Login

Ragnar · 02-24-2022, 06:25 PM

02-24-2022, 04:34 PMfishy Wrote:
02-24-2022, 01:57 AMmcpumpkin Wrote: You've learned to stop being so stingy with money for the GMs, now lets find more ways to do that for the players. I've seen tons of great recommendations in other threads get lost between the awful copypastas

ngl, making money is so easy now, what more do you want? in like the last 10 seasons, they’ve done the following:

- basically doubled Twitter payout (~4mil a season)
- increased podcast payouts when podcasting in groups
- increased job compensation
- added in additional x2 media weeks
- added in a monetary payout for recruiting users (~3mil)
- implemented smjhl bounties (~2mil)

You can basically max earn if you factor in contract money (3-6mil), Twitter every week (~4mil), fantasy (~1mil), and a single job (~5 mil).

If lack of money is what holds you back from max earning, maybe try and get a job? It’s super easy to earn money nowadays, and thus, many jobs that are open aren’t experiencing many applicants. A lot of the jobs aren’t a lot of work either.

IMO the league has already done a lot to make affording weekly training and max coaching easy, so I’m kinda curious as to what more you would want them to do?

The rest of your point is fair, but still don’t really address the elephant in the room, which is the sim engine lol

Agreed. I went from 100k in my bank to ~260m in about two years becoming a graphics grader and submitting graphics weekly.

Sigs by Me, Merica, High Stick King, Rum_Ham, Jess, vulfzilla, enigmatic, and Carpy

❤!! RIP to the big homies 701 and Mac !!❤

PremierBromanov · 02-24-2022, 07:28 PM

A few less attractive ideas ive posted about before, but still believe in nonetheless

4th Lines

Lot of people opposed to this because they dont want to play fewer than 22 minutes a night, nor do they want to be the ones playing 8 minutes a night. But, i think there's a serious issue in this league with finding a place for mid-tier to low-tier earners, players who are active in locker rooms and can find some time to earn, but for whatever reason cant get over the barrier of earning at a high rate. These players are valuable as users, but do nothing for the team, since it's not that hard to stack a team with high earners if you can be successful in the draft.

I don't think much regard is given to these users because they usually become inactive as they find themselves with a lack of options for playing in this league long term.

I think a 4th line could help alleviate some of the pressure on every player to be a top earner, because this is simply not something every player wants to do. It also leaves space for aging players who may want to keep playing but don't mind fewer minutes.

There are obviously drawbacks and considerations for this, but i like it nonetheless.

Revisiting the TPE scale and giving bonuses to archetypes

There was an intention awhile ago to boost the aforementioned lower-tier earners, but I think the effect this has had is quite the opposite. While players can get an easier leg-up on the league their first couple seasons, once they get into their prime they find each TPE to be worth less and less. A gradual scale like this is certainly not inherently a problem, but the cost of increasing attributes above 17 becomes steep very quickly.

The effect of this is three-fold.

One, Builds become very bland and balanced, as players seek to utilize TPE to maximum effectiveness. Why increase ShAcc to 19 when I can bump passing to 18 for far less? What we see is that either offensive, defensive, or skating becomes 18s across the board with a few 19s and (god forbid) maybe a 20.

The other effect is that regression doesn't do much of anything to older players. Steps have been taken to increase the severity of regression, but the reality is that losing 200 TPE basically hits drops 3 or 4 attributes by 1 point.

and lastly, teams can become dominant in tactics without having much TPE to throw around. There are a lot of opinions in the league about limiting tactics, roles, etc but the obvious answer is to put success in the hands of the players and team-architects. Building a winning team should involve some aspect of tactics and roles, but should be more about making great trades, drafting good players, and utilizing your assets as best you can.

One need only look at BAP's dummy thiccc roster losing out to HAM. While TPE should not be a guarantee to success, BAPs roster is stupidly high in TPE and its hard to think of HAM as being a fluke. We like some aspect of randomness, but its hard to take a BAP loss like that when the team they lose to is the same old same old. It's less like the Lightning getting swept by the Jackets and more like the Lightning getting swept by a team who has won most of the championships in FHM.

Had BAP lost to TBB I doubt we'd be having this conversation and it would feel more like a fluke, but I do know each and every playoff team is looking for tactics edges and that seems to be an aspect of the game that is drawing some ire. I dont think tactics should be limited, but rather top tier players rewarded more for being top tier players.

The combination of these would result in star players doing star player things while aging and newer players finding a spot in the bottom 6 to make noise (and also opening up defensive players on special teams).

Lastly, I think allowing players to choose a role once a season and giving them attribute bonuses for the role would help solve some of the build samey-ness and give the players some sense of agency. This role would not be set in the sim, but rather act as an archetype on site that influences their build in the sim. A Playmaker could still be deployed as a goon.

*Leppish* · 02-24-2022, 09:30 PM

Would love something to make the league interesting again.

Poll: What are your thoughts on these? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
More archetypes/ Cap on all stats	46.97%	31	46.97%
Remove Tactics	30.30%	20	30.30%
HO/Owners Evaluate GM’s every 3 seasons	6.06%	4	6.06%
Compensation picks for young FA departures	12.12%	8	12.12%
Other (specify in comments)	4.55%	3	4.55%
Total		66 vote(s)	100%

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us