|
On December 01 2009 10:08 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
imo team wins shouldn't count toward the anti team. It makes it really difficult to pick players since picking a bad player on a good team will end up losing you a lot of points.
It's an anti-team. It's supposed to lose you points. Oh, sure, if you're really really good you won't lose many, but I don't understand why this is a problem. Other than that it makes things harder, I guess.
|
Braavos36374 Posts
On December 01 2009 10:08 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
imo team wins shouldn't count toward the anti team. It makes it really difficult to pick players since picking a bad player on a good team will end up losing you a lot of points.
Why?
Team Wins are built into the prices of players, and you know which teams they are on.
|
I'm actually kind of apprehensive, haha.
There are a few new risks to take to make things even crazier. For your anti-team, you could still pick players who won't see much time, but you could also pick players who will lose a lot for the potential point gain. For instance, Jangbi was +6 this round, but with round 2's scoring he would be at -2. Gorush seemed to have what would now be the worst round. He was +5, but now would be -8. I wonder if the top players this round are going to have any of these type of players on their anti-teams, or if the safer picks will win out. There really weren't thaaat many high priced negative players (and Sangho wouldn't even be negative even though he was 1-5 with no ace appearances - he'd be at an even 0).
Also, average main team players are going to suffer greatly. Hyvaa drops from 20 points to 10. Kwanro from 20 to 12. Movie from 20 to 13. Ruby from 24 to 17. It seems like there will be a pretty big decrease in scoring overall due to the fact lineup appearances mean nothing. These players played a lot, which allowed them to put up decent numbers. In this coming round, they would end up losing out to players like 815 who had only 2 lineup appearances but won both, putting him at 17 points.
An interesting case study involves two players who both had 22 points this round: Light, and Action (yes, Action):
Light had 11 Lineup appearances, over double the amount Action had (5). However, Light was 4-5, while Action was 4-0 (with a 3 game win streak of course). Light was able to make up the difference due to having two lineup appearances he didn't actually get to play in, and being on a better team. In round 2, he would not have been so lucky. The new totals:
Action: 25 (+3)
Light: 14 (-8)
The interesting thing here is that over half of Light's total is now his team win points (8 of 14). Lineup appearances have now gone from points to possible losses of points. FBH had 9 appearances this round, but lost 6 of them. He was still able to earn his owners 11 points, and if Khan had even been a middling team it wouldn't have been a huge loss for those owners. With round 2 scoring, however, he would have earned a total of 2 points - pitiful.
What can we take from all of this? Well, the biggest thing I see is that when you have a player is more important than ever. Stork on week 6 would be worth 17 points. Stork on week 7 would be worth -2. So you'd have been better off trading Stork for a player who didn't play and whose team lost!
Having players at the wrong times is going to ruin teams (not just due to trade value now), and it's going to be tough to judge what will work and what won't. Personally, I'm probably going to play it safe and try to build a team that won't require lots of trading. There are more points than ever in trading, but due to not having the cover of lineup appearances, it's also a lot more risky.
|
On December 01 2009 11:09 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2009 10:08 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
imo team wins shouldn't count toward the anti team. It makes it really difficult to pick players since picking a bad player on a good team will end up losing you a lot of points. Why? Team Wins are built into the prices of players, and you know which teams they are on.
Does that mean that we lose points every time a team of a member of my anti team wins???
|
Players who lose are now actually penalized this time around. -1 wasn't that bad in my opinion, now -2 will make people think a little bit harder.
4 wins will be interesting too. I am definitely seeing the potential of 600+ people picking Flash just because he is....Flash.
Less emphasis on team scoring now, none of the huge 8-10 point bonuses for a 3-0 win now. So, I guess that means I don't need to overpay for a great team this time around.
Hopefully I'll be able to break the Top 100 this time. Didn't do good at all in last round.
|
yeah, but thats not new. If your anti team members get points in some way (and their team winning is one of the ways) then you lose those points.
|
pripple
Finland1714 Posts
thanks for clearing things up HotBid & Abydos1!
+ Show Spoiler +On December 01 2009 11:40 QibingZero wrote:
I'm actually kind of apprehensive, haha.
There are a few new risks to take to make things even crazier. For your anti-team, you could still pick players who won't see much time, but you could also pick players who will lose a lot for the potential point gain. For instance, Jangbi was +6 this round, but with round 2's scoring he would be at -2. Gorush seemed to have what would now be the worst round. He was +5, but now would be -8. I wonder if the top players this round are going to have any of these type of players on their anti-teams, or if the safer picks will win out. There really weren't thaaat many high priced negative players (and Sangho wouldn't even be negative even though he was 1-5 with no ace appearances - he'd be at an even 0).
Also, average main team players are going to suffer greatly. Hyvaa drops from 20 points to 10. Kwanro from 20 to 12. Movie from 20 to 13. Ruby from 24 to 17. It seems like there will be a pretty big decrease in scoring overall due to the fact lineup appearances mean nothing. These players played a lot, which allowed them to put up decent numbers. In this coming round, they would end up losing out to players like 815 who had only 2 lineup appearances but won both, putting him at 17 points.
An interesting case study involves two players who both had 22 points this round: Light, and Action (yes, Action):
Light had 11 Lineup appearances, over double the amount Action had (5). However, Light was 4-5, while Action was 4-0 (with a 3 game win streak of course). Light was able to make up the difference due to having two lineup appearances he didn't actually get to play in, and being on a better team. In round 2, he would not have been so lucky. The new totals:
Action: 25 (+3)
Light: 14 (-8)
The interesting thing here is that over half of Light's total is now his team win points (8 of 14). Lineup appearances have now gone from points to possible losses of points. FBH had 9 appearances this round, but lost 6 of them. He was still able to earn his owners 11 points, and if Khan had even been a middling team it wouldn't have been a huge loss for those owners. With round 2 scoring, however, he would have earned a total of 2 points - pitiful.
What can we take from all of this? Well, the biggest thing I see is that when you have a player is more important than ever. Stork on week 6 would be worth 17 points. Stork on week 7 would be worth -2. So you'd have been better off trading Stork for a player who didn't play and whose team lost!
Having players at the wrong times is going to ruin teams (not just due to trade value now), and it's going to be tough to judge what will work and what won't. Personally, I'm probably going to play it safe and try to build a team that won't require lots of trading. There are more points than ever in trading, but due to not having the cover of lineup appearances, it's also a lot more risky.
great examples here, the one with Action & Light is quite alarming!
Yes you can go so wrong with the trades now, think i'll take the safer approach aswell, my tradegain at round1 of -34 could easily be -60 in round 2.
Those who take the risks and succeed will gain huge points ofcourse.
|
is awesome32274 Posts
I like the anti team changes.
I don't like the ace point changes. With the new system, someone who aces but loses gains zero points from it, while winner takes all.
This makes aces from strong teams (bisu, flash, jaedong, effort) even better. They were considered safe picks in the previous seasons and they will be even safer with the changes.
The problem with expensive players was that there were other players with lower cost that could catch up on them (this round: ZerO, Luxury early on, Ruby till week 4, etc) and that was a fun thing, trying to figuring good cheaper choices. Right now it seems "all-in" teams (Flash + 6-7 pter + random fills) will be better than a more balanced team), but who knows!
also are the prices going to be based on the old point system or on this round but with the new one?
|
is awesome32274 Posts
Basically I think somebody acing but losing should get 1 pt from it at least.
|
Damn my fanboyism, makes it hard to choose.
|
Braavos36374 Posts
On December 01 2009 12:41 IntoTheWow wrote:
I like the anti team changes.
I don't like the ace point changes. With the new system, someone who aces but loses gains zero points from it, while winner takes all.
This makes aces from strong teams (bisu, flash, jaedong, effort) even better. They were considered safe picks in the previous seasons and they will be even safer with the changes.
This is a good point, I talked it over with Abydos and we have adjusted the scoring so that Ace Loss = 0 (instead of -2).
The problem with expensive players was that there were other players with lower cost that could catch up on them (this round: ZerO, Luxury early on, Ruby till week 4, etc) and that was a fun thing, trying to figuring good cheaper choices. Right now it seems "all-in" teams (Flash + 6-7 pter + random fills) will be better than a more balanced team), but who knows!
also are the prices going to be based on the old point system or on this round but with the new one?
Prices will be based on the new system, of course.
|
is awesome32274 Posts
Awesome, so no broken Jaedong next round hahaha :D
|
Russian Federation1381 Posts
|
Wait, so if players from my anti team lose, I would gain points?
|
On December 01 2009 13:56 asianskill wrote:
Wait, so if players from my anti team lose, I would gain points?
Correct, a well picked anti team could actually gain you points this round.
|
I like the negative points for losses. I think this will make picking ppl for main teams much harder though
|
Braavos36374 Posts
|
I'm assuming none of the games today will affect player cost?
|
Braavos36374 Posts
On December 01 2009 15:32 TwoToneTerran wrote:
I'm assuming none of the games today will affect player cost?
We already adjusted values for that, one match will not change much of the player prices anyway.
|
Heh well I figured if Violet suddenly busted out with 2 wins (ace match and such) on top of being on KT's 10-1, he might be a bit more expensive, considering 8-0 on a 10-1 team with significant ace matches sounds like the ultimate player for this kind of FPL (which would be hazardous to Zero, the previous best player's string of losses).
You probably do have it figured out, just a bit cautious about starting up before the matches. :o
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
