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 / Transfer Market - Read OP Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-01-30 22:29:02 (ID: 79705) Report Abuse |
|
In an effort to try find ways to improve the current TM system I'm creating this thread to ask people to post what they dislike about the current system.
Rather than going around and around in circles I'm hoping to get all the problems here in one place, and once we have that we can start thinking about solutions. I'll u p d a t e this post regularly with all the comments. Please try keep this like the formations thread in suggestions so we can have everything as compact as possible. Also any mentioning of an ebay system outside of this paragraph is an automatic 5mil fine, we've already had the discussion and its not going to happen. If you'd like to talk about it use one of the other 20 threads about it this month. So to get the ball rolling here's what I believe are the most frequently brought up complaints: 1) People can't be online at the time bids are ending. 2) Bid wars that last 30/40 mins past the deadline. Anything else? I suspect it won't take long to gather a list of problems so maybe give it a few days then we can ask people to start making posts like: " holmeboy wrote:
Bid wars that last 30/40 mins past the deadline. Solution: Shorten time extention after last bid from 2 minutes to 1 minute that would make bid wars shorter." Once we have a list of problems and solutions we can hopefully come up with a system everyone can agree on and run it by Pete. Thanks guys Last edited on 2013-01-30 22:35:05 by holmeboy |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
ScottWAR
|
posted: 2013-01-31 04:54:15 (ID: 79750) Report Abuse |
|
So,...the issue is the bid wars after the deadline? People waiting until the last minute and putting in a bid to try and snatch away the auction at the last second.
A few ideas- 1- The auction has a deadline.........make it just that a deadline....no time extensions. OR 2- Dont list the actual deadline. If people dont know when the auction ends,..they cant jump in at the last second. You dont have to be online for an auction to end,...if nobody knows when it ends. OR 3- List a deadline,...and if there is a bid in the last 10 minutes,,,,,then extend the deadline by a random amount,...but no more. Or some combination of the 3. Last edited on 2013-01-31 04:59:44 by ScottWAR |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Beergut2
|
posted: 2013-02-03 13:18:01 (ID: 80451) Report Abuse |
|
The bid wars are so annoying. A lot of people can't seem to grasp the fact that waiting until the last second just extends the bid time by 2 minutes. There is no Ebay sniping here people! Would it at least be possible to post a note next to the button where you send your bid explaining that? I'm sick of having to wait the entire 2 minutes to bid again. You'd think after one or two extensions they would get it but they just don't...
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-02-03 13:31:12 (ID: 80453) Report Abuse |
|
Lol forgot I created this and was thinking 'oh no another TM thread
 '
I completely agree Beergut. I could deal with it if they bid a reasonable amount, but its always the minimum! Just wanted to quote an excellent post by shimauma: shimauma wrote:
I made an attempt at creating a list of the suggestions, it's not complete in any way. I also added some of my own suggestions to it: E-bay style: - limited or unlimited to your current funds - set deadlines - Standard starting price? Hidden bids: - limited or unlimited to your current funds - offer a salary + a signing bonus + a contract? The player can take all these factors into consideration to decide which bid he accepts. - Placing a bid costs? - - Different visibility on bids and prices for them. For example, a visible bid for let's say $10k is fully visible to other managers, while a bid for $50k is completely invisible. Could have a semi-visible option as well, where you can see that he has recieved a bid, but not the details of it. Tweaking the current system: - seller can set a minimum initial price - less time extension when bidding close to deadline, ie from 2 minutes to 1 - increase % of minimum overbid. This is at +5% currently, raise to +10%? - you can only release players to the free market, not sell them for profit Does anyone have anything else they want to add about the current system? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Nogard
|
posted: 2013-02-03 13:45:44 (ID: 80455) Report Abuse |
|
Yeah limit the amount of your bids by the money you have in the bank.
example Money in the bank: 100 M you have the highest bid on player A 90M you have the highest bid on player B 50M you have the highest bid on player C 80M the transfer for Player D is over you won and have to pay 40M this is possible now even for more players. I think this shouldn´t be possible. you bought player D for 40M so you should only be able to bid 100M-40M = 60M on other players. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
kyle-rowdy-busch
|
posted: 2013-02-03 15:30:37 (ID: 80466) Report Abuse |
|
put a limit of bids a player can place in 1 day, or 1 player?
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Chatral
|
posted: 2013-02-03 16:02:10 (ID: 80468) Report Abuse |
|
holmeboy wrote:
Also any mentioning of an ebay system outside of this paragraph is an automatic 5mil fine, we've already had the discussion and its not going to happen. Where would one locate the aforementioned discussion about that. . . system. . . I would be interested in understanding the rational argument behind the aversion to that. . . . system. . . that we don't mention. . . to be better informed in the debate. Other than 'we're not going to have it' I can't find out 'why' - and I think understanding that would help me. Ps. whomever replies - if you could just post a link to the relevant post that would be grand, since continuance of that discussion is clearly unwelcome here. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
BuzzKill10
|
posted: 2013-02-03 16:19:07 (ID: 80472) Report Abuse |
|
in a Formula One game that I used to play, everyone would place a bid on a player, e.g. wage, years for the contract, and then once the day rolled over who ever made the highest bid won the driver's services.
this could be implemented into this game where you place on bid on a player and the highest bid wins! if the player is a free agent then the bids could be structured around wage, years for the contract and a possible signing bonus? if the player is being sold then you could place a bid for transfer money and the team selling gets to choose the best bid (possibly could be abused?) or it could just be automatically the highest bid wins. Once the player is transferred you must then negotiate your own contract with him? While this system could lead to a spike in transfer prices (although the need to have money to pay for your players and staff could prevent this) it would end the problem of having a prolonged bidding war which no one really has time for! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-02-03 16:23:55 (ID: 80474) Report Abuse |
|
Chatral wrote:
holmeboy wrote:
Also any mentioning of an ebay system outside of this paragraph is an automatic 5mil fine, we've already had the discussion and its not going to happen. Where would one locate the aforementioned discussion about that. . . system. . . I would be interested in understanding the rational argument behind the aversion to that. . . . system. . . that we don't mention. . . to be better informed in the debate. Other than 'we're not going to have it' I can't find out 'why' - and I think understanding that would help me. Ps. whomever replies - if you could just post a link to the relevant post that would be grand, since continuance of that discussion is clearly unwelcome here. Hey. Obviously I'm only joking. Only put that bit in because most of these threads end up being 'why can't we have the e**y system?' And everything just ends up going around in circles (like I mentioned in the first post) and don't want that happening again here. Pete's already said he doesn't want to go that route so I'm trying to avoid discussion about it itt. There is a (long) thread where Pete talked about his reluctance to use it - I'll try find the thread for you now.` Edit: Here you go. Sorry don't know exactly where the post is, but it might be better working your way back as I think it's towards the end. Last edited on 2013-02-03 16:26:30 by holmeboy |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Chatral
|
posted: 2013-02-03 17:45:22 (ID: 80485) Report Abuse |
|
@Holmeboy
Thank you for the link. Pete summarized his position in that thread as 1) he doesn't like that system 2) it favors the richest player and 3) he doesn't like the system. On seeing this my conclusion swiftly became that I do not see merit in further debate. The reason is this - any game system normally has one or two fundamental mechanics, such as wealth, or in MMORPG sometimes a combination of wealth and experience (for your 93rd level Elf Archer-Assassin, or whatever it is). I don't think Pete knows how to control the flow of wealth in the RZA system (sorry Pete, you're a god but you have got this one wrong). Heck, it's a challenge in any game system; I've done consultancy work for Pro game companies and, after player-relations, game-balance is normally the biggest problem they face for sustainability reasons. I'm a free marketeer and would argue that 'you can only spend it once'. So what if Captain Rich has a billion $ in his account and wants to spend it all on a Draftee for sale by Mr Newbie, a Rookie Manager - it redistributes that in-game 'power' in an instant. It's super-efficient and rich clubs being able to blow their wad in a single hit is fantastic for the game. If you successfully constrain the spending of big clubs via whatever mechanic (in the case of the TM, time-dependent bidding), all they will do if they cannot be online at the end of an auction is bid-up other clubs and cause those - potentially smaller clubs - to spend more of their cash. It actually perpetuates wealth staying with the wealthy. It becomes impossible to spend (a complaint I've seen on a number of threads) unless you are BOTH a rich club AND online a lot. The current system doesn't limit the power of the rich - just those who are cash rich AND time poor. Why do I make this point? I'm not saying that - the forbidden system - is the only solution, but if the game designer doesn't want to let rich clubs spend their winnings on furthering their success, you will be unable to find a $-based solution to trades. All you will do is provide a forum in which people will get pissed at each other (which is largely what I found on that last thread). I fear you are on a hiding to nothing. The only solution I can see is that you FUNDAMENTALLY change the game so that for example $ is ONLY spent on player salaries, and that players can ONLY be acquired via a draft - like in the good old days of 1980s NFL. Anything else will just be changing the shape of the current problem, without fixing it. It's fine, it's Pete's game - but I feel his starting position will prohibit useful debate. Let's just live with what we've got (or go somewhere else). For me - let the spice (sorry, the cash) flow. . . Last edited on 2013-02-03 17:46:57 by Chatral |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Transfer Market - Read OP | |
