For some time now people have been concerned about the skills of rookies which are joining the Dev League and instantly becoming the top run scoreres, wicket takers or keepers in the matter of a mere seven or so games. Now, instead of just complaining, I figured we may as well come up with something better. I think what we need is a system that does the following...
1) Rewards players who have been around for a fair amount of time.
2) Limits the statistics that rookies can sign up to the Dev League for.
3) Still allows for rookies to have a decent chance of making a name for themselves.
The ideas I've come up with so far include the following:
1) Limitations - A system where you a rookie's stats are limited in a way that discourages players from going for stats that most all rounders in the world would struggle to achieve. I've already linked the captains to this image earlier - http://www.aiyon.com/keke/proposalforcwrookies.jpg (and yes, marc's already pointed out the error in that wicketkeepers also need to have a rating which is a multiple of 3, I'll fix that later). I personally think that a bowler should be able to sign up with a slightly lower average, but that's just my opinion.
2) Rewards - A system where "points" are given out at the end of each season depending on how many games you have played or how many days you were actively posting or just the mere fact that you've played for a season. A point could include taking your batting average or batting skill points up a notch, taking the bowling average / skill points down a notch or taking your fielding skill points up a notch. The problem would be finding a way that would make this worthwhile for older members, but at the same time still not making people like, for example, Cloete into batting Gods comparable to Bradman should he stay around for a few more seasons. We don't want to make people invincible, we just want to reward their efforts. Maybe we could make it so that the first season or two are worth so-many points and then after that the rewarded points slowly decrease by half each season? That sounds reasonable to me, and pretty logical too.
I signed up with a batting average of 38 and a bowling average of something like... 45? I think that's right. One other thing I think needs to be looked into is different averages for FC and OD. Averaging 40 in FC is, in my opinion, a possibility for a rookie. But shouldn't batting averages in OD be significantly less, in general? I think that might be a better solution for the limitations, now that I think about it... having a limit for FC of 40 (Bat) and 28 (Bowl) and then a seperate limit for OD, being something like say 36 (Bat) and 25 (Bowl), because in my opinion that's more realistic.
What do you think? Try to keep all thoughts on this unbias, though. We don't want a bunch of older people trying to be amazing or a bunch of younger people outshining the seasoned cricketers. What we need is to find a balance - because we all know that some cricketers can play years of cricket and never really get off their feet, some cricketers can be great from their first season and then go downhill, some can start off rotten and then meet their potential at a later date. In an ideal world, we could find the perfect solution somehow, but with the simming games we do have to accept that things will be a little unrealistic... just hopefully not too much. The question is, how do we find that balance we're looking for?