FOF House Rules Idea - "Action Points"
 

Well, along with many of you, I am still intrigued by the long-term struggle to find a set of "house rules" by which to play solo FOF and maintain a long term career that is:

challenging - I want to face true adversity and difficult decisions
interesting - I want to avoid complete tedium, and enjoy playing
rewarding - I want to feel like my decisions matter to the team's success

We have had a series of conversations, probably some associated with every version of this game, about how to accomplish these varied goals. I suspect a forum search on the word "grail" will pop up at least one such thread.


Anyway - I had an idea recently. I am an occasional board gamer, and I own (and sometimes play) some of the newer-breed board games coming primarily out of Germany. If your board gaming is limited to Monopoly or Scrabble or other old favorites, then you have missed out on a real renaissance in the field. Anyway, specifics aside, I have an idea that might be effectively poached from many of these new board games and dropped into the solo FOF milieu.

The concept is that of "action points" (or something similar) that is drawn from a number of different recent board games - I'm sure it originated somewhere, but I don't know who got the ball rolling. In any event -- in a board game context, the idea is basically than on any turn, you have a budget of points to use to do various thing... depending on the game, you can use your points to do things like draw a card, move a token, play a card, or whatever else is in the game, The various actions each have an assigned cost, and basically it's up to you to decide how to spend you allocated budget most effectively.

Anyway... I think this concept might be useful in the FOF context, though I haven't though it through a ton yet. But the concept would be that you have, for an entire season, a finite number of "action points" (or whatever, maybe there's a more football-y sounding word to use here) to spend on doing the various things that you would do to help your team. Then there are costs associated with the things that you would do... so, to put in an offer for a free agent player might cost you 2 points, and to put in an extension to one of your own players costs you 1 point, and to make a trade within the current year's draft costs you 2 points... and so on and so forth.

I see two possible advantages of this approach:

#1 - one of the things I hate about super-tight house rules is that I tend to lose "control" of the decision-making... but here, I'd be the one deciding exactly what my team ought to be doing, so I think that would help me feel like it was my decisions making the difference

#2 - this could become very flexible based on skill level - if the framework were set up properly, you could just ratchet the annual budget of action points up or down to fit your needs. Maybe one player would get a long term challenge out of playing with an annual budget of 30 points, another might drop that to 20 and then become sufficiently challenged.


Open to thoughts...

My first thought here is actually a potential sticking point.

My main quandary in playing FOF solo right now is that I *enjoy* drafting, and I'd really prefer to be able to run my own draft every year. However, if I am allowed to draft 7 players every season and keep them, I know that I'm going to be able to do a better job than the AI teams overall, and just from that base of players I'm going to have one of the better teams right away, regardless of doing anything with free agents and so forth. That's tough... I don't know how you get around that problem, but maybe it's possible to do so by applying the points system here.

Some random thoughts...

I think it's likely best to keep the "budget" of points and increments pretty manageable... line maybe 20 per season, If the number if big like 100, and there are tons of things that count as 1 or 2 points toward the 100, I would fear the amount of tedium that would ensue.

I also imagine that some long-term decisions might factor into the budget as well... things like "wide open hiring of a staffer = 2 points" versus "offering staffer his requested contract in week one = 1 point" versus "offering staffer his requested contract in week three = 0 points." Once you have hired that guy with a wide open contract, the 2 points would count against you for the duration of that contract, thereby affecting multiple years' budgets.

I also think that "use of the full salary cap" might be something that could count against your annual budget... so maybe you could get bonus budget space for staying below the cap... maybe an extra point for every 5% or 10% below the cap you are able to remain at certain points of the season.

Some one has been playing some Torres, Tikal, or Java methinks...

I think you answer your own question to a certain extent regarding the draft. My belief on the draft is that the most advantage is not gained through the first round of the draft, but is gained primarily in the 3rd to 7th rounds (The human knows how to look for gems, whereas the AI picks some shlub.). So, you can assign action points to each round of the draft. You could also assign points to a "Free Draft" (being free to pick whoever you want) or picking with limits (you get to pick the highest rated player at any one position).

I like the idea, it is flexible, you get to pick your spots, but it would be a pain in the neck to setup.

Hmmm...

Could you use the point system to make a mini-game within the draft? Have X points for all non-draft things. And Y points just for the draft.

And then make the draft mini-game based on it taking more points to draft guys with things likely to make them creep up. If done well, you might have to choose between doing all your interviews, drafting the best guys in the first rounds, and drafting the best guys in the later rounds.

Well the idea here would be to some up with some general weights/prices for the various things, develop that "menu" as a standard thing to do, and then have that become a sort of template for people who are looking for a challenge. Use the standard "action points" menu of things to do, and limit yourself to 40 total point, or 30, or 20, or whatever for your own level of challenge.

You explained that MUCH better than I did.

Interesting. Not sure how I fell about it personally, but it's surely consistent with the general idea.

I'm beginning to think you get more fun out of this than the actual game.

Possibly true.

I like this idea, QS.

For the draft, the cost of action points could be based on how many slots you drop down to snag a gem. In other words, taking one of the top ten names remaining on the overall draft board costs 1 point. dropping down eleven to 20 spots costs 2 APs and so forth. Getting the AP allocation 'right' would force some hard choices while allowing for the needed enjoyment of snagging a late round gem.

Charging APs to use your interviews would be good, too. 1 AP per dozen interviews would cost 5 APs if you used all your 60 interviews.

APs could be position specific too. Grabbing a Center late could/should cost fewer APs, IMO, than anaother spot. This does vary by draft, so it might not work.

I would leave the AP pool for everything. That way you would be forced to decide between focusing on the FA pool to sign/resign or foregoing that to have a nice draft.

A list of high AP worthy items would include:

Signing a Mentor;
Signing a gunner/kick holder/long snapper;
cutting a 'bust' before his contract runs out.

I'm sure there are others.

QS, I read along with your highlander dynasty, and since you claim to prefer building to maintaining, what about setting it up so its variable based on your wins? For example, if your team goes 12-4, you only get to do ____. But if your team goes 8-8, you can do an additional _____, and if your team goes 4-12, you can also do ____.

st c- my real goal here would be to come up with a rule that makes the maintaining itself interesting to me. Not sure about how I feel about tightening or loosening the belt based on success.

Okay, I'm trying to get my head around the idea of extra points being spent within the draft. Regardless of whether the points are from the same pool used for the rest of the season, the same concept still applies, I guess -- you want there to be a "cost" associated with doing the various things that we do to get an edge on the computer teams from within the draft.

I'm not sure how to pinpoint that. Maybe something that just ties to the number of red combine ratings or some other proxy of what we mean by a "sleeper" in the draft?

interesting /= challenging

So what you're looking to do is map another game (using aps or something) onto the game of "maintaining" that makes the chore of maintaining interesting.

Is this correct?

This is another way to go... I guess in theory, when you are going after some sleeper rookie, you are usually *not* going after a guy who is at or near the top of the overall draft board. Need to think about that - whether it creates some kind of "back door" where you'd still get the sleepers you want, but you'd be trading down just to get them higher on the board when you select them.

Worried about both tedium and workarounds here.

Yeah, sort of. I'm sick of seeing my team have a completely full and dominant roster every year, once I get through some initial building phase. Even in my highlander career (where I think my rules are fairly tough) I have one of the top 2-3 roster ratings every single season, even after losing some quality veterans. it's just not fun for me to have that happen - I want to *suffer* if I boot an important draft pick, or if I screw up and let a key FA walk, or the like.

I guess I would tweak that phrase a bit. It's not that I find maintaining a team to be a chore... it's more that I don't find it very challenging to do. Once I have a team full of my own draft picks, I tend to have pretty high quality players at every position, pretty good depth, and lots of creepers. When that's the case, I don't find any of my major decisions to be all that major -- if I blow a top pick, or lose a quality player, or have a big holdout, or a big injury -- my team survives just fine, since I am so much better and deeper than my opponents. Not that my team is a 16-0 powerhouse every year, but I very rarely have the situation where I actually have to do things like alter my gameplan around deficiencies on my team's roster -- it just doesn't happen.

What I *want* is to feel like my team has an ebb and flow. That maybe things come together for a while, and I'm making "go for it" moves to try to win it all for a certain window of time, and then I suffer through a down period after come contracts come back to bite me in the ass, or certain players leave one way or another.

Playing single player, as it is now, I *never* am in a down period. I have some teams that do better than others, but I am absolutely *never* in a rebuild mode and feeling like I can't even compete for the playoffs. That sucks. I want it to be a real challenge to compete, and that's what I think would make the "maintaining" stage more interesting and rewarding.

Part of me thinks you're hosed, unless you can find somebody like your daughter to take over roster management and contract negotiation. Part of me was intrigued by the highlander concept, and thinks if it were tweaked to give you more flexibility in lean years, that that might work for you.

That's all i've got.

Me too, mostly.

Here's a first cut of point costs for draft pick usage... not sure if I like it, but I'm trying to keep things simple:

2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
2 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board

I wonder if the game would be any more challenging if you tried to hide bars. Edit the "165" bitmap so the red, green, blue, and peach bars are all gray. You'd still get overall player ratings, but you wouldn't know where a player's strengths were or where masks might be. Not sure there would be a particular joy in doing it that way, but it might make it more challenging.

hmm, that's a really interesting idea Cuervo.

That is interesting.

It seems like what you're looking for, QS, is a rule set that forces you to occasionally have to go Atlanta Falcons and start over. I'm not sure that's possible without something really artificial, or without some financial options that I don't think exist in this game.

Well, you're basically right. To totally rebuild is likely not very realistic, and really is more than I even am looking for.

I just want to *sometimes* feel that despite my best efforts, my team just isn't all that good, and that I really need to attend to X, Y, and Z to get things back to respectability. And I'd like to feel that my good decision-making is central to getting out of that sort of a mess.

Moved per request of thread starter.

Good concept in general. I'll have to chew on the specifics. But one thing sticks out more than anything:


I'm right there with Quik on this.

Here's my current draft of a cost menu for pretty much everything under the rookie draft:

Rookie Draft
2 – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
1 – Any other trade within current draft
3 – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
2 – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years
3 – Use all 60 rookie interviews
2 – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
1 – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
2 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board


I don't really like the "top page" stuff at all... but I do think there should be some sort of "cost" involved with making a too-clever pick.

This is an illustration of my current thinking with all this, I'll elaborate.

I think it's far too easy to hoodwink an AI team into sending you their future 1st rounder in this game, and when I play I generally rule out such a trade with a rule that simply forbids it. Conceptually, I'd like to be able to make such a trade... but I'd want it to come at a considerable costs to whatever other things I might want to do with my team -- thus the fairly high cost. Maybe 3 isn't high enough, maybe it needs to be 5 or 8 or something - but conceptually, I'd like to have pretty much *anything* on the table, just at a cost that makes things a real trade-off.

Funny, that was the very first one that came to mind when I saw it where I thought 'that cost is way too low'.

Okay... I'm still fiddling around with this, but here is my working draft of a full menu. I'm very interested in comments.

- - - - -

Point Values for FOF Actions

I am building this around my starting presumption that an annual budget of 40 points should prove to be pretty challenging.

[u]Staff Hiring[u]
3 – Hiring scout or head coach with no contract restrictions
2 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract in stage 3
1 – Replacing scout or head coach currently under contract
2 – Hiring coordinator with no contract restrictions
1 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract in stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator at half of HC request in stage 3
1 – Replacing coordinator currently under contract
(costs are cumulative, and in effect for duration of contract)

Internal Contract Moves
3 – Use franchise tag on player unwilling to sign otherwise
2 – Use franchise tag on any other player
3 – Offer unrestricted renegotiation to current player
1 – Offer current player full or partial capout
1 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
2 – Offer RFA player an unrestricted renegotiation
1 – Offer RFA player his requested renegotiation
(costs apply when offer is accepted by player, not for failed attempts)

Early Free Agency
4 – Offer wide-open contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
(Submitting an altered contract to a player already on offer list re-incurs same cost as original offer would have above)

Trading
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for player from another team
4 – Initiating trade of player(s) for a 1st round pick or more
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
1 – Initiating trade of player(s) for less than 2nd round pick
2 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that fails “fairness test”
1 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that passes “fairness test”
2 – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
1 – Any other trade within current draft
5 – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
2 – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years

Rookie Draft
3 – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
2 – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
1 – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board
(Costs are cumulative above, so a two-red player off the top page of the big board would cost a total of 2 points)

Late Free Agency

5 – Sign a FA player released during late free agency
3 – Sign a FA player in 2nd through 4th year in league
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
1 – Offer any other FA player his requested contract
1 – Sign any other FA player to a one year contract

Training Camp

1 – Use custom training camp settings
0 – Use default training camp settings
4 – Carry up to 70 player into training camp
2 – Carry up to 60 players into training camp
1 – Carry up to 56 players into training camp

In-Season

10 – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
2 – Allow changes to offensive gameplan during season
2 – Allow changes to defensive gameplan during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled gameplans for season
3 – Sign veteran free agent to replace player placed onto IR
1 – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
0 – Sign lowest-rated rookie free agent to maintain legal roster

Salary Cap
10 – Use entire salary cap
8 – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
6 – Leave 10% of cap unused as of start of season
4 – Leave 15% of cap unused as of start of season
2 – Leave 20% of cap unused as of start of season
0 – Leave 25% of cap unused as of start of season

So, trying to think through a fairly typical season… here’s how I’m thinking a season might look for a team that is basically making a fairly standard number of moves during an offseason. Nothing perfect about these numbers by any stretch – but just as an example:

3 – Hiring scout or head coach with no contract restrictions
2 – Use franchise tag on any other player
3 – Offer unrestricted renegotiation to current player
1 – Offer current player full or partial capout
1 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
1 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
1 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
2 – Offer RFA player an unrestricted renegotiation
2 – Offer RFA player an unrestricted renegotiation
1 – Offer RFA player his requested renegotiation
1 – Offer RFA player his requested renegotiation
4 – Offer wide-open contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
1 – Any other trade within current draft
3 – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board
3 – Sign a FA player in 2nd through 4th year in league
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
1 – Use custom training camp settings
2 – Carry up to 60 players into training camp
10 – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
1 – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
8 – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
--
81 action points

As I look at that list, I'm inclined to think that 50 may be a realistic number of "action points" to use for a full season under this menu. That list above, totaling 81 points, probably has a handful of things that could go (more FA signings than are really necessary, etc) but if I'm going to use a custom gameplan, that knocks the total of 50 down to 40 right away, and from there I don't see a whole lot of places that offer a ton of give. Cutting from ~80 to ~50 looks like it would be really tough, which is what I'm after.

QS, your idea is close to a Fantasy football league I played in where you were assigned around $200 or 200 points and you had to fill out your roster with the assigned money or points.

ex: P. Manning was worth $80
L.T. was also worth $80

It was so hard to make a quality team because of the little money or points you had. This is just like your idea. Can you use your idea to only be used on FA and Rookie draft.

ex: Assign the 1st top 10 rookies (X), then assign the next 10 (X), and so on and so forth. Allowing people to have a budget to get really 1 real good quality player out of the 7 draft picks. Maybe enough to add a FA.

Just my 2 cents. This worked well in Fantasy Football.

A way to add APs would be to accept trade offers that we all ignore. If they offer you a first rounder, you get 1 point. A seventh rounder, you get 7 APs. Basically you are giving away a starter at a bargain price, so you can do something else you'd like to.

A possibility here is to hide the green ratings. You see current, and you see overall ratings, but don't have any ability to see where the potential is.

What about only being able to use first rounders, without the other draft restrictions?

Not quite sure what you're asking here, but my goal with this pricing scheme:


...was essentially to make trading for a future 1st round pick fairly prohibitive (maybe not enough, actually) but dealing for later picks in a future years more reasonable.

perhaps purchasing draft points with your AP would be an effective way to make drafting more challenging? use the overall ratings the AI gives the player, so a player with an adjusted rating of 6.0 would cost 6 points, this would make trading down for more picks more difficult. to add to that, if you trade a pick, penalize the number of points for the average player at that position (ie trade a 5th round pick for a player during the season, take 4.5 points off what you are able to purchase because the ~140th player in the draft is rated 4.5). perhaps the scale is exponential, so the higher up the draft board the more expensive the player gets in your draft points. i would have to look at a few drafts to work out the details...

It may be moving away from the thrust of the action points concept a bit, but what about a penalty for drafting players below a certain level of potential? I'll throw 50 out as a number that might be effective. For each draftee that hits your roster with a future potential below 50, you face a 2 point reduction in the following season's budget. (Maybe limit it to the first four rounds.) I feel like the 'too clever' picks are often guys who hit your roster with a potential in the 40s and then creep into being very good starters.

I like this because there's some uncertainty to it (you have to really look at guys and make that judgment about which side of the line they'll come down on), and I think it will hamper your ability to target the kinds of players that make it so easy for you to continuously reload. Thoughts?

I think we are in pretty different places on how to deal with draft picks. What I'm worried about being "too easy" is not the ability to get a highly-rated player, but rather one who is *going to turn out* very good. That's why I have, for the moment, some extra costs involved with picking guys who are not toward the top of the overall lists. Adding costs for guys based on how highly rated they are would just send me/us more and more toward the lower-rated guys where I think more of the draft day steals are to be found.

I guess I see the value in something like this, but I'm not sure I like any of the potential implementations - including what I am using in my draft above. Right now, I tend to *know* when I'm getting away with something in the middle to late parts of the draft, but that feeling is not necessarily connected to any one factor that I can pinpoint for a simple menu like I'm trying to do here. Yes -- sometimes it's taking that WR who is only rated 28/38 but whose combines tell me he's going to be special. But a future rating below 50 doesn't necessarily mean you've got a super creeper on your hands, either.

At the moment, I'm at a partial loss on how to best do this. Above, I'm trying to make it more costly to grab combine standouts, and to reach for players who aren't near the top of the game-generated listings, as those are both (in my view) pretty good tipoffs that I'm making a wiseguy pick. But I am not at all settled that this is the ideal way to place those costs into a more balanced system of cost offsets.

One more personal thought -- I think there's an inherent bent toward too much complexity with a system like this anyway. Anything that requires note-keeping for future years seems to add another layer to that, which I'd prefer to avoid if possible. I see the point (you don't see the player's ratings until you select him) but if it's possible, I'd like to leave this as something that one could just cut-and-paste in one location and keep track of fairly easily.

Minor tweak needed above... hiring a coordinator at his asking price isn't usually feasible for the many unemployed staffers (who are all seeking a HC position and price themselves accordingly). I'm inserting a 'free" option to hire a coordinator, in stage 3, at half his asking price as a HC, which seems to work okay.

10:08:32 am [QuikSand]: i am fiddling with an empty cupboard team - clearly an anomaly, I understand - but I think my rules need something
10:08:49 am [QuikSand]: I think there needs to be a "free" way to add a player, without using any of your "action points"
10:08:56 am [QuikSand]: just to be able to get one more guy onto the roster
10:09:15 am [QuikSand]: i dont want it to be free to add an undrafted rookie -- too much room for abuse there
10:09:57 am [QuikSand]: so i'm thinking maybe it ought to be "offer a veteran player (5+) his requested one year, bonus free contract" -- and that would cost you zero points
10:10:25 am [QuikSand]: by limiting it to older guys who arent even asking for a penny in bonus, i think that would wipe out much of any ability to really get a player who's worth a damn... seem reasonable?

i dont know how many guys listen to sports radio out there, but this morning on ESPN radio Colin Cowherd was going on about how men like to build and hate to maintain in life... (basically drafting for fantasy football/baseball is the best part of the season)

probably why we all are looking for the right set of rules to follow to keep the building process going.

wonder if he reads this board?

Fine with me... as long as I don't have to return the favor.

lol, not a cowherd fan i guess.

had an idea, not sure if it is up your alley, but how about a Big Tuna Dynasty, start with a down team, give your self 3 to 5 year deal, see how well you can build them up, then leave for a different team at the end of your term, watch them over the next 2-3 seasons. you would then constantly be in the building mode, maybe 1 or 2 seasons of maintaining/bolstering up.

You can then change the AP's as you go from team to team in order to change how easy/hard the process is. maybe the number of AP is based on the team location, how nice the stadium is, fan support and such?

i dont know how many people would like this, some cant bear to run any team but their favorite.

An idea I have thought about, while not in the same vein as AP's, is if the CPU could just be blessed with fortune telling abilities. If you could make draft and player evaluation perfect for the cpu, it would force us to be perfect to keep up.

Couldn't there be an option for "Nostradamus CPU" or something like that?

Another idea is maybe setting an automatic 25-50% salary expectation boost for players signed by a human or simply cut the human salary cap by 25-50%. That would make it much harder to keep a team together and could be weighted based on player rating, etc. Maybe limit human contracts other than rookie contracts to 4 years maximum.. this way you would still be able to enjoy the draft, and chances are, you would need to draft well every year to try and keep the team competitive and under the cap.

Just some random thoughts that might be easier to implement successfully than AP.

If you mean that the developer could include a higher skill level -- sure, I'm all for it. I think I once suggested (consistent with the current skill level theme, in FOF) "Nightmare on Elm Street" level.


I have played careers (thought not lately) requiring my team to stay 25% and 50% under the salary cap, and have been bored to tears doing so. For me, at least,m it ends up becoming a massive push to exploit all the "cheap players" angles in the game (of which there are too many) and it never hit the mark for me. But I certainly agree it's easier to implement than anything as complicated as what I'm discussing in this thread.

Okay, for page-break ease, and to refresh for anyone who remains interested in this concept... I have tweaked my action points menu a bit, specifically to include a way for a team to make a "free" transaction in early free agency -- just to make sure there's no reason for any team to ever be stuck with too few players. I limit it to players 5th year or older, who are asking for zero bonus -- so far, I am finding that this pretty much wipes out any degree of meaningful talent (most guys with decent skills are looking for at least a modest bonus).

Anyway - here's the revised list:

- - - - -

Point Values for FOF Actions

I am building this around my starting presumption that an annual budget of 40 points should prove to be pretty challenging.

[u]Staff Hiring[u]
3 – Hiring scout or head coach with no contract restrictions
2 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract in stage 3
1 – Replacing scout or head coach currently under contract
2 – Hiring coordinator with no contract restrictions
1 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract in stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator at half of HC request in stage 3
1 – Replacing coordinator currently under contract
(costs are cumulative, and in effect for duration of contract)

Internal Contract Moves
3 – Use franchise tag on player unwilling to sign otherwise
2 – Use franchise tag on any other player
3 – Offer unrestricted renegotiation to current player
1 – Offer current player full or partial capout
1 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
2 – Offer RFA player an unrestricted renegotiation
1 – Offer RFA player his requested renegotiation
(costs apply when offer is accepted by player, not for failed attempts)

Early Free Agency
4 – Offer wide-open contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
(Submitting an altered contract to a player already on offer list re-incurs same cost as original offer would have above)

Trading
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for player from another team
4 – Initiating trade of player(s) for a 1st round pick or more
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
1 – Initiating trade of player(s) for less than 2nd round pick
2 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that fails “fairness test”
1 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that passes “fairness test”
2 – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
1 – Any other trade within current draft
5 – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
2 – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years

Rookie Draft
3 – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
2 – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
1 – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board
(Costs are cumulative above, so a two-red player off the top page of the big board would cost a total of 2 points)

Late Free Agency

5 – Sign a FA player released during late free agency
3 – Sign a FA player in 2nd through 4th year in league
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
1 – Offer any other FA player his requested contract
1 – Sign any other FA player to a one year contract

Training Camp

1 – Use custom training camp settings
0 – Use default training camp settings
4 – Carry up to 70 player into training camp
2 – Carry up to 60 players into training camp
1 – Carry up to 56 players into training camp

In-Season

10 – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
2 – Allow changes to offensive gameplan during season
2 – Allow changes to defensive gameplan during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled gameplans for season
3 – Sign veteran free agent to replace player placed onto IR
1 – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
0 – Sign lowest-rated rookie free agent to maintain legal roster

Salary Cap
10 – Use entire salary cap
8 – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
6 – Leave 10% of cap unused as of start of season
4 – Leave 15% of cap unused as of start of season
2 – Leave 20% of cap unused as of start of season
0 – Leave 25% of cap unused as of start of season

I'm fiddling with an empty cupboard season right now, just to see how well this works... through early free agency I have a pretty weak team with only two or three high quality starters signed, and I have used 31 action points according to this menu. (Actually, I used all 31 points to sign 17 players... then realized that there probably needs to be a "free" way to add roster filler, and I added 14 more low-skill guys through the 0-point method of one year contracts)

I suspect that, playing wide-open with an established team, it would be tempting to use a lot of the "flat contracts" for 2AP with free agents, rather than just offering what they request. I think I made the point costs for a "wide open" contract too heavy, though -- I'm not sure I would ever find myself doing that (I guess with a team making a big go-for-it push, you might sign a stud to a contract only affordable for a year or two, just to bring him aboard under limited cap space... but that seems rare to me).

I think the key here is anything that would most likely benefit the team greatly should be hugely expensive. Something that would constrict, but not hinder creativity..

So I think maybe if you were given 100% per "category" on your menu up there, maybe it looks like this:

Starting with 100 percentage points to use per each of the first 8 phases, plus an initial bonus reservoir of 100% (which can be used if you go over your allotted points in any particular stage.) unused points do not carry over to the following season. starting at the beginning of the initial season, the percentage of the cap you use for the team determines the amount of bonus reservoir points for the next season as illustrated below.

[u]Staff Hiring[u]
50% – Hiring scout or head coach with no contract restrictions
40% – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract before stage 3
20% – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract in stage 3
30% – Replacing scout or head coach currently under contract
50% – Hiring coordinator with no contract restrictions
40% – Hiring coordinator on requested contract before stage 3
20% – Hiring coordinator on requested contract in stage 3
10% – Hiring coordinator at half of HC request in stage 3
30% – Replacing coordinator currently under contract
FREE - Having scout, coach, or coordinator hired for you
(costs are cumulative, and in effect for duration of contract)

Internal Contract Moves
80% – Use franchise tag on player unwilling to sign otherwise
50% – Use franchise tag on any other player
50% – Offer unrestricted renegotiation to current player
5% – Offer current player full or partial capout
30% – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
15% – Offer RFA player an unrestricted renegotiation
5% – Offer RFA player his requested renegotiation

(costs apply when offer is accepted by player, not for failed attempts)

Early Free Agency
100% – Offer wide-open contract to FA player
50% – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
25% – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
50% – Offer the requested contract to FA player
FREE - Offer any type of contract to player with future potential of 30 or less.
(Submitting an altered contract to a player already on offer list re-incurs same cost as original offer would have above)

Trading
50% – Initiating trade of player(s) for player from another team
100% – Initiating trade of player(s) for a 1st round pick or more
50% – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
25% – Initiating trade of player(s) for less than 2nd round pick
75% – Accepting AI-initiated trade that fails “fairness test”
25% – Accepting AI-initiated trade that passes “fairness test”
50% – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
25% – Any other trade within current draft
100% – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
25% – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years

Rookie Draft
50% – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
30% – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
10% – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
30% – Select any rookie player with more than one red combine
50% – Select any rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
20% - Select any rookie player with one red combine
20% – Select a scouted* rookie player who skipped the combine
5% – Select a scouted* rookie player not on the top page of position board
10% – Select a scouted* rookie player not on the top page of overall board
20% - Select a scouted* rookie player on the top page of the overall board.

* - For unscouted players, subtract 5% off of cost. (5% => 0%)

(Costs are cumulative above, so a two-red player off the top page of the big board would cost a total of 50 points)

Late Free Agency

100% – Sign a FA player released during late free agency
50% – Sign a FA player in 2nd through 4th year in league
10% – Sign a FA rookie player
20% – Offer any other FA player his requested contract
25% – Sign any other FA player to a one year contract
FREE - Sign a FA rookie player with potential 30 or below
Training Camp

50% – Use custom training camp settings
FREE – Use default training camp settings
100% – Carry up to 70 player into training camp
70% – Carry up to 63 players into training camp
50% – Carry up to 56 players into training camp

In-Season

50% – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
20% – Allow changes to offensive gameplan during season
20% – Allow changes to defensive gameplan during season
FREE – Implement staff-controlled gameplans for season
20% – Sign veteran free agent to replace player placed onto IR
10% – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
FREE – Sign lowest-rated rookie free agent to maintain legal roster

Salary Cap <<-- Here I am thinking you determine the amount of bonus % available to you in the next season. If you used all the cap, no bonus points next year.

no bonus % – Use entire salary cap
20 bonus % – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
40 bonus % – Leave 10% of cap unused as of start of season
60 bonus % – Leave 15% of cap unused as of start of season
80 bonus % – Leave 20% of cap unused as of start of season
100 bonus % – Leave 25% of cap unused as of start of season
200 bonus % - leave half the cap unused as of start of season (for rebuilding years?)

In theory, I would think this would limit you so that choices were important, but allow enough creativity to still take many different avenues for improving the team. I like the direction you're headed with this - if it could be automated somehow, it would make every decision very important as well as being a hassle free and engaging way to play FOF SP.

Interesting idea. I need to give it some thought.

Right now, my inclination is to try to give the player (me) maximum flexibility in what he wants to do with in the rules. So, having an overall budget for all categories at once essentially says it's okay to put all your resources toward getting the highest quality current players (and letting things like sleeper draft picks or custom gameplans go by the wayside) you can do that... but if it's of paramount importance to you to use a custom gameplan and clever drafting, then you might have go go without high priced free agent offers and leave some cap space unused. I *like* that sort of flexibility (that's an extreme example, but you get my drift I think) being on the table -- I want to feel that i can really alter the direction of my team's priorities, which I don't think is really available under any budgeting system where I am compelled to spend a certain share of my resources on the draft, a certain share in free agency, and so forth.

I'll chew on it.

Within the current context, in my own fiddling, I fear that the addition of the "free" players might tend to drive the prudently-run team a bit more toward a roster comprising a handful of superstar players, and then a ton of youngsters and scrubs. I am contemplating adding something along these lines:

As of some point certain... maybe the final roster of 53?
2 - Each player on roster whose cap hit is more than 10% of total cap space
1 - Each player on roster whose cap hit is between 5% and 10% of total cap space


Theory here is to make it just that much more difficult to carry the really expensive players.

Just following up on this last idea a shade...

I would like to see it be at least conceivable for a team, playing under these rules, and right up against its AP limit for the year, make a decision like "I'll spend one AP to cap out my star player, because that gets me away from a 2AP cost of carrying his big salary this year, and will drop me to a lower tier of cap usage saving me another 2AP."

Maybe the cost of carrying the high-salary player ought to be slightly higher, even -- to make this sort of trade-off more realistic. 2 and 3, rather than 1 and 2?

Still thinking...

My thinking was with the 8 part budgeting system you sort of limit yourself to somewhat realistic situations and keep the total calculation a little simpler.. most teams can't afford to re-sign more than a few quality players, teams trade very little except draft picks and the occasional player, etc.. I can see where a team would be lopsided though after a few years.. But a mandatory 200 (or maybe higher) injury setting would probably help with that quite a bit.

I can see what you're saying though, about the desire to think about the big picture. As far as the contract issues, maybe weight players by their salary? have a salary point cap each year, where a player making..

minimum salary - 1 point,
10% or more below top 20 average salary - 2 points,
within 10% of top 20 average salary - 3 points,
10% or more above top 20 average salary - 4 points,
franchise salary to second highest paid at position - 5 points,
highest paid at position - a rare 6 pointer.

Then, if the average guy is a 3, maybe you set the cap at 138 (46 x 3) and require a 53 man roster..

Also, what if you used the tiering system and "rolled over" points when applicable? Say you had 15 AP coming into FA1 and spent 12 of it.. That extra 3 carries over into the draft, from which the remainder carries into late FA, etc.. you could also implement penalties for going over the AP cap in any given phase.

The only thing I think would have to be set each year would be the 'In Season' phase, because it coincides with other phases.

Also, The 'Internal Contract Moves' phase could almost budget itself using salary points, I think.

SO, if I understand you correctly, this would essentially be the system that I have now (an overall cap) but with increasingly soft limits for each subset of the season, starting from the beginning. 15 points for the first stage... 25 total points for the first two stages... 40 total points for the first three stages...and so forth (or whatever).

Again - I don't see how maximum flexibility is not the way to go here. If I want to pile up a giant bulk of my resources to make a big splash in free agency this year, and can do so at the expense of other things -- why shouldn't I be allowed to do that, assuming the trade-offs are fixed reasonably? To me, that's one of the most attractive things about this whole concept -- freedom to do anything you want, just a price offset for all those things. Adding more limitations goes counter to what I like best about this.

Open question here for those following the concept...


Right now above, I have the cost of using all 60 rookie interviews set at 3 points. By not doing so, you would theoretically free up the AP needed to do something like a team-friendly renegotiation, or perhaps to sign one or two more worthwhile free agents (3 points could get you one reasonable offer, plus one 3yr minsal guy).

My question is -- is this price high enough? I think the ideal pricing scheme would basically make a lot of these things at least close to borderline whether they are "worth it" under a tight AP budget. But I'm having trouble seeing a point where I'd be willing to forgo my rookie interviews just to be able to sign one more free agent -- so I'm guessing that for me (even if my scout stinks because I had to go cheap there to save AP) I'd likely use my interviews in 10 out of 10 seasons, with only 3 AP at stake.

So, is 3 AP enough there? Or should the scheme maybe be something more like 2-3-5, rather than 1-2-3?

I'd tend to go with 3-5-6 there.

Some substantial tweaking at work here -- I'm now thinking that the starting point for a tough season budget is going to be around 60 AP. I'm running my first test season under these rules now.

- - -
Action Point Values for FOF House Rules

Staff Hiring
3 – Hiring scout or head coach with no contract restrictions
2 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring scout or head coach on requested contract in stage 3
1 – Replacing scout or head coach currently under contract
2 – Hiring coordinator with no contract restrictions
1 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract in stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator at half of HC request in stage 3
1 – Replacing coordinator currently under contract
(costs are cumulative, and in effect for duration of contract)

Internal Contract Moves
4 – Use franchise tag on player unwilling to sign otherwise
2 – Use franchise tag on any other player
4 – Offer unrestricted renegotiation to current player
2 – Offer current player his requested renegotiation
0 – Offer current player full or partial capout
2 – Offer RFA player an unrestricted new contract
0 – Offer RFA player his requested new contract
(costs apply when offer is accepted by player, not for failed attempts)

Early Free Agency
4 – Offer unrestricted contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
0 – Offer FA player 8th year+ requested contract 1yr no bonus (up to 4)
(Submitting an altered contract to a player already on offer list re-incurs same cost as original offer would have above)

Trading
2 – Initiating trade for player from another team
4 – Initiating trade of player(s) for a 1st round pick or more
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
1 – Initiating trade of player(s) for less than 2nd round pick
2 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that fails “fairness test”
1 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that passes “fairness test”
2 – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
1 – Any other trade within current draft
5 – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
2 – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years

Rookie Draft
6 – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
5 – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
3 – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 - Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board
(Costs are cumulative above, so a two-red player off the top page of the big board would cost a total of 3 points)

Late Free Agency

5 – Sign a FA player released during late free agency
3 – Sign a FA player in 2nd through 4th year in league
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
1 – Offer any other FA player his requested contract
1 – Sign any other FA player to a one year contract

Training Camp

3 – Use custom training camp settings
0 – Use default training camp settings
5 – Carry up to 70 players into training camp
3 – Carry up to 60 players into training camp
2 – Carry up to 57 players into training camp
1 – Carry up to 55 players into training camp
0 – Carry up to 53 players into training camp

In-Season

10 – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
2 – Allow unlimited changes to offensive gameplan during season
2 – Allow unlimited changes to defensive gameplan during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled gameplans for full season
4 – Allow unlimited changes to depth chart during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled depth chart for full season
6 – Set injury rate at 100
3 – Set injury rate at 150
0 – Set injury rate at 200
3 – Sign veteran free agent to replace player placed onto IR
1 – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
0 – Sign lowest-rated rookie free agent to maintain legal roster

Salary Cap
15 – Use entire salary cap
12 – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
9 – Leave 10% of cap unused as of start of season
6 – Leave 15% of cap unused as of start of season
3 – Leave 20% of cap unused as of start of season
0 – Leave 25% of cap unused as of start of season
3 – Each player on roster for week 1 occupying over 10% of cap
2 – Each player on roster for week 1 occupying 5-10% of cap

Revision notes

3.27.08 substantially revised by QS and incorporated into “Testing My Limits” thread
3.28.08 Increased age of “free” FA signees to 8th year, added 4AP cost of manual depth chart control

One more item to toss out... I played through a preseason with a mature team, under these rules, and I ended up getting four pretty decent roster-filler veteran players with my "free" signings. Here are the relevant snapshots *before training camp*



I am a little bit worried that baing able to grab guys of this general caliber (and of course I was looking at things like affinities, and likely missed out on some slightly better players to sign these guys) might have the practical effect of (1) making low-round draft picks pretty useless, and (2) making me less interested in actually signing real contracts with marginal free agents.

I know nobody in the pic above is going to make the difference between being a champion and a stiff... but they probably do make the difference between feeling like I had adequate depth at a position and not. And for 'free" under my AP system as it stands.

Any thoughts?

Following up on the list of FAs above, I have a couple of potential ways to do this, other than just make the signings "free" under the AP budget.

Here are the rules I have in place now:


Early Free Agency
4 – Offer unrestricted contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
0 – Offer FA player 5th year+ requested contract 1yr no bonus (up to 4)


The harshest way to go would be to just wipe out the "free" signings altogether, and make these signings 1AP each, to offer the cheap deal they are seeking.


Another way to go would be to allow a cost of something like 1AP to sign up to two such guys, essentially making their costs a half point each. (I'm resisting fractional AP for simplicity's sake)


A third way to go, slightly more subtle, woudl be to require that the veteran player be asking for a minsal contract (which would be shown on the player's card with the effective salary being the lowered veteran minimum). As you can see from above, none of these guys would qualify there -- none asked for a bonus, but they all wanted a shade more than minsal.

My worry with this last option is that it might be tedious to find guys with exactly that demand. You can sort in the roster listings of the FA by contract demand, but from there it is not easy to spot affinities, like it is with a "recommend" search, nor can you sort by certain skills. I worry about the tedium there - but it may in fact be the best option available.


And finally, another option would be to up the minimum age of such players -- making it more likely that anyone you sign under a "free" contract would be likely to degrade substantially in training camp. I could up the minimum age to something like 8th or 9th year players sign for free -- meaning there woudl be much more risk of having that "depth' dissolve before you hit the field.

I like this one, and I'm thinking 8th year.

Have you had any more thought on the system as a whole? I may mess around with this some this evening.

If you're looking to fiddle with an already-built team, I would suggest 60 AP and the point system posted above as a pretty good starting point for an overall challenge. I will be posting my own testing thread tonight using 60 AP, and I had a challenging but not brutal offseason.

Started a dynasty thread, using these AP rules:

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...ad.php?t=64518

...continuation of my old "highlander" team, FWIW. Thought it better to work with a mature team than one in total build-up, though I think the latter may prove to be fairly interesting as well, at some point.

Yeah. I've got a team that I abandoned sone time in the 2020s that I'm going to mess around with.

An open question here... I already have the sense that I am going to play my seasons -- at least with my current team -- in largely the same fashion. I will probably use most of the cap and use custom gameplans - taking up close to half of my AP budget right there. In theory, I'd be leaving myself a shorter budget than some other teams for use with things like free agent bidding and so forth.

What I don't know is how much more I'd be able to help my team with an extra 10 or 20 AP available for nothing but roster-building. Maybe I could sign a couple more top-tier free agents, but how many? How many guys could we fit under the salary cap? I don't know -- I'm just not sure how realistic it is to think that a different sort of team than mine (one focusing in other areas) would be able to make big gains by doing without something like a custom gameplan. Just an open thought - I'm thinking this is going to work pretty well for me personally, but for a fast-simmer type of player, I don't know that this whole AP pricing scheme is going to be a good fit. Would 60 turn into a too-easy budget for that guy, just because he'd run out of big moves to make for other reasons (like the salary cap)?

A couple more things that could, conceivably, have an AP cost:

-changing player positions
-sending players to Europe
-weight training

Suggestion: a small reduction if one of the "custom" game plans is an unchanged version of one of the generic stock plans in the FOFC library. Maybe make that 8 points instead of 10. I'm going to use this in my first test season right now.

Suggestion2 (follow up on summer league idea): sliding scale for who gets sent to summer league.
1st round pick: 3
2nd or 3rd: 2
4th or 5th: 1
6th, 7th, undrafted rookie: 0


OK. Not ready for a true dynasty, but I'm going to try a test season or two using my two suggestions above and a 60-point budget. Link in a few.

Test Career:

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...ewpost&t=64530

Action Point Values for FOF House Rules

Staff Hiring
3 – Scout or head coach who was hired with no contract restrictions
2 – Scout or head coach who was offered his requested contract before stage 3
0 – Scout or head coach who was offered his requested contract in stage 3
1 – Replacing scout or head coach currently under contract
2 – Hiring coordinator with no contract restrictions
1 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract before stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator on requested contract in stage 3
0 – Hiring coordinator at half of his HC request in stage 3
1 – Replacing coordinator currently under contract

Internal Contract Moves
4 – Use franchise tag on player for third consecutive year or more
3 – Use franchise tag on player for second consecutive year
3 – Use franchise tag on player labeled as angry, livid or demanding trade
3 – Use franchise tag on player with loyalty rating of zero
2 – Use franchise tag on any other player
3 – Send former 1st round pick to European league
2 – Send former 2nd or 3rd round pick to European league
1 – Send former 4th or 5th round pick or undrafted rookie to European league
0 – Send former 6th or 7th round pick or former to European league
4 – Sign current player to unrestricted renegotiation
2 – Sign current player to his requested renegotiation
0 – Sign current player to a full or partial capout
2 – Sign RFA player on an unrestricted new contract
0 – Sign RFA player to his requested new contract

Early Free Agency
4 – Offer unrestricted contract to FA player
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player
2 – Offer three-year minsal contract to FA player
1 – Offer the requested contract to FA player
0 – Offer FA player 8th year+ requested contract 1yr no bonus (up to 4)
(Submitting an altered contract to a player already on offer list re-incurs same cost as original offer would have above)

Trading
2 – Initiating trade for player from another team
4 – Initiating trade of player(s) for a 1st round pick or more
2 – Initiating trade of player(s) for 2nd round pick or more
1 – Initiating trade of player(s) for less than 2nd round pick
2 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that fails “fairness test”
1 – Accepting AI-initiated trade that passes “fairness test”
2 – Trading down from Top 10 pick within current draft
1 – Any other trade within current draft
5 – Any trade involving future 1st round pick from another team
2 – Any other trade involving draft picks in future years

Rookie Draft
6 – Use up to 60 rookie interviews
5 – Use up to 40 rookie interviews
3 – Use up to 20 rookie interviews
2 – Select a rookie player with more than one red combine
2 – Select a rookie player with more than three red/blue combines
1 – Select a rookie player with one red combine
1 – Select a rookie player who skipped the combine
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of position board
1 – Select a rookie player not on the top page of overall board

Late Free Agency
5 – Sign a FA player released during late free agency
4 – Sign a FA player in 2nd or 3rd year in league
3 – Sign a FA player in his 4th year in league
2 – Sign a FA rookie player
1 – Offer any other FA player his requested contract
1 – Offer any other FA player a one year contract

Training Camp
3 – Use custom training camp settings
0 – Use default training camp settings
5 – Carry up to 70 players into training camp
3 – Carry up to 60 players into training camp
2 – Carry up to 57 players into training camp
1 – Carry up to 55 players into training camp
0 – Carry up to 53 players into training camp

In-Season

10 – Implement custom gameplans at start of season
8 – Implement custom GP, with unchanged offensive gameplan from FOFC library
2 – Allow unlimited changes to offensive gameplan during season
2 – Allow unlimited changes to defensive gameplan during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled gameplans for full season
4 – Allow unlimited changes to depth chart during season
0 – Implement staff-controlled depth chart for full season
6 – Set injury rate at 100
3 – Set injury rate at 150
0 – Set injury rate at 200
3 – Sign veteran free agent to replace player placed onto IR
1 – Sign rookie free agent to replace player placed onto IR
0 – Sign lowest-rated rookie free agent to maintain legal roster

Salary Cap
15 – Use entire salary cap
12 – Leave 5% of cap unused as of start of season
9 – Leave 10% of cap unused as of start of season
6 – Leave 15% of cap unused as of start of season
3 – Leave 20% of cap unused as of start of season
0 – Leave 25% of cap unused as of start of season
3 – Each player on roster for week 1 occupying over 10% of cap
2 – Each player on roster for week 1 occupying 5-10% of cap

Revision notes

3.27.08 substantially revised by QS and incorporated into “Testing My Limits” thread
3.28.08 Increased age of “free” FA signees to 8th year, added 4AP cost of manual depth chart control
3.29.08 Rephrasing and technical changes by QS
3.29.08 Allowed discount for using unchanged Off GP from library (per SD)
3.29.08 Added modest sliding scale for sending player to Europe (per SD)

One more somewhat open-ended idea with this... what about a general rule carrying something like 1 extra AP every time you are doing something from the menu more than three times in one season?

Just in general... if there's some specific "weakness" in the AP schedule, and when playing all-out you find yourself doing it more than a certain number of time, it could self-correct and bump up an point in cost.

So far, in my limited testing, my top candidate for this is probably:
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player

...but if that cost bumped up from 2 to 3 points after I did it a certain (fairly low) number of times, I'd probably be forced to look at other options a shade more closely.


Some trouble there on the simplicity scale, but I sort of like it as a safety net for any inherent weakness in the schedule of costs.

Heh. I know I keep harping on Empire Earth's custom civilization system, but that's yet another component of it that may well be applicable here, as it does precisely that. Once you've spent points on, say, 20% increase in your fighters' attack value, any other fighter improvements cost more than the original values. I haven't played enough with this system to know where the pressure points are, but that makes a ton of sense to me.

One question/issue... Did you intend it this way, that the 0-point offers can only come during early free agency? If so, that's pretty rough, as we can't know for sure who we're going to draft. I'm thinking there needs to be a way to sign 0-point players during late free agency.

Yes, that is intentional. I'm open to debate on it, but for now I disagree that free adds after the draft is necessary. I want the "free" guys to be of as little use as possible.

If you feel strongly and want to waive it in your own implementation, I can obviously live with that -- but it was my intention that these fill-in guys only be available in the early FA stages.

Gotcha. Having just read your new thread for the first time (yeah, probably should have done that), I've realized that the draft isn't going to be as expensive as I'd estimated. I'll play around with it some more. Starting with 20something players isn't easy with these rules.

This might also provide a neater way to limit the "free" FA pickups (whenever they occur)... just leave the cost at 0, but it bumps to 1 AP once you have done it X times, like anything else.

I think you ought to give yourself a few extra liberties starting with a less-than-complete team. Like unlimited free signings to FAs for their 1yr asking price, or something like that. No fun being forced to field a 46-man team strung together with twine.

I'm going to try it nonetheless. I'm still at FA1-10. I'll sign the four guys at the most critical positions for getting the roster legal, and see how it plays out.

In theory, the overall AP concept ought to allow you the "trade off" of saying you will forgo using a custom gameplan (and maybe other things like a reasonably low injury setting, etc) to free up enough AP to use toward the sort of massive roster rebuild that you seem to be undergoing. Not sure that's appealing from where you sit, but playing long term, I could see that being a reasonable option.

Oh, absolutely. In this particular case, I happened to take over a formerly AI-run team that was good (six straight non-losing seasons), with a 14th-year 55/55 QB and a 69/69 go-to WR. I thought it would be fun to see what it feels like to try to make a last-ditch run at a title first.

Mea culpa on that concern. Turns out I'd also overlooked the importance ability to sign my own RFAs to free contracts. I'm doing that as well before closing out early free agency. After the draft, I'm sure I'll cut some of them, but getting legal is no problem whatsoever, now that I look a little more deeply. The RFAs are a nice safety net.

Yup. I'm going into the draft with 48 players with all of these RFA stiffs now. No worries whatsoever.

What I think that means long term is more pressure to draft well. Since you are likely to be counting on most of your draft picks for four years or more of service (just out of AP economy) there's pressure to get picks who can contribute.

As I am now toying with the wording of the new extra point cost for doing any one thing more than three times... do you think this needs to be exempted from that? Or maybe just add two free ways of dealing with RFAs (like splitting requested one year deals from requested multi year deals)?


Here's how I have it written right now:

0 – Sign RFA player to his requested one year contract
0 – Sign RFA player to his requested multi year contract
1 – Additional cost of using any item above after its first three uses

I'd switch it around based on request. There was a 52/52 RFA LT on that Redskin team I just took over. He started sixteen games last year, only gave up two sacks, and was asking for a six-year deal. That should cost some action points. :p Every now and then someone might fall through the cracks with this, but generally speaking, RFAs who want no bonus haven't played much at all and suck. So, I'm thinking...

0 - Sign RFA player to his requested one year contract
1 - Sign RFA player to his requested two or three year contract
2 - Sign RFA player requesting contract four years or longer to his requested contract.

The above would also help nerf the angle-shooting of signing draftees to three-year contracts.

Just for note-keeping purposes, in my last season, here are the things I did more than 3 times, with no added cost for doing so:

0 – Offer RFA player his requested new 1yr contract (4 times)
2 – Offer flat contract with at least 25% bonus to FA player (5 times)
0 – Offer FA player 8th year+ requested contract 1yr no bonus (4 times)

...and of those, I am definitely most concerned about the flat contracts -- I got some quality contributors there, all to three year deals, and for little more than minimum salary (minsal was something like 2.02m, so I just offered that for 3yrs and the same amount in bonus) -- and I got this sort of player:

RB rated RB rated 49/49 (went on to start and post 1172 yds and 7 TD)
5th year WR rated 54/54 (productive #3/4 WR)
5th year OT rated 39/39 and creeping (started at RT)
...and a stud youngish punter.

Looking at this last season fairly closely - I think that was the one are where i feel I was "getting away" with something. Not sure if that sort of contract ought to get bumped up in AP cost, though... 3 AP probably makes those guys a great deal less worth pursuing. And if I can only get them on their requested one-year deals... I'm not sure what share of their value they still carry.

Still thinking on it...

Hmm... I see your logic, and I essentially agree. But I have trouble squaring it logically with this cost already in the rules for open free agents:


Doesn't seem fair to charge a cost to re-sign your own guy to what he is asking for that exceeds what it costs to sign a guy off the street to what he is asking for. If that was even a sentence.

Hmmm... maybe just 1 AP for any requested multi-year deal, and leave it at that?

Yeah, mabye that's the way to go. Maybe that's fairly rare.

Clarification on the cumulative nature of these: I'm about to select a player with two red combines and three blue combines. Does he cost two points or four?

I like this AP concept a lot.

What about +/- your APs NEXT season depending on how Rex scored your current season.

Next Years APs = 50 - Rex overall score.

or a sliding scale based upon that.

Was gonna propose every 1m in signing bonus cost 1AP, then went to every 1m franchise financials were in the red would cost 1AP, but I think the Rex score thing would be a holistic approach that would tend to hit you harder while you were on top, but at the same time would "reward" you for paying attention to financials.

Two.

I tried to rewrite that piece to be clearer... the only additive thing should be adding the highest combine points, plus the one or two points from being off the top page. I'm open to suggestions on how to state that more clearly. (As I write, I think I need to make the points for off-the-page 2 and 1, rather than 1 and 1 additive)

Actually, I think it's time to rethink the "off the page" cost itself. I have found so far that nearly every player not at a premiere position is off the top page overall... I just altered my wording to say sorted by either Grade of Adj, but I'm not sure that rule is adding anything meaningful. I feel like the sneaky picks are all accounted for with the combine tests, rather than the "digging deep" rule. Maybe we just need the "top page at position" or something stricter but within the position itself, if we want to continue that concept.

Open to thoughts.

OK. Got it.

Maybe something along the lines of

"the highest of the following that fits your player" (horrible syntax, but you get the idea)

and then..

"plus more points for..."

or something.

Having not gotten too far into this yet, I'm wondering if the draft needs to be a bit more expensive, but more later on that...

Heh. You beat me to it. I felt silly saying "it needs to cost more points," while at the same time saying "the top page is a QB/RB/CB/DE party after the second round."

My gut feeling on the draft is to allocate the draft points by colors only, but excluding Solecismic test: 1 point per red, .5 points per blue. I'll have more details in a few, I think.

Bah. Screw the SOL exemption. Less tracking that way...