No GTXFF1 2018 thread?

[Alan P]

I want in early this year!

[Kchrpm]

I'm working on a much simpler version of the points sheet that Balki had been using. I just need to figure out how to deal with the mid-season driver changes.

Edit: Fuck it, I'll do it manually as they come up. Someone get some values for the drivers that you trust, I don't know enough to be able to say whether they're good or not.

[Kchrpm]

By the way, for driver lineup clashes, I suggest auctioning. If more than one person wants to use a certain combo of above-the-line drivers (worth more than $10m, for example), they can bid how much they're willing to overpay. Spend more on the higher tier and mid tier, lose out on the lower tier opportunities. That way it's not just who posts first.

[Alan P]

By the way, for driver lineup clashes, I suggest auctioning. If more than one person wants to use a certain combo of above-the-line drivers (worth more than $10m, for example), they can bid how much they're willing to overpay. Spend more on the higher tier and mid tier, lose out on the lower tier opportunities. That way it's not just who posts first.
Great idea!

[CudaMan]

Who shall I curse this year? :evil laugh:

[dodint]

The league I ran last year did two bonus rounds with 1.5x modifiers that allowed for duplicate teams, so long as each player picked unique bonus rounds.

[FaultyMario]

I'm working on a much simpler version of the points sheet that Balki had been using. I just need to figure out how to deal with the mid-season driver changes.

Edit: Fuck it, I'll do it manually as they come up. Someone get some values for the drivers that you trust, I don't know enough to be able to say whether they're good or not.

What's the value range? In case it needs to be adjusted.

[Reynard]

Right then... I'll bid 100m for just Hammy & Bottas! :assclown:

[Kchrpm]

What's the value range? In case it needs to be adjusted.

I don't know. I don't even remember what spending limit we usually use.

[balki]

I want in early this year!
We've always set it up between the last test and the first GP practice, so the window just opened up.

I was going to do it and put some back-of-the-envelope numbers together the the back of, well, a junk mail envelope.
We've thrown around ideas, but Dave and I have found the simple format we've been using works best (even that requires a bit of work to setup)

Here are the numbers I through together (preliminary stuff, not official)
Ham/Bot 25/21
Ric/Ver 18/18
Vet/Rai 21/14
Hulk/Sai 7/7
Per/Ocon 6/5
Alo/Van 4/3
STRs 3 each
Str/Sir 3/2
Haas 2 each
Sauber 1 each

Aside from wanting to put them in a spreadsheet and comparing them to last year's results I'd like to wait for a testing summary article.
A big help would be odds listings from gambling websites, but I wasn't able to find any last year.

Keith, you're welcomed to use numbers above. If I run it again it'll be the same rules except we pick drivers rather than seats (Sainz and Kyvat bouncing around were a mess)

If the prices are balanced then the whole 'who posts first' argument is moot. Last year P1 (Bottas+Vettel) and P2 (Hamilton+Räikkönen) were tied after 19 rounds and Mag was the only shared driver (less than 3% of points total). We can do a loose draft selection: top 5 finishers from last year don't get to submit picks for the first 5 days the new thread is up and running.

[FaultyMario]

I've felt that some of those numbers have been artificially low in the last couple of our Fantasy Seasons.

I think each driver ought to be a reflection of the combined value of engine/chassis/driver talent in which the ideal proposition would be worth (I'd say it's the league's administrator prerogative to decide) either 3/4 or 2/3 of the "money" available to each player. Thus the best driver in the best chassis with the best engine would be worth 30 out of 40 Geeteedollars in case we go for the three quarters approach, or 30 out of 45 if we go for the two thirds philosophy.

Now, how we reach those 30 ideal points is another matter. The easiest way would be to assign 10 points for engine, 10 points for chassis and 10 points for driver. But my opinion is that the current formula puts a lot of emphasis on engine and a lot less on driver talent. The other question is that deciding which "chassis" is better makes it a bit difficult to judge, so how about we assess team performance as a whole? that way we include the other stuff that influences the points a certain car combination delivers on raceday.

To cut the chase I say we split values like this 14 for engine, 10 for team and 6 for driver.

Engines: I'd say it's Mercedes > Ferrarri >> Renault > Honda

Teams (this is based on their avg finishing position in the last 3 years):

Mercedes 10
Ferrari 9
Red Bull 8
FI 7
Williams 7
Renault 4
STR 4
Haas 3
McL 3
Sauber 2



Drivers, well that's some work. Balki let me know if you think I'm on the right track and then i can put together some numbers.

So to go for quick examples, under this proposal Hamilton = 30 (14+10+6), Perez = 25 (14+7+4) and Sirotkin = 22 (14+7+1).

I know this makes teams like Williams highly undesireable, but that would be a reflection of reality.

What do you think, does it spice things up? Is there a way to reach Hamilton points without spending three quarters (or two thirds) of your money allocation?

[balki]

If we stick to the FIA's scoring then we can't have Sirotkin be worth even 10% of Hamilton. I base my numbers on what I think the final 2018 standings will look like then multiple that driver's total points by roughly 6%

I'd be on board with making the drivers a little more expensive

After reading Will Buxton's tweets and jacking up the prices I'm leaning towards these revised numbers:
Ham/Bot 27/22
Ric/Ver 19/19
Vet/Rai 18/12
Hulk/Sai 8/8
Per/Ocon 5/4
Alo/Van 3/2
Gro/Mag 3/2
STRs 2 each
Str/Sir 2/1
Sauber 1 both
‏

[FaultyMario]

I see your point.