Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Catch22
Originally posted by Hanz

I really don't think the 2 above recent statements issued work well together.

Your up in the top leagues..but just can't hack it anymore. The teams decides to start all over again. Since you are doing that, you know you will be losing all you funds saved and starting with a new staduim.

Now you have quite a few players and you haven't been able to fully gear them out, since you weren't sure on what was happening. You are now about to cut these lv 64ish players to FA.

If you give them cash in Equipment fund to bring all their gear up to full spec (which would probably run the bank account dry), you now stand the chance of losing your team???

We can't take the funds down level with us, We can't give it to the players that have been patiently waiting for it.

How is that fair??? What is the point?

You can give money to players in your EQ fund if you are starting over if those players are not all going to one or two teams. If they are going to multiple teams that are not part of an organization, then by all means distribute the money freely. If they are going to one team or multiple teams that are part of a organization, that would be punishable action.



Catch

I can understand your statement.....here is my concern. While I don't belong to an organization,or have any sort of farm system or something like that.
But some agents have been together on my team for over a year. They all now have their own teams at various levels. It is highly likely that a good percentage of the released players will migrate to these 2-3 teams as the agents know the owners over a long period of time and will go to teams with owners they know.

I don't want to see those teams punished because i was being generous.

It seems to be the key word here is an Organization of teams. If there is no structure or schedule of funneling players or funds between teams, just people going with owners they have know for a long time then this is ok?

thanks for the clarification

Originally posted by Hanz
Catch

I can understand your statement.....here is my concern. While I don't belong to an organization,or have any sort of farm system or something like that.
But some agents have been together on my team for over a year. They all now have their own teams at various levels. It is highly likely that a good percentage of the released players will migrate to these 2-3 teams as the agents know the owners over a long period of time and will go to teams with owners they know.

I don't want to see those teams punished because i was being generous.

It seems to be the key word here is an Organization of teams. If there is no structure or schedule of funneling players or funds between teams, just people going with owners they have know for a long time then this is ok?

thanks for the clarification


Like everything GLB, the decision is based on some murky, undefined set of rules based on the whims of the admin that handles your specific situation. No facts will be taken into account and you'll just have to hope that your specific admin got laid that day. Good luck! Have fun!

I'm fine with giving up part of my stadium to level the playing field if I request to stay in cap 14 next season with my level 10 players. I think the amount taken is a little over the top, though.

If teams with Season 15 players are going to go into cap 4, then cap 14 will be only Season 14 cap 4 and non-playoff cap 14 teams. I think it's safe to say that most of those teams will have more than $1.5 million and no extra sections.

As a non-boosting team that reset at the beginning of this season and won't finish in the bottom two, my choices are to request not to promote and get reset to a financial level below the average team in the league or go ahead and promote to cap 18 and contribute to the lack of competition in the cloud. Do I have that about right?

Again, I have no problem giving up some cash and stadium, I just think the amount taken tilts the playing field in the opposite direction.

Top 5 out of 1001 more imaginative and less-game-dumbing-down solutions to team-cash/stadium-imbalance problem:

5. Revenue sharing.
4. Salary cap. Penalty for spending over cap. Fund from penalty is distributed among teams spending under cap.
3. Progressive additional cost for older stadiums such as maintenance cost, property tax etc.
2. Older stadiums require renovation or suffer fan support penalty.
1. In conjunction with 2. above, allow buy/sell stadiums between teams. Teams can buy/sell to have fully developed old stadium with high fan support penalty, or new undeveloped stadium with no fan support penalty.

Originally posted by tonylieu
Top 5 out of 1001 more imaginative and less-game-dumbing-down solutions to team-cash/stadium-imbalance problem:

5. Revenue sharing.
4. Salary cap. Penalty for spending over cap. Fund from penalty is distributed among teams spending under cap.
3. Progressive additional cost for older stadiums such as maintenance cost, property tax etc.
2. Older stadiums require renovation or suffer fan support penalty.
1. In conjunction with 2. above, allow buy/sell stadiums between teams. Teams can buy/sell to have fully developed old stadium with high fan support penalty, or new undeveloped stadium with no fan support penalty.





All good. Anything but the way it is now. It is flat out broken and flawed. We will wait and see what the grand plan to fix it is.

acutally doesn't this at some level dicate a need for owners to develop "farm" systems to move up, so when get to end and beyond ability to "stay up top." It means pushing for folks to spend more flex by owning more teams to move folks upwards to be competitive in developing players.

Wow talk about clutter!! We have a bunch of topics to throw off everyone now,just great.

Just play ball.
You'd think the government was running this game.What a mess.Seems someone is all anxious to get the baseball sim rolling.

I was upset when I read the announcement about this change. I spent the last 7-8 seasons building up my stadium and because I dont have a farm team and lost an agent with 8 guys on my team this offseason was getting killed in AAA because of the lack of free agents worth a damn at that level. I went from 13-3 in AA to maybey winning 3 games this season in AAA. To make matters worse most of my guys would be in decline next season so I decided to build 10-15 guys at positions that are thin, making recruiting easier and go with about 5-8 solid agents who have been with my team since its inception and start over, thinking since I had a complete stadium, EQ funding would be taken care of. I was actually looking forward to not having the headache of trying to keep everyone happy and trying to build up the stadium at the same time. I dont care if you take all the money in my bank but 1.5 mill but why take my stadium also. Teams work hard to build it, why take it back. There has to be a better solution than this. Because of the way Im choosing to rebuild, I can most likely get away with not buying EQ for 2 seasons and dumping all money into rebuilding the stadium, but alot of teams wont have that option and once they get to higher levels will have problems affording the high priced EQ and building there stadium at the same time, thus making it harder for them to retain players and making the competition at higher levels less equal. I personally think AA, AAA, Pro and World Leagues are more important and the cloud structure to me is just something I have to go through to get there.

Once they figure out the amount of FLEX purchasing they lose out on based upon this new rule, anyone care to wage a bet they revise it?

LOL

Fix it now or suffer $ lose of those that have already made decisions based upon the way the rule is written now...

There are so many other more CRITICAL aspects of the game that need attention that without continued FLEX purchases this game WON"T survive

Originally posted by Mobius
Once they figure out the amount of FLEX purchasing they lose out on based upon this new rule, anyone care to wage a bet they revise it?

LOL

Fix it now or suffer $ lose of those that have already made decisions based upon the way the rule is written now...

There are so many other more CRITICAL aspects of the game that need attention that without continued FLEX purchases this game WON"T survive

I was thinking more about this, and if they are just trying to promote equal competition, why not just limit the amount of seats you can fill at lower levels, or change the amount of money you can bring in per game? this would allow teams to keep there stadiums but not profit from it until they reach higher levels. This gives them what they are trying to accomplish and at the same time allows people like me who have already built there stadium keep it.

Just wanted to chime in with my thoughts here...

I am an average (maybe?) GLB owner, so maybe the admins or anyone who cares will read my post and take into consideration my thoughts, or maybe not.

This latest change (the demotion rules) is causing me to think about whether or not I want to spend any more money on GLB. I am seriously considering selling my team, and just retiring my players and living on flex until I use it all up.

Why?

I have owned my team since season 6. I have paid for my team with cash and time, and had some good seasons and bad seasons. Out of the 9 seasons, I think only 2 seasons I have had a CPU team. I was demoted one time, and promted many times. Players came, players went.

My main struggles were always 1) Recruiting and 2) Equipment money.

I struggled and saved my money and paid players good salaries and bonuses, was wise with my EQ money and built my team up from the ground.

After 9 seasons I have built something that I am attached to and feel is mine, that I earned. I didn't collude with anyone in the process, I gave a home to many , many GLB players over 9 seasons..Made the playoffs a few times and have had fun (and heartbreaks) in the process.

Now you are saying you will come in and demolish my stadium and take away my hard earned $$$ if I ask to be put in a lower league should I need to?

This is BS in my opnion.

Many of the teams at the top have demoted and got to keep their money...You arent taking away their money. You are punishing teams like mine in order to be 'fair' to newer owners. Well, this isn't fair to long term customers like me. I had to compete against this when I was a new owner..I had to compete against teams with more cash, bigger stadiums etc...

If you implement this rule, I will not spend one more dime on GLB.

I understand you are trying to be 'fair' to new owners, but it is completely unfair to owners like me who have been at it for 9+ seasons only to see you take away the gains and progress I have made. This rewards the newer players and players who remain at the top as well. It only hurts the average teams like mine who try hard to recruit every season, but sometimes cannot.

This is the most expensive game I have ever played...And I have played a lot of games. No other game I have played has ever threatened to take away my in-game possessions before.

Anyhow maybe I am in the extreme minority of those against this change, and if that is so...Then good luck with your game, it was fun for a while.

Its a shame to have to read these cry's for help.I've voiced my opinion about the changes and how bad its making it for steady legitimate owners.The problem we seem to be facing is the ears that are hearing this are blocked by the blinders that are focusing on their selfish goal.Alot of the steady wallet filled owners that had disposable cash are no longer going to dispose it with these changes.The 5 for it to 1 against it ratio mentioned by catch is not accurate.The number is really flipped around to 1-5.

Tell me how that doesn't hurt the GLB's future. O_o

Originally posted by Team Nucleus
Its a shame to have to read these cry's for help.I've voiced my opinion about the changes and how bad its making it for steady legitimate owners.The problem we seem to be facing is the ears that are hearing this are blocked by the blinders that are focusing on their selfish goal.Alot of the steady wallet filled owners that had disposable cash are no longer going to dispose it with these changes.The 5 for it to 1 against it ratio mentioned by catch is not accurate.The number is really flipped around to 1-5.

Tell me how that doesn't hurt the GLB's future. o_O

tbh most of the people QQing in this thread are familiar faces from GLB main. Which is a tiny minority of the total GLB user base.

What it boils down to is that this change is a positive for GLB. The disparity in stadiums and cash by teams demoting created real problems for newer teams. The people who will be negatively affected by these changes are predictably a little ticked off, especially since this problem has been around for 14 seasons. Unfortunately for those people that fact doesn't diminish the fact that the change is necessary. New teams should be on even footing financially with old teams that have decided to reset. The old teams already have the built in advantage of knowing how to run a team and an understanding of how finances work which gives them an edge. Combining that with infinite money and the ability to make money ad nauseum is too steep of a slope for the new teams.