a trade

zeddyzed · September 04, 2013, 10:58:13 PM

I finished 1500ish after being in the top 30 up until round 10. I found that I wasn't rewarded for starting with a good team, as those that made silly decisions at the start of the season could just burn trades to catch me later. I guess it's my own fault for playing too "old school". I kept players through injury etc. I think 40 trades max is good. 3 allowed over each of the bye rounds. Good trading and team selection/management should be rewarded