Should we allow stacked teams? | Voters

Should we allow stacked teams?

under review

Draftstars

i.e. change the max players limit from 1 team to more than 4

June 4, 2018

Lampy

Draftstars Are there going to be any stack limits in place for NBA? If it's something you guys haven't made a decision on yet, please let me know asap also.

Liam Owen

I'm enjoying the 4 player limit. I don't personally see a need for it to be changed.

Draftstars

marked this post as

under review

tryanhit

This has really been reduced too drastically, I feel its killing creativity and uniqueness in team building and strategy at 4max. I understand people want to see some diversity in a lineup rather than an allout 1 team stack but this has gone too far the other way. I think reducing to 6 would have been a more natural progression to start with, and then just watch how the game and strategies evolve.
What happens with 4max is itll force people to play more similar strategies because you’re killing off alot of its alternatives. I feel this will dull the games over time, especially as the skill gap closes naturally.
The best thing about afl are the options and approaches you can take to win, some weeks a regular wins going hard on their value plays, other times its a mild 4man stack that wins, sometimes an allout 8man, and sometimes a recreational player wins picking his favourite players. It wasn’t a full stack or nothing situation. Don't reduce team creation options too much, keep the diversity of strategies and complexity in the game, especially while afl dfs is in its real early stages and still evolving.
And to touch on the recreational players mentioned in a couple of comments. I think afl dfs is great for recreational players, they have flat payouts and most teams have some equity to win on a given day. A skill game with varied strategies where anyone can still win, we really have a great game. Unlike say a recreational playing nba who is just dead from the start. And as the afl dfs community grows and more information flows the recreational will grow as players too.

jayk123

tryanhit: yep, strong agree with all of this. as the game evolves strategically and people's ability to project player outcomes becomes increasingly accurate going forward, the more strategic approaches are viable in the game, the more fertile it will be. i can totally accept that it might be necessary to get rid of the more extreme stacks since a lot of people really hate them, but taking out the ability to stack at all in AFL DFS takes a lot of creativity and nuance out of the game.

i understand that right now people (most of whom haven't spent much time stacking themselves) think it's a dumber approach, but i don't know how to put it other than just to say that they're wrong. i spend far longer building my 100 teams if i'm building lots of stacks. i used to often spend 10-12 hours working on my teams by hand. if i'm unable to build stacks, it actually does get a lot closer to the type of thing people fear - it starts getting much closer to just loading projections, clicking a button and importing the teams. stacking is a craft, and a very enjoyable part of playing tourneys.

Brent_brent

4 is a stack. Find common ground at 5 if need be. The end

Hedge

jayk123: i have had two weeks now to play the new system and my thoughts on this have evolved, as im sure alot of peoples have.
personally i still dont mind the 4 limit, but there is a BUT.  
The issue with going more than 4 under the current system is if its 5 that means players can have a same-game stack of 5/4 and miss the rest of the games on a slate. this i dont like and i dont think anyone does?
what if there were a same-game rule that could be applied instead of the same-team? if so that could be set at 6 which would allow players to same-team stack 6, or go any same game combo to a max of 6 which means they then need to look elsewhere for the final three selections. 
i feel this would be a perfect compromise and would lead to better game play whilst curtailing the main gripe that smaller players have with stacking. 
really appreciate, and i think all here do, the attempt from DS to get this balance right.. 

jayk123

Brent_brent: I don't think 4 is a stack. How annoying was it on the weekend where most of the best PPD plays on Sat were from GWS, most of the best PPD plays on Sun were from Adel, and every bloody time you made a team you'd get the 4 max msg halfway through when you weren't even building a stack? Pretty annoying!

Lampy

jayk123: Agreed. The team building on both days annoyed me.

Another part that really grinds my gears, is that if the best ruck play of the day plays for that strong team, then you're having to pick just 3 players from that side or have to roll with a sub par ruck. So definitely increase to 5, and if there is strong opposition, then a compromise of excluding the ruck position from the stack would be better than the current cap of 4.

jayk123

Lampy: Yeah really good point about rucks. It's such a 1 on 1 position, so it's very annoying taking a ruck because he has a good individual matchup vs a shorter opponent and then only being able to take 3 guys from the rest of the team.

Draftstars

Hedge: 6 max from 1 game sounds like good middle ground.

Another alternative we considered was 5 max from 1 team + minimum of player selections across 3 teams. Removes the 5/4 split you identified.

Lampy

Draftstars: 5 max from 1 team + at least 1 player from another game would be fine and easy to explain too.

Chriseddy999

I think 4 is the best figure. Keep it. Increases skill cap by avoiding unskillful mashing in of stacks and also narrows the gap between recreational player (as they often can't afford to 'waste' teams on a stack) and regular player. Win/win imo.

Prefer 4 by some margin, but wouldn't be too against 5. Definitely no more than that for me

Hedge

Chriseddy999: 100% agree chris.

Broady4

4 is way too restrictive. For example with this upcoming sunday slate you are forced to pick players from at least 3/4 teams. Projecting which teams you expect to score well is an essential part of DFS. I understand the logic behind reducing stacking to 5/6.

Hedge

really enjoyed the 4 limit. allows a game stack (4 from each team if you think it will be high scoring game) but not a ridiculous full team stack. makes selection better on almost every front and doesn't eliminate the 'stack' it actually makes it more of a skill to get right which players combine well and to really nail how teams move the footy and which players will score well in dominant wins. proof was in the pudding over the weekend re the 4 limit. keep it as is and people will adapt, it makes selection much more fun and challenging for coaches and it also eliminates that mass feeling of 'drawing dead' when game 1 of a 6 game slate is a 120pt win to one team and the big players each have 4-5 stacked teams in and share 1st though 50th. at limit of 4 the 'stack' as a tactic is much more in play than ever before. positive on every front.

Dale Elmi

Don’t change it. Makes it that much more enjoyable and interesting.

Lampy

I think 5 is reasonable limit.

Knova

Tweak it based on slate size

Rhodie

Knova: fixed % of

→