Login

Boomcheck · 03-25-2019, 07:37 PM

03-25-2019, 07:21 PMGrapehead Wrote: lmao proposing a rule to stop teams from doing something that didn't even work in the first place, this is top boomcheck

I made a suggestion because I feel like we need to keep in line with positions.

It literally costs 12M to change positions, so if a person pays I hope they get the most they can out of their investment. Teams should be looking to make moves and add, not just shove whatever they have excess in into holes just because it's allowed.

3 forward PK sounds silly, I made some alternative suggestion to maybe make it a certain archetype or something.

If it doesn't work in the first place what's with the opposition?

spooked · 03-25-2019, 07:39 PM

Get over it. Rule for something that didn't break the sim? Why? We don't need rules for no reason.

Grapehead · 03-25-2019, 07:43 PM

03-25-2019, 07:37 PMBoomcheck Wrote:
03-25-2019, 07:21 PMGrapehead Wrote: lmao proposing a rule to stop teams from doing something that didn't even work in the first place, this is top boomcheck

I made a suggestion because I feel like we need to keep in line with positions.

It literally costs 12M to change positions, so if a person pays I hope they get the most they can out of their investment. Teams should be looking to make moves and add, not just shove whatever they have excess in into holes just because it's allowed.

3 forward PK sounds silly, I made some alternative suggestion to maybe make it a certain archetype or something.

If it doesn't work in the first place what's with the opposition?

It's just a waste of HO's time to consider rules for things that aren't impacting the league. I get the $12m argument, but the sim does treat forwards and defensemen differently in all situations, so there is still benefit to making a change official. The vast majority of a player's ice time comes at their chosen position, but coaches sometimes need flexibility to try different things on special teams. I also get your point about this as it relates to the NHL, but they also don't have a rule against such a thing.

Boomcheck · 03-25-2019, 08:05 PM

03-25-2019, 07:43 PMGrapehead Wrote:
03-25-2019, 07:37 PMBoomcheck Wrote: I made a suggestion because I feel like we need to keep in line with positions.

It literally costs 12M to change positions, so if a person pays I hope they get the most they can out of their investment. Teams should be looking to make moves and add, not just shove whatever they have excess in into holes just because it's allowed.

3 forward PK sounds silly, I made some alternative suggestion to maybe make it a certain archetype or something.

If it doesn't work in the first place what's with the opposition?

It's just a waste of HO's time to consider rules for things that aren't impacting the league. I get the $12m argument, but the sim does treat forwards and defensemen differently in all situations, so there is still benefit to making a change official. The vast majority of a player's ice time comes at their chosen position, but coaches sometimes need flexibility to try different things on special teams. I also get your point about this as it relates to the NHL, but they also don't have a rule against such a thing.

It would be in the same spirit as the 12M rule. 4D 1D is plenty of flexibility.
Also if they were treated a lot differently in the sim then why even have the 12M wall?

GCool · 03-25-2019, 09:18 PM

Grapehead ' Wrote: It's just a waste of HO's time to consider rules for things that aren't impacting the league.

QFT

Bojo is automating the bank at a great pace, let's talk about that and changing the archetype system, not this rn thanks

Grapehead · 03-25-2019, 09:47 PM

03-25-2019, 08:05 PMBoomcheck Wrote:
03-25-2019, 07:43 PMGrapehead Wrote: It's just a waste of HO's time to consider rules for things that aren't impacting the league. I get the $12m argument, but the sim does treat forwards and defensemen differently in all situations, so there is still benefit to making a change official. The vast majority of a player's ice time comes at their chosen position, but coaches sometimes need flexibility to try different things on special teams. I also get your point about this as it relates to the NHL, but they also don't have a rule against such a thing.

It would be in the same spirit as the 12M rule. 4D 1D is plenty of flexibility.
Also if they were treated a lot differently in the sim then why even have the 12M wall?

Personally I think $12m is steep, but I imagine the intention is to prevent people from switching back and forth as the team needs. If it were my call I'd make the free position change once per player rather than once per user, and that's it, no pay option.

Slappydoodle · 03-25-2019, 09:50 PM

Why is it that people have a problem with someone making a suggestion? To read some of the incredibly noxious and virulent posts in reaction to this thread is just disappointing. What is the point of acting like someone is attacking your family when they speak their mind? It helps no one to react in such a way.

Find a way to center yourself. Just calm down and chill a bit. This is not a war. Yelling down dissenting voices is a huge problem in society in general and this league in specific, right now. It’s ok to be challenged a little. It does not diminish you to have someone question something you believe in.

Grapehead · 03-25-2019, 09:55 PM

03-25-2019, 09:50 PMSlappydoodle Wrote: Why is it that people have a problem with someone making a suggestion? To read some of the incredibly noxious and virulent posts in reaction to this thread is just disappointing. What is the point of acting like someone is attacking your family when they speak their mind? It helps no one to react in such a way.

Find a way to center yourself. Just calm down and chill a bit. This is not a war. Yelling down dissenting voices is a huge problem in society in general and this league in specific, right now. It’s ok to be challenged a little. It does not diminish you to have someone question something you believe in.

I dunno... I think everything's going pretty civil in this thread. Several people have come into the thread to disagree with boomcheck, but he's had reasonable exchanges with each person it would seem. Just because people don't agree with someone's suggestion, doesn't mean they're "yelling down dissenting voices". Maybe I missed someone throwing unnecessary insults, but I didn't see any really heated posts in this thread so I'm not sure this is one to rally the troops around.

Slappydoodle · 03-25-2019, 10:10 PM

03-25-2019, 09:55 PMGrapehead Wrote:
03-25-2019, 09:50 PMSlappydoodle Wrote: Why is it that people have a problem with someone making a suggestion? To read some of the incredibly noxious and virulent posts in reaction to this thread is just disappointing. What is the point of acting like someone is attacking your family when they speak their mind? It helps no one to react in such a way.

Find a way to center yourself. Just calm down and chill a bit. This is not a war. Yelling down dissenting voices is a huge problem in society in general and this league in specific, right now. It’s ok to be challenged a little. It does not diminish you to have someone question something you believe in.

I dunno... I think everything's going pretty civil in this thread. Several people have come into the thread to disagree with boomcheck, but he's had reasonable exchanges with each person it would seem. Just because people don't agree with someone's suggestion, doesn't mean they're "yelling down dissenting voices". Maybe I missed someone throwing unnecessary insults, but I didn't see any really heated posts in this thread so I'm not sure this is one to rally the troops around.

I see people asking if someone’s being “purposefully dense”, “lmfao”, a few “smh”. What is shaking your head at someone other than expressing ridicule at the idiocy of their suggestions? Stating that the HO is too busy to deal with such pettiness? This is a suggestion thread. It is specifically what it’s here for. I’m not saying this is world war three. But this is absolutely not a civil discourse. Arguing for or against a proposal is one thing. It’s the habit of impugning the motives of others and trying to ridicule their thoughts that I have a problem with.

Grapehead · 03-26-2019, 11:26 AM

03-25-2019, 10:10 PMSlappydoodle Wrote:
03-25-2019, 09:55 PMGrapehead Wrote: I dunno... I think everything's going pretty civil in this thread. Several people have come into the thread to disagree with boomcheck, but he's had reasonable exchanges with each person it would seem. Just because people don't agree with someone's suggestion, doesn't mean they're "yelling down dissenting voices". Maybe I missed someone throwing unnecessary insults, but I didn't see any really heated posts in this thread so I'm not sure this is one to rally the troops around.

I see people asking if someone’s being “purposefully dense”, “lmfao”, a few “smh”. What is shaking your head at someone other than expressing ridicule at the idiocy of their suggestions? Stating that the HO is too busy to deal with such pettiness? This is a suggestion thread. It is specifically what it’s here for. I’m not saying this is world war three. But this is absolutely not a civil discourse. Arguing for or against a proposal is one thing. It’s the habit of impugning the motives of others and trying to ridicule their thoughts that I have a problem with.

Boomcheck is free to post suggestions, and we're all free to dislike/disagree with that suggestion. Just so happens in the case of this suggestion, most people seem to disagree.

**.bojo** · 03-26-2019, 11:30 AM

03-26-2019, 11:26 AMGrapehead Wrote:
03-25-2019, 10:10 PMSlappydoodle Wrote: I see people asking if someone’s being “purposefully dense”, “lmfao”, a few “smh”. What is shaking your head at someone other than expressing ridicule at the idiocy of their suggestions? Stating that the HO is too busy to deal with such pettiness? This is a suggestion thread. It is specifically what it’s here for. I’m not saying this is world war three. But this is absolutely not a civil discourse. Arguing for or against a proposal is one thing. It’s the habit of impugning the motives of others and trying to ridicule their thoughts that I have a problem with.

Boomcheck is free to post suggestions, and we're all free to dislike/disagree with that suggestion. Just so happens in the case of this suggestion, most people seem to disagree.

you're insulting boomcheck directly. what are you even talking about

03-25-2019, 07:21 PMGrapehead Wrote: lmao proposing a rule to stop teams from doing something that didn't even work in the first place, this is top boomcheck

Grapehead · 03-26-2019, 11:35 AM

03-26-2019, 11:30 AM.bojo Wrote:
03-26-2019, 11:26 AMGrapehead Wrote: Boomcheck is free to post suggestions, and we're all free to dislike/disagree with that suggestion. Just so happens in the case of this suggestion, most people seem to disagree.

you're insulting boomcheck directly. what are you even talking about

03-25-2019, 07:21 PMGrapehead Wrote: lmao proposing a rule to stop teams from doing something that didn't even work in the first place, this is top boomcheck

You might infer an insult there, sure. I meant it more as an observation. Boomcheck and I exchanged messages in this thread that didn't include insults either, and I came out of it with a better understanding of his position tbh. I still disagree with making rules when there's little to no evidence that there's any issue at all.

Grapehead · 03-26-2019, 11:38 AM

Seriously, boomcheck doesn't seem the least bit insulted by the people disagreeing with him, and he's held strong on his points and written good replies to people. I really see no issue in this thread, especially by the SHL's standards.

@Boomcheck honestly sorry if my chirp crossed a line Cheers

**.bojo** · 03-26-2019, 11:48 AM

03-26-2019, 11:38 AMGrapehead Wrote: Seriously, boomcheck doesn't seem the least bit insulted by the people disagreeing with him, and he's held strong on his points and written good replies to people. I really see no issue in this thread, especially by the SHL's standards.

@Boomcheck honestly sorry if my chirp crossed a line

This more about Slappy's point where he just brought up a suggestion and people are being surprisingly defensive about why he's doing it.

It still makes sense to me. We don't allow people to switch on even strength, mostly because of realism. It's being suggested that maybe it makes sense to do something similar for special teams. Even the argument about "some defenders do play forward in the nhl" was brought up when we made the even strength change, yet it was still done.

Grapehead · 03-26-2019, 04:29 PM

03-26-2019, 11:48 AM.bojo Wrote:
03-26-2019, 11:38 AMGrapehead Wrote: Seriously, boomcheck doesn't seem the least bit insulted by the people disagreeing with him, and he's held strong on his points and written good replies to people. I really see no issue in this thread, especially by the SHL's standards.

@Boomcheck honestly sorry if my chirp crossed a line

This more about Slappy's point where he just brought up a suggestion and people are being surprisingly defensive about why he's doing it.

It still makes sense to me. We don't allow people to switch on even strength, mostly because of realism. It's being suggested that maybe it makes sense to do something similar for special teams. Even the argument about "some defenders do play forward in the nhl" was brought up when we made the even strength change, yet it was still done.

To me, we should be factoring in minutes played. Having a defenseman play forward at 5v5 is a lot different (to me) than a forward playing defense on the PK. We don't let people change willy-nilly because then you could just keep changing to suit your team's biggest need, and that (to me) would be a problem, but changing positions isn't a problem in and of itself just the volume of changes. Restricting GMs options on special teams is just a bad idea (says the GM lol) and I don't think we would benefit from it in any measurable way.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us