DaCoach
Joined: Jul 22, 2004
|
 Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 09:21 |
 
|
(Poll and discussion thread for present and past WIL coaches).
So, seasons and redraft is implemented, and I have the feeling this is where WIL is heading, too.
However, to make sure, a small poll to test the point of the WIL community.
Feel free to discuss as well what would be the perfect option for WIL.
For example:
- Season lenght - let it follow a normal season (7 games) or double?
- Fees - how hard should it hit?
- Hard cap or no cap? In my opinion some kind of TV tiering is OK between divisions, and this could be handled with no cap and some extra gold for teams in Prem and Conference.
WIL ruleset for reference: https://fumbbl.com/p/ruleset?id=2314 |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 10:22 |
|
Broadly I am in favour of having a TV cap, so that teams don't get extremely large
I am in favour of having that cap tiered by division, so regionals are smaller than prem, as it makes things easier for new entrants
The main differentiator is then the agency fees
These put a fairly hard cap on the lifespan of players
This in turn hurts certain teams, eg lizards, who need to develop players but they're slow
So, it depends on what you want there
Personally I'm playing vamps and I think the current setup is good for vamps. the vamp teams are doing well in prem and confs, but not dominating
I'll vote for manual TV tiering as it suits vamps, but I don't hugely mind either way
I would say though, 7-game seasons and 20k agency fees would be brutal on player attrition, so please don't make it that extreme |
|
|
DaCoach
Joined: Jul 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 11:13 |
|
Thanks for the feedback.
Obviously short seasons call for less punishment, so suggestion, as per ruleset link would be 10k agent fee, starting from season 3 |
|
|
DaCoach
Joined: Jul 22, 2004
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 11:20 |
|
Well, as for "Personally I'm playing vamps and I think the current setup is good for vamps. the vamp teams are doing well in prem and confs, but not dominating"
If we ended the season now, we would have 4/4 vamp teams in the Prem.
But that may even out, and the new vamps have attracted some quality coaches. |
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 12:11 |
|
Yep.. the combined record of 8/2/0 this season is stronger than I'd realised actually
https://fumbbl.com/p/rosterstats?y=2024 shows vamp overall winrate is 47%, so there must be some coaching skill involved, and/or the teams are now bigger
WIL has the forced-diversity thing so it doesn't skew too much to rosters vamps might struggle with
Getting niggles healed at the end of seasons is good
Vamps being elite + trash means they can cut down then rebuild relatively easily
Vamp positionals can skill up pretty quickly
I think all these issues would remain though even if you have agency fees. The existing vamp teams only are at 29, 37, 14, 16 games-played, so their current performance wouldn't have been impacted much by fees
Also, the cap does constrain vamps more than we previously saw in Competitive (asteflix's megavamps for example) Won't be able to afford 8 RRs, won't have budget for vargheist |
|
|
DoctorMidnight
Joined: Jul 07, 2022
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 12:47 |
|
7-game seasons and regular re-draft:
- the 7-game format is the perfect length : long enough to stay competitive even if you get some losses, and short enough to avoid becoming boring and painful if you don't get enough wins.
- fat cow teams are not my cup of tea. |
_________________
 |
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 13:11 |
|
Mmm fair enough. you're playing amazons right, which a cynic might suggest suits a lower TV anyway?  |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 13:21 |
|
|
DoctorMidnight
Joined: Jul 07, 2022
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 13:45 |
|
| Sp00keh wrote: | | Mmm fair enough. you're playing amazons right, which a cynic might suggest suits a lower TV anyway? |
And I would answer then: "Mmm fair enough. You're playing Vamps, which a cynic may suggest suits mid-high TVs?"  |
_________________
|
|
Sp00keh
Joined: Dec 06, 2011
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 13:46 |
|
Yea, I already mentioned that, been pretty open about the reasons why I think current setup suits vamps |
|
|
Dynamix
Joined: Jan 21, 2009
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 13:57 |
|
WIL Division tiering with the hard caps should be retained if possible. A tweak may be necessary but the current form in the absence of re draft I think it has worked well |
|
|
DoctorMidnight
Joined: Jul 07, 2022
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 14:09 |
|
10 votes, but only 3 or 4 people explaining their vote...
@DaCoach: may I suggest you to send all the WIL members a PM, asking them to express their vote and feelings? Imho, it would be more "accurate" than a public anonymous vote. |
_________________
|
|
StrangeFeller
Joined: May 13, 2023
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 14:40 |
|
Personally I am not a fan of redraft, specifically because of agent fees.
I haven't been in this league too long, but I've already had several conversations with other league members about specific players on specific teams. Like this one: https://fumbbl.com/p/player?player_id=14508066
I'm sure many people know about the ST5 pro elf blitzer and would love to be the one to kill it.
These are the sorts of narratives that agent fees hurt a lot, and I appreciate those narratives very much as I feel they give leagues their own identity and a stronger sense of community.
There are many coaches who don't enjoy playing against such monstrosities and I appreciate that when they go unchecked, especially in the current ruleset where stats are guaranteed, the competitive aspect suffers. Even though I personally don't like redraft I won't object to it in this league (I may quietly disappear once my team becomes too expensive to keep). But if there's a choice to be made between more or less severe agent fees, I vote for less.
I've enjoyed the current system of "dumb" TV caps very much. A bigger budget for teams in higher divisions sounds like a good idea. Perhaps keeping the TV cap and having a redraft every other season could work.
As for the vamps issue: They are just a bit too good in the current rules. I think they will redraft quite well as they have don't have too many players they need to keep, so introducing seasons won't help much in that regard.
I do feel a bit dirty playing them, but in my defence I also played quite a bit of vamps back in the previous ruleset when they were crap, so I believe I've paid my dues.  |
|
|
Mercutio
Joined: Jan 31, 2012
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 15:03 |
|
I have a few thoughts and have voted No in the poll.
In my view, the redraft system is harsher to slower building players like Nurgle Bloaters or Saurus as getting SPP on those players is all about the volume of games played. Vamps or Elves can skill up specific players quite easily by comparison. A 2 season grace period for agency fees helps those slower building players a little by buying them time, but it can also eliminates agency fees on players with a lot of extra skills. As an example, these are vamps with 14 games played https://fumbbl.com/t/1187021
The TV caps already force choices on coaches for team construction and combined with the racial limits I think this is already keeping things balanced.
Another thing to consider might be handling of forfeits. At present nothing is awarded so a couple of forfeits over a season takes away 28% of the chance to earn SPP and will still incur agency fees. An example where this happened recently https://fumbbl.com/p/group?op=view&at=1&group=14949&p=tournaments&show=62580 |
|
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
| Posted:
Feb 09, 2025 - 16:54 |
|
I don't have very strong feelings about this matter. I expect the results to be similar especially with low agent fees. |
|
|
|
|
White Isle and seaso...
Search
