Discussion - Restrictions

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Razcalking1978, Jun 1, 2009.

  1. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    Discussion - Restrictions

    So after a quick look at the TeamBuilder site, it looks like we're going to have to come up with restrictions:

    - on pitch ratings. I'm thinking 1 Excellent, 2-3 Great, etc, etc. Discuss.

    - on player ratings. Not sure how to do this. Discuss.
     
  2. MazzMan56

    MazzMan56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    336
    I made a team called the Florida Maniax out of Panama City.

    Mascots, will they allow your teams colors on the mascots you have to pick from. If not, it looks like I will not be using one.

    Program Info- Not sure what we are going to here. All I can think of is maybe have all our pitches start out at a C+, or C-.

    As far as rosters, they let you pick from a spread, powerhouse, cupcake, option attack, average joe's, air it out, or ground attack. Looks like you can also start out with any real ncaa teams roster.
     
  3. Colemanchu

    Colemanchu GOAT SPLITTER

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,707
    I was messing around with the rosters and chose spread, and boom 99 ovr so. qb. As usual with ea create a team a lot of high rated young players.
     
  4. Colemanchu

    Colemanchu GOAT SPLITTER

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,707
    It look's like the rosters are set in stone for each class of team and not random. It would be pretty lame if we have the same exact roster as other teams in dynasty. Just to check if mine are same go to spread on rosters and sort by rating I get:
    QB#10-so-99ovr
    MLB#54-sr-97ovr
    LE#8-jr-95ovr
     
  5. MazzMan56

    MazzMan56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    336
    Wow, how do you pick a spread offense and get a 99 ovr QB who is only a soph. I thought EA was going to tone down the players. I guess we should just be glad that if we go with the same overall players ratings from another team that the players won't be the same name.

    A good thing about it would be if we started with the same overall player ratings you would know if someone juiced somebody up because they would be different from your own roster.
     
  6. Colemanchu

    Colemanchu GOAT SPLITTER

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,707
    EA just made deciding how to choose rosters a lot more difficult for us. If they were randomized evertime you created a team we could have just all agreed on using average joes or something like that. Now we have to either choose the same exact players or choose a system for editing players within the rosters, and then go through the hassle of making sure people abide. We're going to need to get creative here boys.
     
  7. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    We could also consider allowing users to replicate teams that are of the same prestige level they are creating.

    So if I was making a 3-star team, I could choose a 3-star team and use their roster (with new names, of course).
     
  8. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    New thought - we could allow teams to either pick the default rosters like Cupcake or Middle of the Road, or the team could choose an existing team to clone based on that team's overall - say any team that's 77-78 overall or less.

    I really, really, really don't want to get into the editing of teams. It's messy and will cause conflicts. After one year of recruiting, transfers and training, all the teams will be unique anyways.
     
  9. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    I think the best way to make this work would be to have options on the overall level of your players, your school prestige, and your program info.

    By category we could break it down into tiers:

    Three overall team rating options based on any teams roster. I am completely open to changing these tiers because I think an 85 overall team may be too high to start with.
    85-80
    80-75
    75 or less

    Three prestige levels.
    3-star
    2-star
    1-star

    Three program levels that restrict the number of A, B, C, D categories a team can start with. We should eliminate the +/- aspect to keep it as simple as possible. Again, I'm open to adjusting these tiers.
    4-A categories, 2-B categories, 3-C categories, 2-D categories
    2-A categories, 4-B categories, 4-C categories, 1-D category
    2-A categories, 3-B categories, 5-C categories, 1-D category

    The idea would be to have each team pick a different tier for each category.

    For example, a team could want to start with the highest tier in overall rating so they would then have to choose a 1* or 2* prestige, then depending on which tier they had left it would decide their program info strength. With this set-up we can guarantee everyone a chance to decide the way they start their program, and it still leaves the possibility open of having very different programs yet everyone is on a relatively even playing field.

    We would obviously post our selections to ensure everyone is following the rules, and to be honest, I'm not really worried about that, I think this set up is fair enough that if someone wanted to cheat then they shouldn't be in this league. The only issue I foresee is that we don't know what the team overall ratings are yet. I'm sure that news will come out in the next few weeks, but it could kind of slow the selection process a bit.

    My favorite aspect of this system is that it completely eliminates the changing of specific players attributes. I believe that would solve our biggest problem in keeping the league fair.

    Thoughts?
     
  10. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    I like the direction of this a lot. I'd bump down the starting overall team ratings, and I'd include the option of picking the middle tier on each. But if you wanted one of them to be top tier, another would have to be low tier.

    I'd like to hear other's thoughts on this system.

    Maybe this for Overall:

    68 - 72
    72 - 76
    76 - 80
     
  11. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    Both good suggestions Raz. I'm fine with allowing all second tier selections for every catagory but only if we don't have every or most teams choose that set up. I'd like to have some diversity between the programs.

    Let's do the overall tiers as:
    80-77
    76-74
    73-70
     
  12. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    I think we'll be able to set the ranges better when they release the rosters.

    Even if lots of people pick all middle tier, the teams will still be very different depending on which roster they template.
     
  13. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    Very true. I like your ranges better too. I posted mine right before you edited your previous post.
     
  14. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    I'm fine with whatever the consensus is on the restrictions. I think we should all start out as 3* teams with no editing of attributes. Other than that, or if anyone wanted to start lower, I am totally fine with.
     
  15. Colemanchu

    Colemanchu GOAT SPLITTER

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    7,707
    I like the three tiers idea a lot. Needless to say I will be looking for a lower tier overall team with a few good players on it.
     
  16. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    Thing is Basis, they don't allow you to create a "3-star" roster - they have no connection between the prestige levels and the rosters. So we have to treat each seperately.
     
  17. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    So could we have a 3* prestige team, and make sure that our overall rating is between a pre-determined range? That was pretty much what I meant, I think -- this part confuses me a bit.
     
  18. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    If you want to have a 3* prestige you'll have to choose a roster and program info from a 2nd or 3rd tier, but you can't have a 1st tier prestige with a 2nd tier roster and program, either one of those has to be in the 3rd tier. I hope that makes sense.
     
  19. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I have no real opinion, really, other than this:

    I think it would be weird if we challenged for national titles in the first year. I will want to restrict my team as much as possible. I may want a few good guys at key positions, but hopefully I will start weak. But I can understand some variance in the starting makeup of each team. I just think a BCS title in the first year for one of us would be a disappointment, if you know what I mean.

    AG
     
  20. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    I completely agree. Hopefully even if we have some teams go undefeated they won't be in the NC because we'll be playing in non-BCS conferences. Keeping teams at a max of 80 overall should prevent any unrealistic records the first year. With that said, I do expect to go undefeated against the CPU unless I have a powerhouse scheduled in the first year, but that doesn't mean I won't lose to another user controlled team.
     
  21. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    It will be an interesting balance, and a tough decision. If you go with a team that will contend early by choosing high Overall, you'll sacrifice recruiting by having to take lower prestige/pitches.
     
  22. Basis4aDay56

    Basis4aDay56 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    5,421
    Here, here! I wouldn't mind starting off as a 2*, but if I am in C-USA I would prefer to be a 3. The fun of this dynasty, for me personally, is going to be to try to build a contender from a pretty average/below average starting point.
     
  23. Archie Griffin

    Archie Griffin Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    5,738
    I want to be a one. I want to be a 65-70 rated team. I want some CPU teams to be too much for me. I think an 80 is way too high. 80's can run the table and win it all. With the conferences we're in, undefeated schedules will lead to title shots. Maybe not every year, but in many years. New teams making the jump to D-1 are supposed to struggle mightily. I think only Marshall saw real success early, and they were never in the title hunt for a moment.

    Remember, we're going to play multiple seasons. Do we want our first bowl game to be the BCS title game? I think our first winning season, our first decent recruit, our first bowl bid - why waste all of these milestones in a single year by starting as a contender? We should suck, and then we should build until we no longer suck. That first bowl game should be tough to get, and therefore rewarding. Many of us shouldn't make bowl games in year one. If we're going to enter D-1, let's do it sim instead of starting out as the best in our conferences. I'll start as a one. I'll start as the worst team in the game.

    Anyway, that's what I think would be the most fun. But it's not my decision to make. I can try to influence you guys, though.

    AG
     
  24. Razcalking1978

    Razcalking1978 OFFL TeamBuilder Commish

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830
    Certainly an interesting thought. We could always bump down the Overall ranges we're looking at, so maybe they top out around 75.

    As both player progression and recruiting will depend on Prestige levels, I'm not sure teams will be able to work their way out of the basement in 6 seasons if we restrict prestige levels too much. I think a low starting point with decent prestige might get the effect you're looking for.
     
  25. Mallard Muscle

    Mallard Muscle Blue Chip Prospect

    Joined:
    May 8, 2009
    Messages:
    234
    I like the prestige and program info tiers we've already discusses. I'm open to any change in overall ratings. I really don't care what range we use becuase I'll be looking for a roster that has the kind of players I want to play with.
     

Share This Page