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 / Restructuring the league Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 29 30 31 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2019-03-12 19:45:04 (ID: 100137508) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
And just for the sake of a complete picture: I still like the idea of earlier retiring players OR much more injuries when playing at highest level. Playing Elite should causes more headaches, and it does not at the moment. I agree with both of these suggestions, I'm in favour of more injuries, and for injuries that occur during games to be more variable too - with some extending beyond the game in which it happens. I would also like to see variable skill caps, with the talent rating of a player representing a rough average of what level the player can reach, but with the precise skill levels unknown. Maybe this could be tied into the scout predictions, or the initially drafted/youth pulled position - eg a player drafted as a RB will have higher potential on average in the carrying skills, and lower passing/tackling etc. This might change the current practice of everyone building players to order based on strength/speed/intel/tw levels, and make planning for future seasons more challenging. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2019-03-12 20:00:16 (ID: 100137510) Report Abuse |
|
OrangeCrush wrote:
taken away the mediacenter for Elite is not closing but widening the gap imo. It will hurt those teams coming to Elite and not reaching the playoff more, so you better save some money before you get to Elite  Correct. Using my team as an example, my Celtics break even most seasons - there are only 3 seasons in the last 15 in which we've made a significant loss, and 2 have been due to rare dabbles on the TM - the 3rd was last season when we failed to make the playoffs and were eliminated from the SuperCup early. Breaking even each season is a matter of stupid pride for me more than anything at the moment. Take away the media centre and it just means I have a bigger buffer of cash than my rivals, and can keep going at my current expenditure level for a lot longer. And for newer teams entering Elite, it would be a nightmare for them. Finances are not the issue imho, predictability of squad strength and development is - established teams have mastered the YA production line, they know exactly what they will need and when, and how long it takes. If you add more variability in terms of training peaks, player capability, and injuries, then that would have more of an impact. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2019-03-12 23:52:10 (ID: 100137522) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
And just for the sake of a complete picture: I still like the idea of earlier retiring players OR much more injuries when playing at highest level. Playing Elite should causes more headaches, and it does not at the moment. If you create too much of a headache you are liable to create an atmosphere of managers avoiding entry into ELITE and actually detracting from the experience of being there. ALSO if you start retiring players younger you are going to need to revamp exp gain AND largely increase the skill level of draft picks. More injuries - fine, but MUCH MORE? Don't go crazy. And yes it is more difficult to have a winning record and staying in ELITE. Last season I had 11 wins and still got relegated (while some really bad teams got to stay.) Maybe you need to find a way for quality teams to stay.. Like increase to 5 teams per division or maybe only relegate 1 per division. Last edited on 2019-03-13 00:00:50 by punch drunk |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-03-13 12:45:44 (ID: 100137542) Report Abuse |
|
5 teams per division just sounds stupid now. As long as the relegation works per division you will have unfair results with 2nd placed team in division X having a worse record than 3rd placed team in division Y. There's nothing you can do about that given the constraints of the game. I understand that it's unfair that I'll get to stay this season with my 6 wins and that you got relegated with your 11 wins but proposing completely ridiculous solutions like 5 teams per division would just make things worse.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-03-13 12:48:50 (ID: 100137543) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
pete wrote:
And just for the sake of a complete picture: I still like the idea of earlier retiring players OR much more injuries when playing at highest level. Playing Elite should causes more headaches, and it does not at the moment. I agree with both of these suggestions, I'm in favour of more injuries, and for injuries that occur during games to be more variable too - with some extending beyond the game in which it happens. We would need to be able to manage our subs much differently than today though. For example, I usually rotate 3 DEs, if one goes down I would like my 4th DE to rotate with the 2 healthy ones. Or, I have 3 QBs, I want the #1 to play all snaps unless hurt, then #2 and I would like #3 to come in only if #1 & #2 are hurt. We can't do either of these things now, until we can do that I think more injuries would just increase the luck factor without giving managers the tools to deal with the random draws. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2019-03-13 13:08:10 (ID: 100137546) Report Abuse |
|
Of course, these are options that would *need* to be added.
Maybe an extra check box.. "If initially chosen starter becomes injured, this player enters the starting rotation" My DC typically has 3-4 starters checked for OLB for example, but with a few backups listed below (who do not have the 'starter' box checked. The option above would give the manager greater control over how the those backups are utilised. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
marinarul10
|
posted: 2019-03-13 13:28:55 (ID: 100137547) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
5 teams per division just sounds stupid now. As long as the relegation works per division you will have unfair results with 2nd placed team in division X having a worse record than 3rd placed team in division Y. There's nothing you can do about that given the constraints of the game. I understand that it's unfair that I'll get to stay this season with my 6 wins and that you got relegated with your 11 wins but proposing completely ridiculous solutions like 5 teams per division would just make things worse. What do you guys think about an ALLSTARS league above Elite? 16 teams, AC and NC conferences, two divisions(4 teams each) in each conference. 6 Teams per conference in the playoffs, the other 2 get relegated and replaced by Divisional Elite winners. Extra promotions in the first season in all actual leagues.... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
PJRAVENS
|
posted: 2019-03-13 13:43:23 (ID: 100137548) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
5 teams per division just sounds stupid now. As long as the relegation works per division you will have unfair results with 2nd placed team in division X having a worse record than 3rd placed team in division Y. There's nothing you can do about that given the constraints of the game. I understand that it's unfair that I'll get to stay this season with my 6 wins and that you got relegated with your 11 wins but proposing completely ridiculous solutions like 5 teams per division would just make things worse. It is not unfair. The record of teams that are not in the same division cannot be compared. They did not play against the same teams in the regular season. Last edited on 2019-03-13 13:44:56 by PJRAVENS |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-03-13 13:53:38 (ID: 100137549) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
Of course, these are options that would *need* to be added. Maybe an extra check box.. "If initially chosen starter becomes injured, this player enters the starting rotation" My DC typically has 3-4 starters checked for OLB for example, but with a few backups listed below (who do not have the 'starter' box checked. The option above would give the manager greater control over how the those backups are utilised. Glad we agree that these options *need* to be added. Once they are I'd be fine with a more realistic number of injuries of course. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2019-03-13 13:56:04 (ID: 100137550) Report Abuse |
|
PJRAVENS wrote:
Meitheisman wrote:
5 teams per division just sounds stupid now. As long as the relegation works per division you will have unfair results with 2nd placed team in division X having a worse record than 3rd placed team in division Y. There's nothing you can do about that given the constraints of the game. I understand that it's unfair that I'll get to stay this season with my 6 wins and that you got relegated with your 11 wins but proposing completely ridiculous solutions like 5 teams per division would just make things worse. It is not unfair. The record of teams that are not in the same division cannot be compared. They did not play against the same teams in the regular season. Of course we played different schedules but I think it's fair to say that your team had a better season than mine in Elite this season and that you currently have a better team yet I'm staying up and you're relegating. This is what I'm refering to when I say "unfair", the fact that a better team can get relegated while a weaker team stays up but as I said in the above post there's nothing we can do about that given the current constraints. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 29 30 31 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Restructuring the league | |
