League Vote on 3038 Nonprofile Strengths (207 views)

[eric]

forms.gle/kqToGnFTpoeF1x6P8

This is the upcoming nonprofile draft players, each GM can vote on their strength. I didn't do the spelling/existence check yet so names are still subject to change.

This exercise is to determine if GMs in the league are interested in doing this and can do so in a balanced way, for example not just voting Inside Scoring for every player.

If the results are positive, they will be used in 3038 and I will look for ways to repeat this exercise going forward - Google Forms turned out to be kind of clunky to use so it may be something else but the same principles would apply.

[Eric’s usual bs]

as usual eric misrepresents someone’s idea and argues against that instead of the actual idea

[Herby New Year!]

Thanks. That was essentially exactly what I suggested.

A couple of improvements for the next test. A lot of players I hadn't heard of or didn't really remember. I started researching their stats, but that quickly became burdensome even on a holiday week.

Add some basic info (position at bare minimum, maybe height/weight/age).

DM could provide a top 4 strengths unique to that player (similar to how they are already providing a single strength) + three available to all prospects (potential/drive defense/oklahoma special). That way we cluster strengths that are somewhat in line with the player and we also have a way to "vote" for players we like/dislike. Maybe with an honor code that we do not vote more than 2 players as potential, drive defense, or oklahoma special per class.

[eric]

so i got two responses and a bunch of people who expressed in shout they weren't into this. i think it was fason yesterday who suggested a third class of player and i think that's the way to go for this, i'll set up a board poll for people to vote on which nonprofile players should get enhanced nonprofile builds and the top 5 will go into the experiment. 5 is just a guess, it might turn out this is feasible with 3 or 10, we'll see

i'm leery of putting more work on the DM to provide a strengths subset, i think the basic premise of a player can have any strength is workable with the smaller subset, but if we try it and it still isn't obviously we'll reconsider. i also think the smaller subset gives us a good opportunity to try the two strengths and a weakness routine

we're getting a little tight on when i start creating this class so i'm gonna put a pin in this for now

[TinyTimPig]

Nov 22, 2022 10:28:01 GMT -5 Herby New Year! said:

Thanks. That was essentially exactly what I suggested.

But BK said...

[TinyTimPig]

Nov 22, 2022 11:22:18 GMT -5 eric said:

i'm leery of putting more work on the DM to provide a strengths subset

I can't take on any more. I'm DM'ing (like banking) at this point because no one else wants to do it. If someone else wants to take over, feel free, but I'm not open to doing additional work as DM. As I've been paying half attention to this discussion in the background, my initial impression (hope) was that we'd be crowd-sourcing profile player strengths, which is very appealing to me.