Discussion BBL|10 SC: Team & In-Game Discussion - Home of #1 and #2 Leagues
- Thread starter Goodie's Guns
- Start date
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2014
- Messages
- 8,045
- Likes
- 42,769
- AFL Club
- North Melb.
I have been busy today and only just read the call for feedback on the game. So here it goes.
Positions
I would change the positions to more closely match how teams actually structure themselves. I know each team do it slightly differently however I would force teams to include 4 specialist bats, 3 allrounders, 1 keeper and 3 specialist bowlers. No DPP players. Currently the majority are effectively trying to get an allrounder into every on-field position in their team. I would suggest 1 bench player in each position subject to the following point around trades. If it it stays at 3 trades per round then you would probably need 2 for bats, ARs and bowlers.
Trades
I would allow a lot more each week at least 5 but maybe even unlimited meaning your cash reserve is the limiting factor. With international commitment, rests, rotations, players becoming fathers, odd selection decisions, X factors, Injuries, game order and the lack of information coming from clubs it is nigh on impossible to keep up with it all and if you miss something it can ruin your whole strategy. It would also give players a lot more flexibility around strategy and think you would get more differences between teams which I see as a good thing. (It would also be good for @Herbie66 health as he doesn't blow a gasket answering the same question over and over).
Emergencies
I would give players access to an emergencies score if one of your DGR players misses a game. That is you would get score for DGR player in the game they played and the emergency score for the game they missed.
Price Changes
This is not my area of expertise however I would advocate for a change here. As it stands as soon as a player gets a good score you are almost compelled to trade them in so you don't miss out on the cash gain and the same in reverse for a low score. I think the scores currently change too quickly and the combined affect of a low/high score itself and the flow on cash effect is too great. If you have a rough run (and I have had my share) it is almost impossible to recover.
Trading Loophole
If they are going to allow this loophole then I would allow it even after you have completed the 3 trades for the round. ie You could switch any player traded in that round to another player before they lock out.
DPP Players
Allow DPP players (if you have them) to be switched to their other position even after they are locked out. Note that they could not be switched from on-field to bench or vice versa. This would allow for greater flexibility on team management and game order would not matter so much. I acknowledge this would probably be complicated to implement.
Scoring
Batting
Positions
I would change the positions to more closely match how teams actually structure themselves. I know each team do it slightly differently however I would force teams to include 4 specialist bats, 3 allrounders, 1 keeper and 3 specialist bowlers. No DPP players. Currently the majority are effectively trying to get an allrounder into every on-field position in their team. I would suggest 1 bench player in each position subject to the following point around trades. If it it stays at 3 trades per round then you would probably need 2 for bats, ARs and bowlers.
Trades
I would allow a lot more each week at least 5 but maybe even unlimited meaning your cash reserve is the limiting factor. With international commitment, rests, rotations, players becoming fathers, odd selection decisions, X factors, Injuries, game order and the lack of information coming from clubs it is nigh on impossible to keep up with it all and if you miss something it can ruin your whole strategy. It would also give players a lot more flexibility around strategy and think you would get more differences between teams which I see as a good thing. (It would also be good for @Herbie66 health as he doesn't blow a gasket answering the same question over and over).
Emergencies
I would give players access to an emergencies score if one of your DGR players misses a game. That is you would get score for DGR player in the game they played and the emergency score for the game they missed.
Price Changes
This is not my area of expertise however I would advocate for a change here. As it stands as soon as a player gets a good score you are almost compelled to trade them in so you don't miss out on the cash gain and the same in reverse for a low score. I think the scores currently change too quickly and the combined affect of a low/high score itself and the flow on cash effect is too great. If you have a rough run (and I have had my share) it is almost impossible to recover.
Trading Loophole
If they are going to allow this loophole then I would allow it even after you have completed the 3 trades for the round. ie You could switch any player traded in that round to another player before they lock out.
DPP Players
Allow DPP players (if you have them) to be switched to their other position even after they are locked out. Note that they could not be switched from on-field to bench or vice versa. This would allow for greater flexibility on team management and game order would not matter so much. I acknowledge this would probably be complicated to implement.
Scoring
Batting
- 1 point for each run
- SR for each run scored above balls faced like it used to be. If there is a concern that bats can get too many SR points say for the Stoinis innings last year were he got 147 of 80 odd and got 67 SR points then it could be limited to 25 max. I personally wouldn't do that but can see the case for doing this. I absolutely hate the 20 run threshold for SR bonus, 25 points is way to many for somebody who just scores 20 runs and 0 points in not enough for someone who scores a rapidfire sub 20 score.
- I am not against extra bonuses for 4s, 6s, 50s and 100s however I wouldn't include them. I think the points above are sufficient and already reward players who achieve these milestones.
- 20 points per wicket.
- I would calculate the ER bonus in a similar way to the SR bonus for batters. Given that batsmen can start earning a SR bonus as soon as they get above a run a ball (ie 6 per over) I would allow bowlers to earn a a ER bonus if they concede less than 10 an over. This is on the basis that I see 160 as a generic type par score for a T20 match (ie 8 per over). I would multiply the overs bowled by 10 and every run scored less than that provides a 1 run ER bonus. ie if a bowler bowls 4 overs and concedes 20 runs then he would earn 4 * 10 - 20 = 20. I also hate the qualification for ER bonus of 3 overs and using this method a bowler can earn ER points in proportion to the number of overs they bowl.
- Again not against 3 wicket and dot ball bonuses or wide and NB penalties but i wouldn't include them because they all influence the points above.
- I would make a catch, stumping and run out all worth the same and would suggest 10 points (could live with 15). I have never understood why they are different value it is not like the batsmen is more out using one of these methods.
- I would also award points to all people who participated in the dismissal. A relayed catch both get the points as do the thrower and receiver in a runout. I can see the case for dividing the points for fielding dismissals that involved multiply players but I wouldn't do it.
Some really good thoughts in there. I particularly like the thoughts around positions. It's currently pitched very heavily towards casual players in that a lot of players can go almost anywhere. If the players scored reasonably even amounts, maybe we could be locked in to a certain number of players in each position, but then some utility style ones. For example, 1 keeper, 4 bats and a utility spot that could be a keeper or a bat.
You are doing an amazing job, @Professor.
Getting all our feedback, and suggestions through. Thanks.
I was pretty sure my incremental dot ball idea was too complicated.
When we think of ideas, I think you have to come from the basis of, that they want people with little understanding of either cricket or SC to be able to play, understand and enjoy the game.
Having said that golden balls are a real bug bear of mine.
A bowler bowling his 18th ball, depending on what his 1st 17 and 5 balls of that over did can score:
20 + 10 + 15 + 25 +1 = 71 points.
To me, that is 40 points too high, as on the 17th and 19th ball he can only score 31 points.
Getting all our feedback, and suggestions through. Thanks.
I was pretty sure my incremental dot ball idea was too complicated.
When we think of ideas, I think you have to come from the basis of, that they want people with little understanding of either cricket or SC to be able to play, understand and enjoy the game.
Having said that golden balls are a real bug bear of mine.
A bowler bowling his 18th ball, depending on what his 1st 17 and 5 balls of that over did can score:
20 + 10 + 15 + 25 +1 = 71 points.
To me, that is 40 points too high, as on the 17th and 19th ball he can only score 31 points.
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 1,779
- Likes
- 7,102
I’m not worried about Neser and Head looped on the bench, but Billings with his big breakeven could lose a stack of cash if he doesn’t get a decent bat tonight. Am I just being a panic merchant wanting to sideways trade to Wade? I feel like I’m a vacuum, Billings could go just as well but the breakeven and rain delays bother me
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 19,512
- Likes
- 82,852
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Just thought of this right now...
One of the changes I would like to see implemented, for the betterment of the game, is to extend the rolling lockout for delayed games due to weather...much like the one we're all waiting on for tonight. This will allow us to make last minute adjustments as the result of the toss is crucial in such a scenario.
One of the changes I would like to see implemented, for the betterment of the game, is to extend the rolling lockout for delayed games due to weather...much like the one we're all waiting on for tonight. This will allow us to make last minute adjustments as the result of the toss is crucial in such a scenario.