Social Wrighty presents Forum Sheep game for 2024 - Contestants please check in now

[Wrighty]

Hi Team

Would I be able to get some feedback on the following question please

I was dreaming about this game last night and it ocurred to me that the squad of 25 is too big relative to picking a team of 17 for voting. You would have 17 in your line up and 8 spare players. Which is a bit excessive and could lead too many disingenuous/gamesmanship bids.

Thoughts on

a) Status Quo 24 rounds, 25 player squad - pick 17 for voting - Wrighty concerned about this one
b) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 23 player squad - pick 17 for voting.
c) 22 Rounds - drop both Wrighty Rounds, 22 player squad pick 17 for voting
d) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 22 players squad - pick 17 for voting
e) 24 Rounds - two Wrighty Rounds, 23 player squad - pick 17 for voting

I like either b or d? I will also ask chat GPT since it is an expert on this game now.

 

[Wrighty]

Chat GPTs thoughts

I see what you're saying. The 25-player squad does seem like a bit much when you're only selecting 17 for voting, which could indeed lead to strategies where players accumulate extra bodies for no good reason beyond disrupting others or game manipulation.

Let’s break down your options, and I’ll weigh in on each one:

---

a) Status Quo: 24 Rounds, 25 Player Squad – Pick 17 for Voting​

• Pros:
  • Keeping the rounds at 24 keeps the pacing long enough to allow for strategic depth and risk/reward decisions. The auction dynamics remain as intended.
  • Gives more flexibility for players to adjust their squads based on the unfolding auction.
• Cons:
  • Excessive players: With 25 players, you could easily end up with 8 surplus players that aren't even part of your core 17. This could lead to "gamesmanship", where people might just collect players they don’t need, intentionally bloating their roster to disrupt others or for the sake of power bids.
  • Voting Outcome: It might feel a bit unfair when 8 players aren’t even part of your top 17, so there’s a risk that voters may disregard the final team selection if they feel some picks were made purely for strategic maneuvering.

---

b) 23 Rounds – Only One Wrighty Round, 23 Player Squad – Pick 17 for Voting​

• Pros:
  • Slightly tighter roster: 23 players is a more manageable number, reducing the temptation to hoard unnecessary players.
  • One Wrighty Round: By cutting one of the Wrighty rounds, the game remains long enough to keep the strategy involved but tightens up the decision-making a bit.
• Cons:
  • Fewer rounds: 23 rounds means players have fewer chances to acquire their top picks, which could make it feel a bit rushed. However, this could actually be a benefit if it forces players to focus more on their picks rather than "gaming the system."
  • Slight reduction in strategic depth: With fewer rounds, some of the under-the-radar players may not come up enough, potentially disadvantaging players who rely on strategic picks.

---

c) 22 Rounds – Drop Both Wrighty Rounds, 22 Player Squad – Pick 17 for Voting​

• Pros:
  • Fewer rounds and fewer players make this a tighter game overall, preventing people from over-collecting and focusing more on building their core team.
  • Having 22 players means everyone will likely have a very lean, focused squad that’s more representative of their final 17.
  • Tighter strategy: Reduces the overall randomness and forces players to focus more on picking the right players rather than "stockpiling" depth.
• Cons:
  • Less room for error: With fewer rounds, there's less room for strategic blunders. Players would need to be more precise with every pick.
  • Missing Wrighty Rounds: Removing both of Wrighty’s rounds might feel like a missed opportunity for added unpredictability or for the round master’s bonus to shake things up.

---

d) 23 Rounds – One Wrighty Round, 22 Player Squad – Pick 17 for Voting​

• Pros:
  • 23 rounds strikes a good balance between keeping things interesting and not dragging too long.
  • Having just 22 players makes the final squad feel more meaningful, and players will likely make fewer excess bids.
  • The one Wrighty round still allows for some added surprise and intrigue without overcomplicating the structure.
• Cons:
  • As with Option b, reducing the number of rounds can make the game feel more intense but also more rushed. Some players may not have enough opportunities to strategically adjust their squads in later rounds.

---

e) 24 Rounds – Two Wrighty Rounds, 23 Player Squad – Pick 17 for Voting​

• Pros:
  • This keeps the game at 24 rounds, which gives a good amount of time to strategize and accumulate players.
  • Having two Wrighty rounds adds extra fun and challenge, allowing the round master to throw in some curveballs.
  • 23 players is a nice balance — not too many players, but still enough flexibility to pick a well-rounded squad.
• Cons:
  • One extra player in the squad compared to Option d could still lead to some players overstocking their roster. While it’s less extreme than 25, there’s still a chance of players picking surplus talent just to block others.
  • Having two Wrighty rounds means more disruption in the auction dynamics, which could add complexity but may also create more opportunities for misdirection or overthinking.

---

My Recommendation:​

If your concern is gameplay fairness and reducing gamesmanship, I would lean toward Option d) — 23 rounds, 22-player squad, and one Wrighty round. This strikes a balance between enough rounds for a strategic experience while avoiding an excessively bloated roster. The single Wrighty round can still offer surprises but limits the impact of extra rounds. Plus, with a 22-player squad, players are forced to be more thoughtful in how they use their budget and pick only the best players, which will make the final team selection feel more meaningful.

 

[Inruin]

I'm with sticking to 25 squad and a 17 roster. It gives you flexibility, room for strategy and gamesmanship, room to make an error in a round where you may end up with more players than you think due to your selections and bids, and you still have a salary cap to keep people in check so some may quickly find they run out of money

 

[Wrighty]

Defence what is your third opinion? I am worried that 25 allows too much gamesmanship. E.g. a contestant makes a run on all the hookers to spite the other teams and make their lives difficult.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Hi Team

Would I be able to get some feedback on the following question please

I was dreaming about this game last night and it ocurred to me that the squad of 25 is too big relative to picking a team of 17 for voting. You would have 17 in your line up and 8 spare players. Which is a bit excessive and could lead too many disingenuous/gamesmanship bids.

Thoughts on

a) Status Quo 24 rounds, 25 player squad - pick 17 for voting - Wrighty concerned about this one
b) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 23 player squad - pick 17 for voting.
c) 22 Rounds - drop both Wrighty Rounds, 22 player squad pick 17 for voting
d) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 22 players squad - pick 17 for voting
e) 24 Rounds - two Wrighty Rounds, 23 player squad - pick 17 for voting

I like either b or d? I will also ask chat GPT since it is an expert on this game now.

If we’re going with unlimited number of bids per round then I’m def in favour of 17 player squads - no room for error, pick a dud then tough luck.

 

[Wrighty]

If we’re going with unlimited number of bids per round then I’m def in favour of 17 player squads - no room for error, pick a dud then tough luck.

Ok thanks for that vote. Appreciate both your and Inruin's input. Will wait another hour to see if anyone else weighs in.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Ok thanks for that vote. Appreciate both your and Inruin's input. Will wait another hour to see if anyone else weighs in.

Inruin & I coming from completely opposite ends on this haha. I dunno, I just think it will be more fun by placing more value on each trade you make.

 

[Wrighty]

Inruin & I coming from completely opposite ends on this haha. I dunno, I just think it will be more fun by placing more value on each trade you make.

I am likely to cut a number between both of your perspectives as both your arguments are sound.
I just think 25 is too many for gamemanship and allows for some spam bidding. 17 might be a bit hard for people new to my games not to mention some of the qualifying questions may not give much scope for picking the player position you are looking for.

Unfortunately the Turkish hackers ruined the old site so I can't go back and see my rules from the old games as what we capped the squad at. I do have the general manager game rules but that was completely different.
I am going to land on picking a number from either 20, 21, 22 or 23

Will complete my mulling shortly but would welcome any other perspectives from other contestants

 

[Defence]

Defence what is your third opinion? I am worried that 25 allows too much gamesmanship. E.g. a contestant makes a run on all the hookers to spite the other teams and make their lives difficult.

Option D for me wrighty- as much as I am looking forward to your rounds- 25 players seems excessive to me.
I would’ve liked to see squads of 20 but that would cut the game too short.
22 seems a good compromise?

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

I am likely to cut a number between both of your perspectives as both your arguments are sound.
I just think 25 is too many for gamemanship and allows for some spam bidding. 17 might be a bit hard for people new to my games not to mention some of the qualifying questions may not give much scope for picking the player position you are looking for.

Unfortunately the Turkish hackers ruined the old site so I can't go back and see my rules from the old games as what we capped the squad at. I do have the general manager game rules but that was completely different.
I am going to land on picking a number from either 20, 21, 22 or 23

Will complete my mulling shortly but would welcome any other perspectives from other contestants

More the better for me… allows gamesmanship

 

[Wrighty]

Option D for me wrighty- as much as I am looking forward to your rounds- 25 players seems excessive to me.
I would’ve liked to see squads of 20 but that would cut the game too short.
22 seems a good compromise?

You vote for Option D

"d) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 22 players squad - pick 17 for voting"

That is what Chat GPT recommends as well for whatever AI thinks is worth. ChatGPT says

• Managing Complexity:
  • A 22-player squad keeps the game manageable in terms of roster management while preventing it from becoming too simple or too complex. Players will have to make meaningful decisions with every pick, and it adds intensity to the auctions.
• Strategic Depth:
  • The 23 rounds give players ample opportunity to strategize and adjust as the game unfolds, while still maintaining a sense of urgency. It gives enough rounds to see the game develop and allows players to adjust their strategies as they see how others are building their teams.

Let's go with the decision of Option D = 23 Rounds, One Wrighty Round, Squad Size 22, Pick 17 for voting.

wizard of Tauranga I have noted your vote "More the better for me… allows gamesmanship". Your squad can be up to 22. With 17 in your team for voting. To use a mathematics expression this gives you "5 degrees of freedom" or 5 additional squad members you can either use as a buffer for making a blunder with a pick. Or for gamesmanship.
The half way point between Mr Browstone's 17 and Inruins' 25 is actually 21 picks so 22 picks slightly err on the side of gamesmanship it is worth noting.

 

[Wrighty]

The Wrighty round will probably be a bit of a softball qualifying question. I am thinking of making it either the first round of the entire game so people can ease into the game. Or the last round of the game so people can round out their squads. Leaning towards first round of the game as a difficult first round qualifying question could throw people.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

You vote for Option D

"d) 23 Rounds - only have one Wrighty Round instead of two, 22 players squad - pick 17 for voting"

That is what Chat GPT recommends as well for whatever AI thinks is worth. ChatGPT says

• Managing Complexity:
  • A 22-player squad keeps the game manageable in terms of roster management while preventing it from becoming too simple or too complex. Players will have to make meaningful decisions with every pick, and it adds intensity to the auctions.
• Strategic Depth:
  • The 23 rounds give players ample opportunity to strategize and adjust as the game unfolds, while still maintaining a sense of urgency. It gives enough rounds to see the game develop and allows players to adjust their strategies as they see how others are building their teams.

Let's go with the decision of Option D = 23 Rounds, One Wrighty Round, Squad Size 22, Pick 17 for voting.

wizard of Tauranga I have noted your vote "More the better for me… allows gamesmanship". Your squad can be up to 22. With 17 in your team for voting. To use a mathematics expression this gives you "5 degrees of freedom" or 5 additional squad members you can either use as a buffer for making a blunder with a pick. Or for gamesmanship.
The half way point between Mr Browstone's 17 and Inruins' 25 is actually 21 picks so 22 picks slightly err on the side of gamesmanship it is worth noting.

To give context, in the last game the luck of the draw mean I was half way through the game with no halves.

I ended up snapping up an inferior one because he was available. Then a better on popped up. Then a better one!

If I waited any longer I could have had no halves the way the game was playing out. I had to take a terrible choice and sell them like they were the most under rated player to play the game!

Extra spaces allow upgrades and removes luck somewhat.

I think 22 is about right.

 

[Wrighty]

Great post Wizards

 

[Wrighty]

Hi I am introducing a new rule

I think this will get a nod from Mr B. It is based on the spirit that the black sheep rule is intended for good players only you bidded on.

The black sheep pick will cost you $0 but in order to qualify for the $400K refund you need to declare in the thread that you intend to play them in your voting 17. If things change later and you get a better player and you change your mind you need to forfeit your $400K refund AND pay a penalty of $100K.

Where I face an issue is towards the end of the game. So there will need to be a rule you can't replace that Black Sheep pick with one of your final pick(s). This means either a Round 22 or Round 23 pick or your 21st or 22nd player in your squad.

Thoughts or comments or will pass that rule.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

To give context, in the last game the luck of the draw mean I was half way through the game with no halves.

I ended up snapping up an inferior one because he was available. Then a better on popped up. Then a better one!

If I waited any longer I could have had no halves the way the game was playing out. I had to take a terrible choice and sell them like they were the most under rated player to play the game!

Extra spaces allow upgrades and removes luck somewhat.

I think 22 is about right.

What I like about this version is that as far as I can tell there’s no luck from happening to be at the right or wrong end of the snake draft for when the best options come along. Defence & I got smashed by that last game, & anyone in the middle was even worse off.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Hi I am introducing a new rule

I think this will get a nod from Mr B. It is based on the spirit that the black sheep rule is intended for good players only you bidded on.

The black sheep pick will cost you $0 but in order to qualify for the $400K refund you need to declare in the thread that you intend to play them in your voting 17. If things change later and you get a better player and you change your mind you need to forfeit your $400K refund AND pay a penalty of $100K.

Where I face an issue is towards the end of the game. So there will need to be a rule you can't replace that Black Sheep pick with one of your final pick(s). This means either a Round 22 or Round 23 pick or your 21st or 22nd player in your squad.

Thoughts or comments or will pass that rule.

Sounds sensible

 

[Wrighty]

Rule Clarification

Once you have spent your Warchest or have less than $100K (the minimum bid) you may not acquire any more players. IE you can't go black sheep hunting on the grounds they cost $0 if you land one (because you can't afford the $100K to make a bid)

 

[Wrighty]

Sounds sensible

Thanks - It is clunky to administrate though so if anyone has a better way of implementing it please let me know.

 

[Wrighty]

The Wrighty round will probably be a bit of a softball qualifying question. I am thinking of making it either the first round of the entire game so people can ease into the game. Or the last round of the game so people can round out their squads. Leaning towards first round of the game as a difficult first round qualifying question could throw people.

The Wrighty Round will have special rules.
It will be the last round of the Game. Only eligible those with money left and room in their 22.
Open Draft.
The Question will be pick any test player who is eligible not yet taken.
You may only bid on one player.
You must bid all that remains in your warchest.
If someone else outbids you then change your target player to someone else before the auction closes.

It is intended to be a friendly soft finish to the game to give you one last good player to fill a gap in your 17.