tff 2018/19 final thoughts.

[ffstuff]

I've rerun the table without Wolves players being included as Andy requested to see what happened. As i stated before, its just the defenders (not keeper) that i am multiplying by the 1.1, 1.2 etc factors.
I have removed the original table posted above as i noticed a minor error in the DEF £*1.2 and DEF £*2.0 lines . For producing the optimal solutions i use the COIN branch and Cut Solver (CBC) , that by default sets the Branch and Bound tolerance to 1%, in effect allowing the solution it gives to be within 1% of the optimal solution. I have now rectified this to 0% so that in effect it will give the actual optimal solution for this Solver method.



For comparison, I am also showing the Dreamteam (Using Starting Prices) best starting XI and Sky best starting XI also



Frank

[Darbyand]

Brilliant work and really interesting. Barely a premium striker in sight with the slightest of tweaks.

[get_on_my_cocker]

Andy, why do you think GFM are responsible for the game rules and how the whole game works? All they do is run the game for the telegraph, and do whatever they are asked to do by the telegraph.

[12345678]

many thanks frank,

as i suggested elsewhere it seems jiminez saved tff from being a 4-5-1 single striker game, in an average season my gut feel is that under current rules 4-5-1 is actually better than 5-3-2 in most seasons, if there is a bargain striker who racks 'em up then 5-3-2 rules the roost.


'Andy, why do you think GFM are responsible for the game rules and how the whole game works? All they do is run the game for the telegraph, and do whatever they are asked to do by the telegraph'

that is a very good and fair point. it is true that newspapers have always had a lot of input in terms of what they want from games.

that said as GFM never really tell us anything (fully accept hands tied by telegraph) i think it is a fair assumption that GFM are responsible for the game design itself.

if that is not the case i am fully prepared to apologise, if it is the case then for reasons stated i think their incompetence has damaged tff more than 'free games', although i fully accept that i may be wrong on that.

[12345678]

cheers for the latest info frank, is it possible to do any sort of fpl analysis & can you do sdt & sky without wolves players please

on reflection with sdt can you do it at 105% 107.5% and 110% of original budget at final prices.

p.s. with fpl it may be easiest to use scores and treat it as an XI man game with an assumed sensible XI man budget.

[12345678]

Brilliant work and really interesting. Barely a premium striker in sight with the slightest of tweaks.

the sky & tff situation is pretty grim for them, with no jiminez you can see how the template shifts! 4-5-1 or as striker says if it was allowed then 5-4-1 would be the way to go!

sdt is obviously striker friendly but like fpl i think you have to fiddle with the budget slightly. i have no doubt 3-4-3 is likely to be ahead of 4-3-3 in sdt. with fpl it would again be altered from a standard template by the 'wolves effect'. i suspect the formation you would want to play in an XI man fpl is 3-4-3. not sure how easy a meaningful comparison would be to do, along the lines of sdt.

[Yorkshire Exile]

There is of course a flexibility factor in here... Strikers tend to score big hauls sporadically whereas defenders tend to accrue more consistently. Using your transfers to hit the hauls necessitates formations which enable this dependent on game rules.

I agree with the fundamental premise of the arguments and think defenders are underpriced..... But the situation is a little more nuanced than a what is optimal within budget analysis as this doesn't include relative match timings and fixture runs.....

[12345678]

would agree but only to a very limited extent yorkie. mainly because the equation is so heavily in favour of defenders that good short runs are unlikely to overcome that weighting for anything but the very shortest of runs.

what i really wanted to do with these posts is to prove to tff/gfm where they have taken the game and the likely consequences to their entries and to telegraph fantasy devotees of the lifespan of the games continuing with the structure and design that they currently have.

hopefully it has done that and frank has helped to crystallise with further figures just how bad the current state of play is.

i hope tff/gfm don't ignore it, but fear they will with obvious consequences.

at least i can say 'i tried'

[theo29]

so what sort of tempting financial offer would you like to see coming out from Tele Towers in the next few weeks ? The word 'tightwads' was used on here the other day What might make them loosen their purse strings a little ?

[ffstuff]

There is of course a flexibility factor in here... Strikers tend to score big hauls sporadically whereas defenders tend to accrue more consistently. Using your transfers to hit the hauls necessitates formations which enable this dependent on game rules.

I agree with the fundamental premise of the arguments and think defenders are underpriced..... But the situation is a little more nuanced than a what is optimal within budget analysis as this doesn't include relative match timings and fixture runs.....

Yes , I was thinking exactly the same, there are a smaller pool of good scoring players in the bargain area for Mid/Str to Transfer between for the hauls, so in reality i would look to concrete in a higher priced player into the optimal calculation to enable me to do just that and have the optimal 10 based around that selection. (or indeed selections) i.e. best optimal solution with Aguero taking one striker berth

[Darkish]

A lot of this depends on who the target audience is, is it the serious player or the casual player?

I would say I’m not as serious as others here, but more serious than the casual. I don’t play to win the first prize and I think the casual player has no chance either. So the borefest doesn’t really apply.

I hate games which is just about goals and like a balance with non-scoring players being a viable option. VVA, Leporte, TAA and others are great players and should make a team.

For serious players who have hundreds of teams, its all about the winning as you are not sitting down watching a game cheering on a player as you probably have him in 25 teams but not 75. It surely is just about the points so it doesn’t matter.

I play for the mini-leagues and mini-tournaments, have 4 teams enter several leagues and enjoy the fun. If these were removed then I wouldn’t play.

If TFF asked me about changes to the game they would be as follows:

1. More transfers – making changes just makes the game more fun and engaging. Maybe help the casual a bit by having these split pre and post Xmas.
2. Have the negative points for defenders more aligned to FPL, eg don’t lose points for first goal conceded and then only lose points for every two goals conceded. This makes good defenders from non-top teams more viable.
3. Defenders need to be priced better – eg. More expensive and I expect attackers should be reduced in price.
4. There is nothing to stop players having multiple players from a single team (in Sky have multiple captain days). So limit players to 3 from each team. People can then make decisions on whether to go for defence or attack. If a player gets injured you don’t have to have three from that team and need to manage the risks.
5. Key Contributions – To me I thought these were like assists but slightly looser definition. I just don’t care. I have seen loads of arguments about assists that should or shouldn’t be given. I just accept what is given and as I’m not paranoid they are fixing this against me, then I’m not bothered.
6. Agree about the prize money should be less top heavy and some prizes should be scrapped. But not worried as doubt will be effected.
7. Wish they wouldn’t take a 10% cut from the mini-tournaments, but I suppose they use to generate cash.

I only started playing tff last summer due to the world cup. I had seen it before but had no intention of paying. If it wasn’t for the fact of mini-leagues I wouldn’t have played at all. I don’t often see the games advertised and it must be very difficult to get new paying members.

[ffstuff]

regarding Andy



I think FPL for 11 is awkward to do, unless you settle on a formation or determine you want crap on your bench etc , if you just took say 80 million for your main 11 and said 106 milloin max for your entire team (winners team in effect) youd always get a 4-5-1 as best but the winners team is 3-4-3 on that budgets , a 4-5-1 would mean crap bench forwards which may not be viable.

[12345678]

whilst its a fudge i think you have to compare FPL scoring as an 11 player game with the various formations available for scoring and work out a sensible base budget, maybe the average of the leading half a dozen teams best 11 say.

after all its really trying to see how the scoring fits tff formations, if you see what i mean.

cheers for your efforts

[Darbyand]

Looking back on this thread with a nod to the new price list that came out yesterday: given that premium defenders have gone up by about 1.4/1.5 we're in 451 territory; still with a quality defence and an overperforming striker as the best formation

(worth noting that ffstuff didn't change the price of the keepers who have gone up by about 1.1 or factor in premium midfielders going up 1.1/1.2)