12-05-2021, 12:55 PMSymmetrik Wrote:

12-05-2021, 10:57 AMslothfacekilla Wrote: I'm confused, haven't Bromanov and 7 suggested concrete alternative solutions that don't rob an entire draft class of one of their peak seasons?  Bromanov even posted charts he made I'm not sure how you missed it.

I've only seen suggestions that either don't target the problems, or create bigger problems.

Reducing the number of TPE available doesn't help reduce the gap between the absolute peak and rookies. I feel like that's an important point not being focused on by alternative solutions. It's not about the difference between 1900 and 2300. It's about the difference between 800 and 1900. That's a lot better for rookies than going up against 2300 TPE. Reducing TPE opportunities reduces TPE for everyone and does nothing to bring the level of rookies closer to the peak (unless you want rookies to spend more time in the minors). It also takes a LONG time to be seen. "Just don't give out so much TPE 3head" doesn't help because it doesn't address one of the big problems. I believe it was RED (I could be wrong) who mentioned that while you could earn more, STHS basically maxed out your useful attributes at ~1500 TPE (and let's not forget we had "archetypes" so you were limited with 1 attribute at 85 and it cost twice as much). FHM doesn't have that, you are actively improving your player still at 2000 TPE and it's led to an absolutely massive gap for rookies. If that's the case, you've got to make things closer between rookies and peak and that starts with reducing the overall TPE available at peak. That's one of the most important parts of moving up the start of regression IMO.

doesnt the re-factored update scale play into the staggering difference between 800 and 1900?

and, to what degree are we fine with that difference? why should an 800 TPE player put up 40 points (or 30, or 20)? Where's the actual line?

Maybe this is speaking past you rather than at you (more directed at others at large), but sometimes it seems like people want a flat league with no high scorers or dominant teams. Whats the reward for building a player up for two years? 60 points at 2k and 40 points 800? This is where I'd like some clarity. The proposed scale is one I will work with, but i see it as a well crafted arrow fired at the wrong target.