4 ms·

You could create new categories of play with varying restrictions to make things fun again. I don't know about fantasy football, but in the video-game speed-ru

You could create new categories of play with varying restrictions to make things fun again. I don't know about fantasy football, but in the video-game speed-running community people often come up with new categories to maintain the fun. Sometimes a game can be broken to the point that it can be finished in mere minutes, but people still play the 100% category as well. How about restricting what kinds of data and models are allowed? Another option is to straight up ban the model team and force people to get creative. It sounds like you're basically already doing this, but maybe you should lobby your preferred platform to add explicit support for this kind of restricted play.

jerf 4y ago
"You could create new categories of play with varying restrictions to make things fun again." I think the obvious one (to me, anyhow) would work: Penalize a person relative to the number of people who take him. I'd have to sit down with some pencil & paper to work out the best way to do so, my gut says it'll be something a bit non-obvious to make the math work out the best (possibly involving something like the logarithm of the number of people who selected a given player), but off hand it's not immediately obvious to me what that is. (I suspect just dividing the value of a player by the number of people selecting them is a bit too direct and has some pathologies in it. It certainly does around low numbers of selections, e.g., if you selected a person first you take a heck of a hit when the second person selects them.) I'd motivate the change with a large player base by saying this is an attempt to simulate at a large scale the fact that in the real world, teams can't pick the same person more than once. Even if this didn't solve the problem, I am fairly certain it would destabilize the meta and at least turn it from something static to something dynamic, which is still an improvement over there being one single true solution.

jerf 4y ago

"You could create new categories of play with varying restrictions to make things fun again." I think the obvious one (to me, anyhow) would work: Penalize a person relative to the number of people who take him. I'd have to sit down with some pencil & paper to work out the best way to do so, my gut says it'll be something a bit non-obvious to make the math work out the best (possibly involving something like the logarithm of the number of people who selected a given player), but off hand it's not immediately obvious to me what that is. (I suspect just dividing the value of a player by the number of people selecting them is a bit too direct and has some pathologies in it. It certainly does around low numbers of selections, e.g., if you selected a person first you take a heck of a hit when the second person selects them.) I'd motivate the change with a large player base by saying this is an attempt to simulate at a large scale the fact that in the real world, teams can't pick the same person more than once. Even if this didn't solve the problem, I am fairly certain it would destabilize the meta and at least turn it from something static to something dynamic, which is still an improvement over there being one single true solution.