no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
Main / Discussions / rule clarification Search Forum | |
Navigation: |< < 1 2 8 9 10 > >| | |
Poster | Message |
gabriel06
|
posted: 2017-05-03 15:47:31 (ID: 100103281) Report Abuse |
sorry, I did think you were the OP - my bad for not checking - I think what he did was scandalous, which was the basis of my comment(s).
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2017-05-03 21:09:01 (ID: 100103290) Report Abuse |
Fincyril wrote:
Losing on purpose is just wrong. It does not matter how you proceed. Closing the stadium is actually a good idea. No supporter would pay a ticket to see his team not even trying... Totally agree - this is just scandalous! |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2017-05-03 21:23:54 (ID: 100103292) Report Abuse | |
I do not understand why people throw away games using this style, and deal with less income and losing draft picks...I really don't get it. However, it seems managers try to push this to the max possible. This makes me actually thinking about lowering the thresholds. So...maybe this should be active from season X on:
1 game tanking is OK, all penalties are active if the manager is tanking his second game in 1 season. The income penalty is active for all league games, including playoffs. However, I cannot do it by lowering the attendance, since this would affect the opps team as well. Man, I hate it to write code just to create penalties for abuse...I really hate to waste my time this way |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Fincyril
|
posted: 2017-05-03 22:07:01 (ID: 100103294) Report Abuse |
I do not know how hard it would be to code but dropping in the draft would make it dissuasive...
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
thomastem
|
posted: 2017-05-03 22:55:04 (ID: 100103296) Report Abuse |
Fincyril wrote:
I do not know how hard it would be to code but dropping in the draft would make it dissuasive... If you want to be dissuasive picks in the draft are nothing. Break out the Judas Chair that should do the trick. Source: http://www.medievality.com/images/torture/judas-cradle.jpg |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Rock777
|
posted: 2017-05-03 23:47:26 (ID: 100103298) Report Abuse |
thomastem wrote:
Rock777 wrote:
thomastem wrote:
Also I wonder where the outrage is when a team goes inactive in the middle of the season and that inactive team is set to tank the balance of the season affecting playoff races in just about every league in every season? That is exactly why I had proposed holding off on bottizing a team until the end of the season. But unfortunately Pete didn't want to add extra tasks to the season flip. Okay. I was told when I first joined RZA that a poll was taken and that that vast majority of community voted to have bots as they currently are, an automated tanking team. If the reason, or one of the reasons is because it can't be done or is very difficult to do technically or is time intensive to Pete then there is no reason for me to bring this up from time to time. If it is because the majority of the community wants inactive teams to tank with the bot function then the same community has no right to have outrage when a human tanks against a bot and it doesn't affect any other humans negatively. Perhaps I have misunderstood the reason why bots are as they are? I think you have it half right. People want bots to demote, but I don't think anyone is really happy with teams going bot mid-season as it messes up the leagues' integrity. Delayed Scrubbing |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
philjc
|
posted: 2017-05-04 10:01:38 (ID: 100103313) Report Abuse |
I agree that a one game warning is enough.
It is surely almost impossible to have these kind of gameplans by accident? So to repeat that is entirely your own fault. So 1 game warning, if it is repeated then take the draft picks, and fine them 50% of their current bank roll. That should be sufficient, and perhaps presents less of a coding problem than the attendance punishment? |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
thomastem
|
posted: 2017-05-04 11:40:50 (ID: 100103323) Report Abuse |
philjc wrote:
I agree that a one game warning is enough. It is surely almost impossible to have these kind of gameplans by accident? So to repeat that is entirely your own fault. So 1 game warning, if it is repeated then take the draft picks, and fine them 50% of their current bank roll. That should be sufficient, and perhaps presents less of a coding problem than the attendance punishment? After or before you have torn off their finger nails with a rusty pliers? I'm thinking before as if you do it after the missing nails may still be on their mind and they may not care as much. Perhaps a poll is in order? |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Cheesehead
|
posted: 2017-05-04 12:57:07 (ID: 100103326) Report Abuse |
Theoretical question: what should happen if someone fires all their players to the minimum level in order to lose games.
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2017-05-04 20:16:50 (ID: 100103340) Report Abuse |
philjc wrote:
I agree that a one game warning is enough. It is surely almost impossible to have these kind of gameplans by accident? So to repeat that is entirely your own fault. So 1 game warning, if it is repeated then take the draft picks, and fine them 50% of their current bank roll. That should be sufficient, and perhaps presents less of a coding problem than the attendance punishment? 50% of bank roll should be a good incentive. Other penalties could include: No draft picks No YA players A ban on accessing the TM These could all initially be for a season but could be extended for serial offenders. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
reply Mark this thread unread | |
Navigation: |< < 1 2 8 9 10 > >| | |
Main / Discussions / rule clarification |