Warrior General Games

Discuss.

I think a realignment is good, and I like the current league structure well enough.

Neither of these topics address the actual problem, which is WHY there are so many gutted teams. For me, the biggest reason I'd leave is the overwhelming time spent recruiting. And the solution to that is to have smaller player universes.

Instead of thousands of teams competing with eachother for tens of thousands of players, there should be a smaller universe of players in Europe East A that we're all competing for. Yes, you still may not be able to fill a roster of cap level players, but you'll know that after 1,000 offers and PMs, rather than 10,000. And then you can focus a lot more energy on the other aspects of running a team.

I agree with some of that. I don't think the response from this poll will be to fix gutting, but more of a first step in trying to create some competition.

There still needs to be something done going forward to try to minimize the gutting on an ongoing basis.

Part of that is scrapping these farm teams that many successful agents setup as a training grounds for their upcoming players. It's weird that some of the most knowledgeable players in GLB are contributing to a major problem. Let these farm teams exist as D-league teams.

This might not be an ideal way of doing, but I don't see why you can't just assign an admin per, say, 12 leagues, and he can manually adjust the teams as the beginning of the season when the gutting occurs. This isn't perfect, but it gives us something immediately until we find a solid fix.

The idea of creating a player in a specific region, if that is what you're saying, is an interesting one.

I'm not sure where I stand on the recruiting front. It is very difficult work to be sure, but perhaps I have been lucky, I haven't sent 1000s of PMs. I have sent a lot, but also got a lot of responses, and I am VERY particular about who I send a PM to. I can understand where you're coming from though.

players want to play for teams that win. As long as the player gets to choose where he wants to play, loser teams will hardly EVER get better.

I mean, a player thinks: ok, for the same amount of money, i can play for a team thats going to be 13-3 or a team thats going to be 0-16. Where do I want to go? The answer is easy.

The only way to truly curb this, is to institute a draft. Let the weaker teams be able to choose guys, regardless of whether or not they want to be on that team. There's a fix.

Will it or CAN it happen? no. But thats how parity is created in real sports and without the ability for the team to go out and say you HAVE to play for me. You WILL be a good player. We WILL get better eventually, there is nothing you can do.

Players will go where they want to go. Most want to go to winning teams. A few just want to start or get playing time and fewer still want cash. The real smart players though, they see winning teams as their best chance for a good experience. Smart players = quality builds. Quality builds = more wins. etc.


Until they can force good players onto gutted teams, none of this will change anything.

Originally posted by Shardaddy
players want to play for teams that win. As long as the player gets to choose where he wants to play, loser teams will hardly EVER get better.

I mean, a player thinks: ok, for the same amount of money, i can play for a team thats going to be 13-3 or a team thats going to be 0-16. Where do I want to go? The answer is easy.

The only way to truly curb this, is to institute a draft. Let the weaker teams be able to choose guys, regardless of whether or not they want to be on that team. There's a fix.

Will it or CAN it happen? no. But thats how parity is created in real sports and without the ability for the team to go out and say you HAVE to play for me. You WILL be a good player. We WILL get better eventually, there is nothing you can do.

Players will go where they want to go. Most want to go to winning teams. A few just want to start or get playing time and fewer still want cash. The real smart players though, they see winning teams as their best chance for a good experience. Smart players = quality builds. Quality builds = more wins. etc.


Until they can force good players onto gutted teams, none of this will change anything.

A lot of this is why I don't think recruiting needs to be fixed. It's up to the owner to field a competitive team. If you can't? Tough, stop being an owner. We need fewer owners anyways.

The problem is that need a better system for those owners that couldn't do it. Get them out of the league quickly.

Yeah, having competitive leagues is important, and promotion/relegation and a one-time realignment probably aren't going to really do the trick by themselves.

The system has to be designed to do a realignment each season in a way that's pretty fluid and makes sense. Maybe on top of typical promotion/relegation. So just plain crappy teams drop a notch, phenomenally good teams promote. But then the gutted teams need to be identified, and probably just deleted. Then insert a new owner into a new team in our league with the right tools for success... an average stadium compared to the rest of us, a relatively equal set of players made up from the players on the deleted gutted teams signed to day 40.

Originally posted by Shardaddy
players want to play for teams that win. As long as the player gets to choose where he wants to play, loser teams will hardly EVER get better.

I mean, a player thinks: ok, for the same amount of money, i can play for a team thats going to be 13-3 or a team thats going to be 0-16. Where do I want to go? The answer is easy.

The only way to truly curb this, is to institute a draft. Let the weaker teams be able to choose guys, regardless of whether or not they want to be on that team. There's a fix.

Will it or CAN it happen? no. But thats how parity is created in real sports and without the ability for the team to go out and say you HAVE to play for me. You WILL be a good player. We WILL get better eventually, there is nothing you can do.

Players will go where they want to go. Most want to go to winning teams. A few just want to start or get playing time and fewer still want cash. The real smart players though, they see winning teams as their best chance for a good experience. Smart players = quality builds. Quality builds = more wins. etc.


Until they can force good players onto gutted teams, none of this will change anything.
A smaller universe will help with players signing only on to winners. If they have to be in our general league, the options will quickly be limited.

I heavily favor a draft as well.

Also, salary caps and some amount of revenue sharing or just limiting the profit from playoffs would also balance things out. The revenue disparity is too great and insurmountable once a winning set of teams have been established.

A draft? For competitive CPU players perhaps.

Force an agent to a team that he doesn't want to go play for, and you're basically ruining the game for people.

I wouldn't have minded if my players got drafted on to a team, certainly not for 1 season. As long as they become free agents later.

Actually, i think it would've been a better game experience.

Originally posted by Barnsie
A draft? For competitive CPU players perhaps.

Force an agent to a team that he doesn't want to go play for, and you're basically ruining the game for people.

I totally agree with this. Our team is made up of 90% guys who know each other. If we had to all play on seperate teams, that would be lame.

However, a smaller pool WOULD be helpful.

I think that fixing CPU players would help too. It would seem that you would, if there was a smaller pool, HAVE to get decent CPU players. If we only have 9 FA DE's in EEA5, you cant get enough guys and HAVE to sign cpu guys. Just because there is no guarantee that you will even have enough to field enough positions.

Ok... more thinking on the poll, re-organizing.

If an owner leaves and the team's gutted, the team should just get deleted. The fill in comes from either promoting heavily from below, or altogether vaporizing one of the neighboring Conferences and redistributing the teams to existing leagues/conferences that have had some deletions as well.

So -

EE A #5 Alpha looses 4 teams to gutting
EE A #5 Zeta -3
EE A #6 Alpha -5
EE A #6 Zeta -4
EE A #7 Alpha -10
EE A #7 Zeta -6

...EE A #7 is dissolved, and the 6 teams left from #7 Alpha are redistributed to fill in other EE A conferences, the 10 teams from #7 Zeta are kept as a Conference, but moved to, say EE A #2, who lost one of their entire Conferences, and the remaining 6 teams are filled in from promotion/relegation or redistribution.

I don't think that the owner always leaves. There are lots of ways to "gut" really, including the farm teams that I mentioned.

I think that you just move these teams in to the same league. If half of EEA#5 turns to garbage (gutted, farm teams, teams like Grodno that don't allocate SP) and the same with EEA#6, just merge the sets of good teams in one and the bad teams in the other. Why not let the gutted teams that are still struggling duke it out in what might be a competitive league to them?

It takes manual work to do it, but who cares. You do it once/season.

Some people are going to leave the team because it didn't live up to expectations (winning championship or just winning at all). There isn't a way to stop that.

To stop farm teams from messing up the leagues, maybe he should create a farm league. If you want a farm team, maybe make it cost less Flex. But there is no playoff or championship for the farm league. Kinda like human controlled D-league.

The problem is, how do you force people to play for your team if you are bad?

Who wants to go to a gutted team and try to rebuild? Look at the top teams in our league (Zeta). Hippo's, Brown Bay, Spanish, Belgrade just as the top four. Ill even throw in Barcelona and Athens for 6. DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to slight any team, just the top 6 as I saw it last year. Hell, add in River City, too, if you want.

Take a look at how many of those teams have MULTIPLE players managed by single agents. Its really astounding. I think only BigC had to do any REAL recruiting, maybe athens, MAYBE river city. But the top four teams? They have a small group of agents managing a large number of players. They only had to plug holes.

Our team is a prime example. We will never have to worry about recruiting. Ever. It makes the game so much more enjoyable too. I dont stress that anyone will leave. I dont stress that we are short on DE's or LB's or WR's. We only have to find the occasional back up. Sure, every once in a while I try to upgrade at starter but I dont try too hard.

My point is that how many teams can say that? Odessa...how fun is recruiting? How bout Macedonia? They gave up on it completely. It is by far the LEAST fun part of this game. It is also the most crucial. If you dont bust your ass throwing out 90000 offers to anyone and everyone, you will lose. period.

Imagine you are playing a video game and you have some backpack that you HAVE to keep organized, neatly, otherwise your player will die. An un-fun aspect of the game that is totally and 100 percent nessicary in order to even succeed. That is a MAJOR design flaw, imo.

I think it boils down to less of IF teams are gutted but what happens when they are. Teams in pro sports are gutted all the time, more so in baseball than others but it still happens. Teams give up, teams start over, teams go with a youth movement. But they always know they will get to choose their players at some point. They control their destiny. I pick player A and he is mine. That doesn't happen here. Its 100% luck if you sign someone. They might choose to sign with someone because of the team name, money, whatever.

Currently, there is no fix for something that is inevitable.

Draft. I wouldn't object to being drafted and that would add a lot to the initial phase of a new player. After 1 or two seasons you are a free agent and go where you want (salary cap).

To me this game does not have long term appeal in it's current state. Drafting would be a lot of fun and really help out some of the lower end teams get competitive.