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 / Renovation of RZA structure Search Forum | |||||||
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 5 > >| | |||||||
| Rating: | |||||||
Poll: Allow one manager to have more than one team - with no additional rules,
Poll closed,
votes: 77
|
|||||||
| Poster | Message | ||||||
| posted: 2025-05-31 19:36:04 (ID: 100191526) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |||||||
|
butchpt6 wrote:
Little disappointed how the 'vote'is going. Do we all like playing BOTs? The question as set was, a) should we allow cheating, b) should we not, c) or don’t you care. Given the question, I consider the voting to be surprising close. Last edited on 2025-05-31 19:36:21 by JohnHW |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-05-31 20:23:44 (ID: 100191528) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
That and on to do I not believe that many managers would manage a 2nd team on top.
Maybe, just my personal guess, 10%, which would be right now roughly 19 additional teams. A 2nd-team-approach won't solve the general problem, the shrinking user base. |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 07:48:22 (ID: 100191546) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
jack6 wrote:
Maybe, just my personal guess, 10%, which would be right now roughly 19 additional teams. A 2nd-team-approach won't solve the general problem, the shrinking user base. 19 is a guess - could be 10 or 30. But 19 extra teams would make a significant difference in leagues with a lot of bots. More meaningful matches, more fun. |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 09:33:03 (ID: 100191553) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |||||||
|
Everything here is about dealing with too few managers. There are two things. We need more new managers, and then they can't turn into bots again.
As for the second question, I don't know if Pete has any statistics on that. My impression is that after a few months, managers have a day that ruins everything they've spent months building. Soon it'll be that time again. It's the season rollover. New managers get their media center paid for by the system, but then suddenly it stops. At the same time, this is the day when one-skill monsters, trained one-sidedly without an HR department, get a huge salary. Firing players costs millions, and you're already bankrupt. Entire franchises explode on this one day. Can we somehow mitigate this day? My idea is that all new managers are born with a full-size stadium. The media center is already paid for for the current season, but starting with the new season, you have to take care of it yourself. Managers without an HR department can fire players for free during draft week. And if games against bots are boring, let's increase them to 60 or 65 percent OVR. Last edited on 2025-06-01 09:33:33 by hmpf22 |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 11:34:14 (ID: 100191556) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
For a certain time (years) I was sending a link to a survey, once a manager left the game. A few of them answered. Top answer was "learning curve too steep", followed by "underestimated the time this game needs".
|
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 14:12:02 (ID: 100191559) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
Tvllo wrote:
This season I win 10 of my 11 victory(in the next week I'm agaist a bot)agaist a bot team. This has not been a fun season. Tvllo started this thread with the issue above. The discussion has attracted quite a few comments and votes. So, I think it's worth exploring further. For example, is second teams the only answer, or is there another option (hmfp22 put forward another idea)? And if we want to explore second teams, can we deal with the concerns to reach a consensus? On running a second team (for which there may or may not be interest, as Jack6 says), there seem to be two issues: - Pete said by the far the biggest one is dealing with official matches between two clubs under the same management. How to prevent the manager artificially deciding which team wins? - The fear that some people will cheat. Other than matches between the two teams, the potential problem is with player transfers or TM bids. Official matches Does anyone have any suggestions on this one? TM bids Pete, is it possible to programme so the manager cannot bid on their other team's players? |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 15:14:13 (ID: 100191560) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
StuartW wrote:
Tvllo wrote:
This season I win 10 of my 11 victory(in the next week I'm agaist a bot)agaist a bot team. This has not been a fun season. Tvllo started this thread with the issue above. The discussion has attracted quite a few comments and votes. So, I think it's worth exploring further. For example, is second teams the only answer, or is there another option (hmfp22 put forward another idea)? And if we want to explore second teams, can we deal with the concerns to reach a consensus? On running a second team (for which there may or may not be interest, as Jack6 says), there seem to be two issues: - Pete said by the far the biggest one is dealing with official matches between two clubs under the same management. How to prevent the manager artificially deciding which team wins? - The fear that some people will cheat. Other than matches between the two teams, the potential problem is with player transfers or TM bids. Official matches Does anyone have any suggestions on this one? TM bids Pete, is it possible to programme so the manager cannot bid on their other team's players? I would say both issues have same solution. You need to know that the two teams have the same owner. Once you know that, I believe it should not be that hard to come up with rules, ways to apply them and put that into code. Like I said before, having more than one team in a manager game is not a new idea, it already exists and it can work without any problems. All you need is a way to have it under control, so you can have automated mechanics in the game... |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 15:41:59 (ID: 100191561) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
StuartW wrote:
TM bids Pete, is it possible to programme so the manager cannot bid on their other team's players? Only if we know about it. It is already that way since the beginning ... those wo feel bound to our rules have the disadvantage over those who don't care. In my opinion, the most important question should be: do we want to accept this or not ... |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 16:01:25 (ID: 100191562) Report Abuse | |||||||
|
pete wrote:
StuartW wrote:
TM bids Pete, is it possible to programme so the manager cannot bid on their other team's players? Only if we know about it. Accepting what you say, but just wanting to clarify (as I know nothing about programming)... Would we 'know about it' if a manager openly controls two teams? So, Team A1 cannot bid on Team A2 player, and A2 cannot bid on Team A1 player? Currently, as JohnHW as noted in this thread, someone could cheat - if they really want to do it. But they'd do it in a hidden way. |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| posted: 2025-06-01 17:30:16 (ID: 100191563) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse | |||||||
|
The main idea of this thread (I think) is to find a system to increase the number of players, so that anyone who joins the game finds it attractive, fun, and wants to stay for a long time. It's clear that this isn't currently the case.
More teams for current managers? This option already exists in other games (Hattrick, Buzzerbeater,...) and is designed for veteran players who already master the game, not for first-time players who already have enough work managing one team. I think we need to make the game easier for new players, simplifying their life in RZA even more. Offer prizes as they progress (money, good players,...), etc. Incentives to continue, of any kind. Looking at what other similar games are doing wouldn't be a bad idea. The problem with all of this is always the same: it requires work, a lot of work behind the scenes (work = money) to transform what's currently there into a more attractive product for newcomers. Hey, another option is to just leave everything as it is now. Whether we're 500, 50, or 50,000 players. 
Last edited on 2025-06-01 18:45:46 by Quimriera |
|||||||
| Quote Reply Edit | |||||||
| reply Mark this thread unread | |||||||
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 5 > >| | |||||||
| Main / Suggestions / Renovation of RZA structure | |||||||
