We changed that transfer in the last week as we also become well aware of that problem, so it is now 1 change ever 7 days - I e-mailed James all the text changes about 2 hours back - He now has about 7 e-mails of updates to do, so you should notice it as soon as James gets time to update it for me.James said:You can see the schedule of matches here - http://www.cricketweb.net/fantasycricket/matches.php
It's one change every 7 days. Where did you read 1 change every 14 days?
Certainly does
*hangs head in shame at realisation that he has picked a west indian, a pom and a bangladeshi.*Samuel_Vimes said:Well, I think it's good, but I have a slight suggestion for the points scoring system.
For example, during the next three months, the teams have the following number of matches:
Aus 13
NZ 12
SA 10
Ind 8
Zim 8
Pak 6
SL 5
WI 4
Eng 0
(Bangladesh and Kenya discounted because nobody would pick their players anyway)
Therefore, it would be idiotic to pick English, West Indian and Sri Lankan players, because they won't have the same chance to score points as all others as they will play fewer games (case in point, me, who have 2 English players and 2 Lankan players).
Either increase the value of players who are likely to play a lot of games, or average the points scored over each game played, or have longer seasons.
Lenght first... I was with you on this one, I had the comp set to a year with whoever was top etc after each month being declared manager of the month type of thing... but in the end it was just going to be pointless for new people to join.Samuel_Vimes said:Well, I think it's good, but I have a slight suggestion for the points scoring system.
For example, during the next three months, the teams have the following number of matches:
Aus 13
NZ 12
SA 10
Ind 8
Zim 8
Pak 6
SL 5
WI 4
Eng 0
(Bangladesh and Kenya discounted because nobody would pick their players anyway)
Therefore, it would be idiotic to pick English, West Indian and Sri Lankan players, because they won't have the same chance to score points as all others as they will play fewer games (case in point, me, who have 2 English players and 2 Lankan players).
Either increase the value of players who are likely to play a lot of games, or average the points scored over each game played, or have longer seasons.
How about the average idea? That way, players who play only 4 games count as much as those who play 13, and managers. Of course, players who do really well in one game then get dropped will score a lot of points, but realistically, who's gonna do that?Rich2001 said:Lenght first... I was with you on this one, I had the comp set to a year with whoever was top etc after each month being declared manager of the month type of thing... but in the end it was just going to be pointless for new people to join.
If say on the 21st Aug 2004 you stumbled across Cricket Web and thought oh that Fantasy Cricket looks like fun i'll join that... only to see the top 10 players have 25,000 points and the closest to 0 is already on about 350. What do you have to gain? you wouldn't climb many places and all you would be doing is battling yourself and if you did join how long would you hang around or spending time sorting your team transfers out etc.
With 3 months stints your always going to be in the game so to speak and even if you join up after 2 months you know the points will be reset and can mount a challange next month.
****************************************************
As for matches that a team plays what we can do is at the end of the 3 months stint you could add a new team for the next 3 months - Therefore always being able to pick players that might be playing, or we could just clear the points out and let you carry that team on, remember transfers are one a week, so in 3 months you could change about 10-12 players, techincally you could re-build your whole side in that time ready for the next period of play. And as players finish a series ie NZ v PAk will be over first you can start replacing those player.
Either way it wouldn't be a problem to implement either so if you all shout now for what you perfer.
It's not a bad idea but one of our aims was to make the game quite basic and stright forward so that anyone could play... averaging would get confusing as to who was a good pick and who wasn't etc, and also it would require a fair bit of re-coding to the database... And then there's the problem of the 25 odd managers who have already signed up at a disadvantage because of the rules change.Samuel_Vimes said:How about the average idea? That way, players who play only 4 games count as much as those who play 13, and managers. Of course, players who do really well in one game then get dropped will score a lot of points, but realistically, who's gonna do that?
Ah ok then.Rich2001 said:It's not a bad idea but one of our aims was to make the game quite basic and stright forward so that anyone could play... averaging would get confusing as to who was a good pick and who wasn't etc, and also it would require a fair bit of re-coding to the database... And then there's the problem of the 25 odd managers who have already signed up at a disadvantage because of the rules change.
With either of the ideas I suggested you could just select players that are likly to play or, you will have plenty of oppotunity to make transfers to get those that will play into your set up.
Hehe, one advantage of opening this to the public early is we have time to make 1 change before the game even starts and one on the day of the first match if your quickSamuel_Vimes said:Ah ok then.
*makes note of throwing English players out for NZ ones at first juncture*
Picking a Bangladeshi is sill anyway!Mr. Ponting said:*hangs head in shame at realisation that he has picked a west indian, a pom and a bangladeshi.*
Im sure Bashar would have served me well!marc71178 said:Picking a Bangladeshi is sill anyway!
Don't worry you aren't the first and def wont be the last to make a doggy decision, Iam aware of a few people who have picked Harby Singh after being ruled out for 5 months a few days back.Mr. Ponting said:Im sure Bashar would have served me well!
And South Africa v West Indies by the looks of things - Lets not even mention NZ vs SA or Aus v SL then :saint:James said:Forgot about the VB series
Cheers mate. I can always count on you for support :rolleyes:Rich2001 said:And South Africa v West Indies by the looks of things - Lets not even mention NZ vs SA or Aus v SL then :saint:
Haha pass the buck!James said:Cheers mate. I can always count on you for support :rolleyes:
I'll blame it on you though Rich for always sending me too many emails and making me do 10 things at once
After all the work you've done how could I not. Damn - I can't hide the truthRich2001 said:Haha pass the buck!
You know deep down you like me really :P - NZ actually have about 10 ODI's so you wont do to badly