Fantasy Fanatics Podcast #5

Revraiser wrote:

What do u mean, more than the standard weekly rise ?  What do you mean 'ruining' ?

What i meant was that say a player is valued at 500K, if you were to buy him and he had 20% ownership, then perhaps they charge you a 20% "signing fee" or something based on its current worth (so he ends up costing you 500K + 100K). You could even make it so it only applies if the ownership is over a certain %, so say if they only had 9% ownership then its only 500K you paid. I'm not certain on exactly how it should/could/would work but Milchy said there is already some examples so you could probably just start with that and tweak it if needed.
What i meant by ruining is that I don't like the idea that if a player had like 50% ownership (say Cam Smith in the days of old) they likely won't be the premier choice because either their score is lowered or a lesser owned player is going to score higher (I realise you suggested the higher score, not lowering anyone), even though they didn't necessarily do any more in the game. I'd rather the scores reflect the performances and the ownership be reflected in the cost (so if you manage your team correctly you can still choose to bring in those high scoring but highly owned guns). I think it would make the whole season quite interesting as you not only have to look at your cows and when they might peak but you'd have to guess when the guns you want to upgrade to are all going to be jumped on and start rising in cost, or what alternative POD's you might consider.