2015 SC Proposed Changes

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Other than the impossible dream of classic lockout, I'd like a whole suite of new customisation options for draft leagues, and I think the scoring could use a tweak. For example, my gut-feel is that the decline in real scores over the last few years should see goals weighted more heavily.
Don't mind that idea.

Would bring the KPF back into play more in the FWD line. I agree, I'd like to have some actual forwards in my SC team rather than midfielders who drift fwd.

Would mean though scoring would become more Sportsbet like wouldn't it.
 
To a degree, but Sportsbet is still unweighted and run off basic statistics, so just a differently-balanced DT.

The SC formula was cooked up a good decade ago now, and there have only been very slight tweaks since, with nothing major since they jacked up rucks and inside mids a few years ago. I think the clear evolution of the (real) game should prompt at least some sort of re-modelling, but I suppose CD are more focused on their new Player Ratings system.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Perhaps they could omit the lowest score from your selected 22 to help ease the pain of in-game injuries? It's representative of the actual play where a team only has 21 contributing players at any one time.

Obviously could also help with green vest/late withdrawals, but we already have ways to deal with those problems. I think this is just a little tweak that could reduce the luck factor ever so slightly.
 
The problem with these various proposals to "help" with low scores is they strip away the majority of the 'gameday' decision making. Pick your captain, pick your starters, pick your emergencies, wear the results. Yes, there's luck involved, but there's just as much skill.

I'm with you, and I certainly don't think any of the more extreme versions of the idea such as the best 22 scores in your squad count have any merit. I just feel that omitting one score would strike a nice balance between game day decisions and a little injury insurance, as well as being more representative of the actual AFL under the sub rule.
 
I wonder if they have considered letting people BUY extra trades once their initial 30 run out.

There is no way I'd ever spend money (other than SC Gold) but just something I've always thought about.

No way. Great for the business I suppose, would ruin the game though. Perhaps using your spare in-game cash to buy trades at like $100,000 a pop would be okay, if only because I think in most scenarios it would hinder rather than help.
 
One thing that has driven me away from SC into other formats is a simple thing like the lights for who is selected/bench or not. I know you can pay extra for it but I'm not going to and it makes it a lot harder to manage them team without it.
When they changed that to SC Gold only I started to be less interested


Not a big issue but enough that it was an annoyance to go back and forth between the team sheets each week. Other formats I don't have the same issue and they have become more enjoyable to me

God forbid you pay $1 a week for something you get hours of enjoyment out of. They have a business to run, we either support them or they find something more profitable. Everyone wants something for nothing nowadays, it's pathetic. Less than a ******* $1 a week, you have to be shitting me!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top