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 / Suggestions / Faster Climb Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 7 8 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
bwadders76
|
posted: 2012-10-07 09:01:43 (ID: 60425) Report Abuse |
|
Some people like this idea some don't. But can someone please explain where this cutoff point is going to be for the new players?
If it starts from S6 what about the guys who started during S5? Suddenly you will have a team who has spent the best part of a season still being the lowest rated teams in RZA because those who joined later than them have been given a bump up. 9 draft quality players being given straight away upon completion of the license? I think that is far too many you want to give teams a bump up not a catapult up. I agree we need to try to help keep new players in the game but there are several teams who join up and never log back in. Newer sides are going to be more likely have a higher turnover in teams but lets just say we give them 9 draftees from the completion of their license and they decide to stay because it's easier for them to be competitive from the start. What happens when the majoirty of these up and quit because they reach the next ceiling? Then what about the teams who are slightly more established and they suddenly go from a competitive 2.x side to the whipping boys because they haven't got 9 draftees in their squad? Until we have some evidence to prove this is why teams leave the game then I think this should remain what it is.... a suggestion not a way forward |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oddball
|
posted: 2012-10-07 09:22:26 (ID: 60427) Report Abuse |
|
what is going on with the world! why cant people just earn their achievements instead of being handed everything and spoon fed!.
team A is better than mine its not fair i want 20 drafts to make up for it.!! I want a top player free off the TM every time a top team gets one but its not going to happen. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
MTS1972
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:09:19 (ID: 60446) Report Abuse |
|
i agree with Oddball - starter teams are just that - and if we are looking to RL for comparisons, well how long does it take expansion teams to make a full run at the SB? In games such as RZA that are ongoing, there will always be a top, middle and lower tier of teams - start at the bottom and work your way up - if a manager puts in some thought and effort, he'll attain success - and i guess eventually the pyramid flattens out - it just takes some doing getting there and you cant expect to go 15-1 every season.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:11:36 (ID: 60447) Report Abuse |
|
The ratings of the last few managers that say it's all good -
Ranagol - 52 Lee1950 - 57 Monkey - 54 Oddball - 54 
I want to hear these words from someone in the low 40s or 30s.  Last edited on 2012-10-07 13:15:49 by hosh13 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:18:02 (ID: 60450) Report Abuse |
|
bwadders76 wrote:
Then what about the teams who are slightly more established and they suddenly go from a competitive 2.x side to the whipping boys because they haven't got 9 draftees in their squad? This is easy to sort out. The new teams get x draftees. The teams that have been around for every draft get none. Then there is a sliding scale for everyone in between. That's what could be done if this was introduced. Like I said - squash! 
No one overtakes anyone. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:20:37 (ID: 60452) Report Abuse |
|
MTS1972 wrote:
i agree with Oddball - starter teams are just that - and if we are looking to RL for comparisons, well how long does it take expansion teams to make a full run at the SB? In games such as RZA that are ongoing, there will always be a top, middle and lower tier of teams - start at the bottom and work your way up - if a manager puts in some thought and effort, he'll attain success - and i guess eventually the pyramid flattens out - it just takes some doing getting there and you cant expect to go 15-1 every season. How long do you think a new manager should have to pay his dues b4 being able to be #1 ? How long do you think a new manager, who is perfect, will take to be #1 as the game stands now? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
MTS1972
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:30:43 (ID: 60454) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
MTS1972 wrote:
i agree with Oddball - starter teams are just that - and if we are looking to RL for comparisons, well how long does it take expansion teams to make a full run at the SB? In games such as RZA that are ongoing, there will always be a top, middle and lower tier of teams - start at the bottom and work your way up - if a manager puts in some thought and effort, he'll attain success - and i guess eventually the pyramid flattens out - it just takes some doing getting there and you cant expect to go 15-1 every season. How long do you think a new manager should have to pay his dues b4 being able to be #1 ? How long do you think a new manager, who is perfect, will take to be #1 as the game stands now? I doubt any manager starting now can ever reach #1 - however you gauge that. But any new manager now can relatively quickly get success and become competative and start becoming a force. I started a few days before Season 4 started - had no experience of TOG so came in blind - i guessed at the Admirals league and went into 2.2. But through reading the manual thoroughly, researching the forum, asking questions of a few managers that seemed to be in the know - and also through swapping notes and ideas with my mate wadders who started a few weeks before me - i quickly grasped the game concept - drew my own targets and strategies and went for it. Result: 15-1 in my first season, losing in the Conference game to the eventual bowl winners, being BOT flushed upto 1.1, going 6-10 in that league and 14-1 in my SuperCup division - beating teams like the Dapper Dandies, Driegieu Cymreig and others along the way, and running teams like Galrauch Raiders, Flying Donkeys, Cheshire Cats very close. And getting a few pastings. It can be done. I had no bonus players or freebies along the way - and im not the only player who has done it to get to this stage either - which IMO is decent after 2 seasons, missing the first 3. See the Shard End Sharks, Firenze Fappers, Sidcup Scarfish and i dare say more as well. Will i ever get to number 1? No. Do i care? No. My aims are to keep developing, try and make the playoffs in both league and SC, and become established at my own level. Not every team can be a Man Utd or Chelsea. But teams can become an Everton, Fulham, Tottenham etc. That should be a new managers aim Last edited on 2012-10-07 13:31:25 by MTS1972 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
bwadders76
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:39:49 (ID: 60455) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
MTS1972 wrote:
i agree with Oddball - starter teams are just that - and if we are looking to RL for comparisons, well how long does it take expansion teams to make a full run at the SB? In games such as RZA that are ongoing, there will always be a top, middle and lower tier of teams - start at the bottom and work your way up - if a manager puts in some thought and effort, he'll attain success - and i guess eventually the pyramid flattens out - it just takes some doing getting there and you cant expect to go 15-1 every season. How long do you think a new manager should have to pay his dues b4 being able to be #1 ? How long do you think a new manager, who is perfect, will take to be #1 as the game stands now? The general opinion seems to be around 4 seasons which was the same as the quickest expansion side to win the superbowl in the Baltimore Ravens (and they wasn't an expansion side it was a relocation of the Cleveland Browns). Whats four seasons in this game? Approximately one year give or take a few weeks |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2012-10-07 13:53:01 (ID: 60456) Report Abuse |
|
4 seasons? Hopeless optimism imo.
Like I said elsewhere, the teams that have been here for 5 seasons are over 55 in rating and continue to increase. AND now their YAs are at full capacity! (Free players and money) AND they are in plenty of playoff games so more money to fund mega rosters! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
bwadders76
|
posted: 2012-10-07 14:08:03 (ID: 60457) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
4 seasons? Hopeless optimism imo.
Like I said elsewhere, the teams that have been here for 5 seasons are over 55 in rating and continue to increase. AND now their YAs are at full capacity! (Free players and money) AND they are in plenty of playoff games so more money to fund mega rosters! When I started the top teams were rated around 48% - 50% and I was at 35%. The top teams are now around 55% and I am at just under 47% so the gap is closing slightly. My YA is full of players with TW and INT in the mid 30's upwards also so and in a couple of seasons 8 or 9 of those will be promoted to the first team. Please show me some evidence that these new sides quit because they can't catch up? My league was full just over a week ago now there are 7 bot teams six of them signed up and never logged back in so they never saw a game played out or anything. That's down to general turnover nothing else. You wont catch the fish if you throw the hook into the water and pull it out after five seconds. I think this suggestion should be shelved until the end of season 6 and in the meantime if Pete can organise an email to go to managers when they go bot with a short questionaire we may have some grounds on which to base an arguement. You wouldn't expect to train for a job and spend ten years doing it then some kid comes in fresh out of school learns a bit for 6 months then have him put on the same salary now would you? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 7 8 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Faster Climb | |
