Warrior General Games

Originally posted by smakibbfb
If we're thinking about player deman estimatesd it would need to go a bit further to be accurate. Would have to have each player specify which position he is doubling up as.

if we are only looking at 1 set of leagues for Iron Man Leagues (ie: similar to the USA A-Pro), we would only be looking at somewhere around 5% of the players (1/3 the roster of standard teams). The impact to the Demand is pretty small.

Originally posted by DL24
Update:

Originally posted by Bort

15 would not work. The sim has a hard coded minimum of 20 players on a side because otherwise there can be issues with filling out a formation. If 20 works, however, and there is a lot of interest, I wouldn't be against the idea.

Can we all agree that a 20-player roster w/ no changes in the sim would be a fine idea ?

qfrollover

You guys think 20 is fine?

I can live with 20.
less than 1/2 of a standard roster means you will still need solid builds.

Is 20 too many to make it worthwhile?

1QB 1HB 1FB 1TE 2WR: 6 Offense Specialists
1FS 1SS 2CB 3LB: 7 Defense Specialists
This leaves room for at least 5 linemen.. lets say 6 linemen and a CB/KR (which would fill out 5 CB spots on the DC with the 2 WRs)

Still some strategy involved for sure, as you of course don't have to follow this formula at all. But it could be argued that 20 is close to defeating the purpose, as many players can still pretty much build players to be mostly specialized for one side of the ball?

Just being a devil's advocate here, I still think its a fun idea. But lets think this 20 person thing over

Originally posted by Skoll Wolfrun
if we are only looking at 1 set of leagues for Iron Man Leagues (ie: similar to the USA A-Pro), we would only be looking at somewhere around 5% of the players (1/3 the roster of standard teams). The impact to the Demand is pretty small.

I was thinking in terms of a seperate demand table for the Iron Man league. Say people figure out that the optimal way to build a SS/HB combo is to create it as a HB it's gonna show falsely lower demand for HB than SS.

I'm not saying it needs a demand list. Just thinking that if it got one it would require a bit of extra doing.

20 is waay to many. 15 is tactically more interesting, more players playing on BOTH sides of the ball....Its Ironman, thats what playign both ways is. Not 10 "specialized" players and 10 hybrids to fill the rest!

Originally posted by The Avenger
20 is waay to many. 15 is tactically more interesting, more players playing on BOTH sides of the ball....Its Ironman, thats what playign both ways is. Not 10 "specialized" players and 10 hybrids to fill the rest!

So you would rather not have the league, than have 20 players, and just find a way to work around it? I mean, every player is still going to get 75-100 plays per game, but they just might sit out 20-30. No biggie.

I'd rather give in a little bit, and settle for 20 than be hell-bent on 15 and stop this idea from possibly becoming a reality.

Originally posted by DL24
Originally posted by The Avenger

20 is waay to many. 15 is tactically more interesting, more players playing on BOTH sides of the ball....Its Ironman, thats what playign both ways is. Not 10 "specialized" players and 10 hybrids to fill the rest!

So you would rather not have the league, than have 20 players, and just find a way to work around it? I mean, every player is still going to get 75-100 plays per game, but they just might sit out 20-30. No biggie.

I'd rather give in a little bit, and settle for 20 than be hell-bent on 15 and stop this idea from possibly becoming a reality.


But in the true definition of Ironman, its supposed to be full of players playing both sides of the ball. not just 6 of them and 14 natural position builds. We respect the game of football and most of its rules here in the GLB by playing with 55 man rosters and not 60 or 70. Its just a closer reality to the suggestion that this has been identified as a true Ironman league and its numerous unique builds required to be successful from only 15 players avaialble to work with!

Originally posted by The Avenger
Originally posted by DL24

Originally posted by The Avenger


20 is waay to many. 15 is tactically more interesting, more players playing on BOTH sides of the ball....Its Ironman, thats what playign both ways is. Not 10 "specialized" players and 10 hybrids to fill the rest!

So you would rather not have the league, than have 20 players, and just find a way to work around it? I mean, every player is still going to get 75-100 plays per game, but they just might sit out 20-30. No biggie.

I'd rather give in a little bit, and settle for 20 than be hell-bent on 15 and stop this idea from possibly becoming a reality.


But in the true definition of Ironman, its supposed to be full of players playing both sides of the ball. not just 6 of them and 14 natural position builds. We respect the game of football and most of its rules here in the GLB by playing with 55 man rosters and not 60 or 70. Its just a closer reality to the suggestion that this has been identified as a true Ironman league and its numerous unique builds required to be successful from only 15 players avaialble to work with!


How would adding 5 players take away from those unique builds? Sure, some teams would have 15 guys specialize and 5 guys go both ways, but they would suffer either because they had no depth at certain positions, or because they had to play a specialized play OoP when players get tired. There would be trade-offs, but imo, having to add 5 players shouldn't be a big problem, and the smart teams would still be smart and build 2-way players.

Then don't call it Ironman. Techinically with 20 roster spots instead of 15 you could make an entire starting regular defence and starting regular offence. Add in advanced AI tactics instead of just basic and you could get around depth issues....thus NOT being 2 way built Ironman players = defeats the purpose of this Epic suggestion......

Originally posted by The Avenger
Then don't call it Ironman. Techinically with 20 roster spots instead of 15 you could make an entire starting regular defence and starting regular offence. Add in advanced AI tactics instead of just basic and you could get around depth issues....thus NOT being 2 way built Ironman players = defeats the purpose of this Epic suggestion......

As I said, teams that do that will be punished with an extreme lack of depth, and having to play regularly built QBs or HBs at positions they will, frankly, suck at. I say make the best out of the scenario, still do your thing, and beat down the teams that try to cheat the Ironman system because of bad foresight(depth issues). If they want to do that, then they should go to the regular leagues.

(Another option would be to make it a requirement that each player is on the Depth Chart at more than one position, and get snaps at multiple positions, or something like that?)

Originally posted by DL24
Originally posted by The Avenger

Then don't call it Ironman. Techinically with 20 roster spots instead of 15 you could make an entire starting regular defence and starting regular offence. Add in advanced AI tactics instead of just basic and you could get around depth issues....thus NOT being 2 way built Ironman players = defeats the purpose of this Epic suggestion......

As I said, teams that do that will be punished with an extreme lack of depth, and having to play regularly built QBs or HBs at positions they will, frankly, suck at. I say make the best out of the scenario, still do your thing, and beat down the teams that try to cheat the Ironman system because of bad foresight(depth issues). If they want to do that, then they should go to the regular leagues.

(Another option would be to make it a requirement that each player is on the Depth Chart at more than one position, and get snaps at multiple positions, or something like that?)

That might be a bit harder to enforce in the implementaion of this kind of league since it would be a "new" rule.

I can see a team not ever, ever having to worry about kicking, punting or depth issues if an AI can be set up so that ONLY natural position players are in the formation like a 1 QB, 1 FB, 1 HB, 2 WR's, 1 TE, 5 O-linemen only formations. Even if those 11 ONLY played every offensive down they would dominate a bunch of hybrid OOP built defensive players! Always going for it on 4th down in the AI eliminates punters and kickers and vise versa with the D! 3-3-5 Formation only but ALL NATURAL position builds in the 3-3-5 would dominate a hybrid, OOP, bunch of offensive builds! The biggest thing of all....this team whole team would never have to play both ways, energy would never be a factor so stamina would never be a tactic. This is very far away from being an Ironman idea. You can't beat a team like this when BOTH sides of the ball have their asses covered. Make it a 15 player team and there are way, way more interesting scenarios and way more diversity with builds and tactics when its not so straight up!

Originally posted by The Avenger
Originally posted by DL24

Originally posted by The Avenger


Then don't call it Ironman. Techinically with 20 roster spots instead of 15 you could make an entire starting regular defence and starting regular offence. Add in advanced AI tactics instead of just basic and you could get around depth issues....thus NOT being 2 way built Ironman players = defeats the purpose of this Epic suggestion......

As I said, teams that do that will be punished with an extreme lack of depth, and having to play regularly built QBs or HBs at positions they will, frankly, suck at. I say make the best out of the scenario, still do your thing, and beat down the teams that try to cheat the Ironman system because of bad foresight(depth issues). If they want to do that, then they should go to the regular leagues.

(Another option would be to make it a requirement that each player is on the Depth Chart at more than one position, and get snaps at multiple positions, or something like that?)

That might be a bit harder to enforce in the implementaion of this kind of league since it would be a "new" rule.

I can see a team not ever, ever having to worry about kicking, punting or depth issues if an AI can be set up so that ONLY natural position players are in the formation like a 1 QB, 1 FB, 1 HB, 2 WR's, 1 TE, 5 O-linemen only formations. Even if those 11 ONLY played every offensive down they would dominate a bunch of hybrid OOP built defensive players! Always going for it on 4th down in the AI eliminates punters and kickers and vise versa with the D! 3-3-5 Formation only but ALL NATURAL position builds in the 3-3-5 would dominate a hybrid, OOP, bunch of offensive builds! The biggest thing of all....this team whole team would never have to play both ways, energy would never be a factor so stamina would never be a tactic. This is very far away from being an Ironman idea. You can't beat a team like this when BOTH sides of the ball have their asses covered. Make it a 15 player team and there are way, way more interesting scenarios and way more diversity with builds and tactics when its not so straight up!

So we can agree that forcing a player to play an offensive and defensive position each game, or force them to at least be on the DC(with a max of 3 players on the DC at each position besides CB/WR), would be a fair solution? Because there is no way to have 15 man rosters, so we need to work around this if we want this implemented(I sure as hell do).

There's no way for a 15 man roster?

What if there was a happy medium? like 17-18 max roster? That way there HAS to be 3 to 4 builds that are forced to play offence and defence!

And what about the other major issue, can tactics be the exact same as Casual (which work very well to avoid exploits and rely on builds mostly, to which this special league should be relying on builds more!)

Originally posted by The Avenger
There's no way for a 15 man roster?

What if there was a happy medium? like 17-18 max roster? That way there HAS to be 3 to 4 builds that are forced to play offence and defence!

And what about the other major issue, can tactics be the exact same as Casual (which work very well to avoid exploits and rely on builds mostly, to which this special league should be relying on builds more!)

No, we need at least 20 to be able to sim the game :

Originally posted by Bort
15 would not work. The sim has a hard coded minimum of 20 players on a side because otherwise there can be issues with filling out a formation. If 20 works, however, and there is a lot of interest, I wouldn't be against the idea.

EDIT: And yes, I'm sure I can bring up the option of just using Casual League tactics so things stay simple and focused on builds