Thoughts on the Future of Village Challenge II

[Subby]

It is my personal opinion that Viiage Challenge II has ceased to be a challenge (evidenced by the fact that we have one something like 8 Bowls in 11 years). Now, I am happy to step aside and let someone take my place - but I would be more interested in starting a real Challenge - complete with tough house rules, couched in the classic Village Challenge format (game file passed between a "village" of GMs every couple of years).

I guess I should start off the discussion like this:

What I Like About VC II:

*Keepers
*Web site (not because I authored it - but because of the historical info).
*Dynasty Reports
*Village Framework
*Participants

What I Don't Like About VC II:

*Lax House Rules regarding drafting and trading and renegotiating
*Game engine issues (primarily playoff injury bug)

For the most part we are playing 'all-out' - VERY fun for a while - but something of which I personally have grown tired. We've killed the monster (14 Bowls?) now and I am ready to see how good we REALLY are. I would like to see House Rules on the order of WLC or GroupThink, but incorporated into the VC - in other words...take the best of the three most prominent challenges and create VC III!

Any thoughts?

I've been thinking of this for a while myself. The only time I play FOF2 is for the VCII, and I don't think everyone involved has migrated to 2K1, so that is a concern.

Keepers, while I love this aspect, I think we need to be more steadfast on the issue. If we make someone a keeper, we need to make every attempt to make that player a starter. Thus, we can't have 2 QB keepers or two RB keepers and so on. Also to keep away from the same GM getting to keeperize his QB all the time (or whatever position), you can't make the same position a keeper consecutively (ie If your QB keeper just retired, your next one can't be a QB, thus giving another GM the oppurtunity).

I think that along with the generally accepted house rules would go along way into making everything more of a challenge.

Myself, I would like to move to FOF2K1, but I don't know if everyone is willing.

[WebEwbank]

I want to continue with VC in asome form, but am very willing to alter the house rules if the majority wants.

Tougher trade, re-signing, and drafting rules would help, I think.

I don't see the double keeper at one position not-allowed rule as positive, though. I purposely made Parish our 2nd QB keeper to see if we could afford both a promising young 'un and the All-Universe Sammie.

I have FOF2K1 and would do the VC IIA challenge with it if the majority wants. I just find the interface to be so painful, that I haven't really evaluated the realism improvements.

[Alf]

Hi,

I've been following closely the VC II Brown challenge and I appreciate it a lot.

This is where I started knowing a little bit of FOF.

I totally agree with Subby as the Very Good points of the VC II is
- Web Site (with all stats)
- Dynasty Reports (easy to follow this Dynasty)
- Keepers is a must too (although it might be difficult according to Salary Cap if there are more difficult house rules ie, renegotiating contracts, no signing 4th year FA after FA period)

I've been playing FOF2K1 for two months now and would like to be part of the VC III Challenge if you guys start a new one with FOF2K1.

------------------

Alf

[This message has been edited by Alf (edited 03-13-2001).]

[Darkiller]

salut Alf

--
I'm all ok to continue VCII.
Unfortunately as I don't have FOF2K1 that would be impossible for me to follow on a "VCIII".
I still believe FOF2 is way better, with a more efficient game engine VCII is all about FOF2.

About rule changes :

It is true that we have won many many bowls over that past decade but let me raise a question :
how about Sammie McNight.
What if we just had the best player ever...
remember, after a string a bowl wins during the Blaine Davies era, we went more than 10 straight seasons without winning one...
All that to say that maybe we have an exceptionnal player and that when he'll be retired we won't be as dominant.

Of course we were still winning a lot of games even during the Lee Clark era.

I don't know what you guys think about it but I still belive that 2 keepers per GM is too much.
We should only have 1.
That would easier trades and let our team regenerates itself a lot more (less cohesion, more difficulty).

Obviously i'm willing to accept house rules.
i'm not too informed (though I should lol) about the WLC and GroupThink rules but yeah maybe we could adapt them to VCII.

Please feel free to enumerate as many house rules that you guys would like to see applied to VCII and we'll make a choice.

As for me, I have yet to play season 2040.
We'll have to select the 50th anniverary team later on.

[Alf]

Would there be a way to start a VC III Challenge based on FOF2K1 ?

------------------

Alf

[Subby]

Of course! That's what I have in mind...but since 2K1 was so thoroughly conquered in WLC, it might be worth installing some serious House Rules.

[Fritz]

Subby,

I would like to get into a VCIII if one materializes.

I have both FOF2 and 2K1 on my system.

[Alf]

You're right Subby, WLC showed that 2k1 could be conquered quite easily and we should emphasize the use of strict House Rules.

I think having keepers would already be a very good house rule.

As you suggested Subby, we should work house rules around VC II, WLC and GroupThink.

Groupthink Rules are here : http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~fof/ubb/...ML/000220.html

WLC rules are here :
Well, can't find them...

VC II rules (except Keppers) are here : http://www.geocities.com/fofbrowns/f.../vc_rules.html

I have no time until next WE (Birthday party tonight, and some house work to do) but I would really like to contribute to such a challenge.

------------------

Alf