This is unacceptable....

[X3NEIZE]

Originally Posted by jda

What I've seen is you doing a lot of insinuating in the thread. Just chill, okay?

lol I'm not insinuating anything, I'm pretty upfront ... do I care? not anymore hence the .

Sorry if you don't agree with me not liking tanking or theme teams as you call it... well I don't... OK?

[MoPetey]

Originally Posted by Mudster

Just an idea for those concerned about the PP being earned against "tankers". Why not give a percentage amount of points for achievements based on the point level average of the 25 man rosters? If you have a team full of 100's and play the all iron team, you might only get 25% (or whatever) of the points for achievements and vice versa. This gives incentive to build a "team" instead of just collecting all stars. This puts more incentive into strategy and cleverness. The whales might get less points this way, but as someone said earlier, the achievement points earned are laughable for the most part compared to the amount of money they throw into the game for PP.

Yeah, I don't like this idea either. If someone wants to tank or do an extreme theme change, why do their leaguemates get punished? We want to incentivize teams to stay at higher levels or feel free to change strategies, but not profit later because of it.

Inspired by other games' loot systems, what if you scaled the PP earned by the player that achieved it? The PP earned for a player achievement can be scaled based on the player card level compared to the league level. For example: If I have a team in Gold, a gold player gets 100% of the PP for a player achievement, a Diamond player gets 85%, and a Silver gets 115%. That way, a team wouldn't want to tank back down to Bronze and put in their Perfects, because they would then earn 40% of the player achievement PP, but a team that finds a way to use a Bronze card in Gold gets a 30% bump in PP. You could show the multiplier in the achievement notification to be transparent.

This is a rough idea and I don't think you would scale team achievements, but the key is not to penalize the other teams in the league. Sure, they are getting "tainted" PP, but nobody is getting a Perfect in the AH because they beat up PT's equivalent of the Marlins... (Not that I'm calling HiDesertAce the Marlins. He's doing something a lot cooler than the Marlins.)

[HRBaker]

I still think the problem is the spread in talent in Perfect Level is too great.

Close the talent spread as you move up each level, so a 10-15 game spread between teams at that level is HUGE. When your only 10 games out, it won't take much of a change to gain on the leaders - and in such a scenario, there's a lot less reason to even think about tanking.

Close up the talent spread, and tanking would mostly go away.

As I posted a while back, the current system is actually reversed - there's more of a talent spread in Perfect than any other level - and Iron has the smallest.

Numbers from last week across 10 leagues at each level...

Level AVG.GB

IRON 21
BRONZE 24
SILVER 29
GOLD 31
DIAMOND 38
PERFECT 45

Who is surprised that someone that works hard to get to perfect finds themselves 45 games behind with no hope is looking for a way out.

[X3NEIZE]

Originally Posted by HRBaker

I still think the problem is the spread in talent in Perfect Level is too great.

Close the talent spread as you move up each level, so a 10-15 game spread between teams at that level is HUGE. When your only 10 games out, it won't take much of a change to gain on the leaders - and in such a scenario, there's a lot less reason to even think about tanking.

Close up the talent spread, and tanking would mostly go away.

As I posted a while back, the current system is actually reversed - there's more of a talent spread in Perfect than any other level - and Iron has the smallest.



Numbers from last week across 10 leagues at each level...

Level AVG.GB

IRON 21
BRONZE 24
SILVER 29
GOLD 31
DIAMOND 38
PERFECT 45

Who is surprised that someone that works hard to get to perfect finds themselves 45 games behind with no hope is looking for a way out.

Is this average between the last team and the first ranked one?

[HRBaker]

Originally Posted by X3NEIZE

Is this average between the last team and the first ranked one?

Yes, average GB across all 6 divisions in the 10 leagues I checked at each level.

[X3NEIZE]

Originally Posted by HRBaker

Yes, average GB across all 6 divisions in the 10 leagues I checked at each level.

Wow OK, that's bad.

[neugey]

Originally Posted by MoPetey

Yeah, I don't like this idea either. If someone wants to tank or do an extreme theme change, why do their leaguemates get punished? We want to incentivize teams to stay at higher levels or feel free to change strategies, but not profit later because of it.

Inspired by other games' loot systems, what if you scaled the PP earned by the player that achieved it? The PP earned for a player achievement can be scaled based on the player card level compared to the league level. For example: If I have a team in Gold, a gold player gets 100% of the PP for a player achievement, a Diamond player gets 85%, and a Silver gets 115%. That way, a team wouldn't want to tank back down to Bronze and put in their Perfects, because they would then earn 40% of the player achievement PP, but a team that finds a way to use a Bronze card in Gold gets a 30% bump in PP. You could show the multiplier in the achievement notification to be transparent.

This is a rough idea and I don't think you would scale team achievements, but the key is not to penalize the other teams in the league. Sure, they are getting "tainted" PP, but nobody is getting a Perfect in the AH because they beat up PT's equivalent of the Marlins... (Not that I'm calling HiDesertAce the Marlins. He's doing something a lot cooler than the Marlins.)

This is variant of Mudster's idea that I was also thinking of. Would balance things nicely. Having Perfect Cy Young throw a no-hitter at perfect league level should be a much larger PP payout than him doing the same at the bronze league level.


That being said, I'm not sure if this is something that should change until OOTP 21. Change the payout scales mid-stream is probably something that should be avoided unless it's really a huge issue. I think bumping up the relegation numbers is the top order of business, and one that shouldn't require much Dev time at all.

[webdox]

I still like the idea (whoever posted it) is would be the ability to skip to whatever level you want, up or down, so long as you have the players to play at that level and all your other players are frozen for the week/season.

If you are in Perfect and want to go down to Iron, you should be able to during the offseason and before seeding so long as you only play with players commensurate for the level and those players only. All cards higher than the level will be frozen until you decide what you want to do the following week.

Same would go if you are in Bronze and want to play your All Golden Boys team, jump up two levels and only be able to play with players at that level (or below).

It seems that at least outwardly it would solve the problem of the occasional whale who wants to beat up low grade metal boys...

[Lee]

Locking this as it has become unproductive and resulted in numerous reported posts. Please keep it civil.