12-19-2021, 02:05 PMLeoben Wrote: If anyone is confused where they stand, sve7en is Steve Rogers, Cal is Tony Stark.

12-19-2021, 01:23 PMsve7en Wrote:

12-19-2021, 12:58 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: I'm trolling because it's incredibly obnoxious to watch non radical change occur and to see people so up in arms over it. If careers had been cut in half or something crazy yeah I'd be on your side for this, But you're still going to be able to have the longest careers of the big three sim leagues. If we can't handle the smallest of changes like this then it's going to be impossible to fix things. I swear HO is going to implement something to fix the current issues that allow the same teams to win the cup over and over, and people threaten to leave the site over it.

I'm sorry you guys think HO isn't doing everything perfectly, but there are over 500 members of the SHL. We're not going to end up with a solution that everything thinks is perfect, but you're all going to have to learn what the word compromise means.

Fun fact, it's also incredibly obnoxious to explicitly state how something is unfair and then have people claim your argument is a different one. 

Some have continually ignored that I've condemned some of the S53 and S54 backlash that's actually self interested, and I've been a supporter of steeper regression despite it negatively affecting my goals regarding player length. I want this new curve that has less time at the top and while I don't think 9 season regression is the way to deal with TPE inflation I'm accepting that HO believes that to be the better solution.

I both explained the flaw in the current idea and provided  alternatives that still achieve HO's goals while not unfairly skipping a season of the timeline that players were looking forward to. I do this because I see the value and want the effects of the changes, so don't try and tell me that I don't understand what compromise looks like. That I came up with alternatives does make me think they didn't do everything perfectly, yes, but I respect the work they put in and the opinions they have. You don't have to blindly throw yourself in front to protect them and I've had it with this idea that we're all trying to put our careers first over this league.

12-20-2021, 09:11 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote:

12-19-2021, 01:23 PMsve7en Wrote: Fun fact, it's also incredibly obnoxious to explicitly state how something is unfair and then have people claim your argument is a different one. 

Some have continually ignored that I've condemned some of the S53 and S54 backlash that's actually self interested, and I've been a supporter of steeper regression despite it negatively affecting my goals regarding player length. I want this new curve that has less time at the top and while I don't think 9 season regression is the way to deal with TPE inflation I'm accepting that HO believes that to be the better solution.

I both explained the flaw in the current idea and provided  alternatives that still achieve HO's goals while not unfairly skipping a season of the timeline that players were looking forward to. I do this because I see the value and want the effects of the changes, so don't try and tell me that I don't understand what compromise looks like. That I came up with alternatives does make me think they didn't do everything perfectly, yes, but I respect the work they put in and the opinions they have. You don't have to blindly throw yourself in front to protect them and I've had it with this idea that we're all trying to put our careers first over this league.

I'll be honest, I don't quite understand what your actual alternative suggestion is based on the post you linked, maybe other people feel the same hence why it wasn't referred to more in the discussion? Is it just the change of the transitional period to S63-65 or is there something else that I'm missing?

12-20-2021, 10:00 AMsve7en Wrote:

12-20-2021, 09:11 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote: I'll be honest, I don't quite understand what your actual alternative suggestion is based on the post you linked, maybe other people feel the same hence why it wasn't referred to more in the discussion? Is it just the change of the transitional period to S63-65 or is there something else that I'm missing?

It's adding an extra season and also changing the numbers to allow for simultaneous reduction of the league's top tpe numbers and shift to the new curve that limits longevity and time at the plateau while also allowing for every class to have equal time at the top. The implementation HO offered doesn't allow for the latter.

12-20-2021, 10:04 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote:

12-20-2021, 10:00 AMsve7en Wrote: It's adding an extra season and also changing the numbers to allow for simultaneous reduction of the league's top tpe numbers and shift to the new curve that limits longevity and time at the plateau while also allowing for every class to have equal time at the top. The implementation HO offered doesn't allow for the latter.

The "equal time at the top" argument is one that I see brought up a lot in this discussion but isn't this exactly what the regression change is aimed at? A shorter time at the top isn't an unfortunate side effect of this change, it's what we want to achieve by it.

12-18-2021, 08:16 PMGeekusoid Wrote: Can sim.  Overtake means of production. ROH wins

12-18-2021, 10:45 PMLeoben Wrote: TPE has consumed you.  It’s consuming them.  I’m done letting it consume me.

I am Born of the TPE. Made man by the TPE. Undone by the TPE. Our eyes are yet to open......fear the old TPE

12-19-2021, 12:18 AMPremierBromanov Wrote: Side? I am on no one's side because no one is on my side

12-18-2021, 07:58 PMhockeyiscool Wrote: The winner is nash

12-21-2021, 01:19 AMZombiewolf Wrote:

12-18-2021, 07:58 PMhockeyiscool Wrote: The winner is nash

It’s always nash

12-21-2021, 09:06 PMefiug Wrote: we should just cap tpe for players so like you get extra regressed if you earn more, fuck those entitled 2000 tpe earners they dont deserve shit. 1st year regression caps u at 1300 tpe get dunked.