Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Sik Wit It
Seriously if you stick with the original idea and just paste my tl;dr version at the bottom of the post, I think you'll garner much more support .

-There's a salary cap - if you go over the cap, you basically pay that extra money to the league as well (luxury tax)
-Player's pre-game starting morale is based on their salary in comparison to the rest of the league.
-You can raise your players' pre-game starting morale using 3 methods:
1) higher contracts - the more you pay your player in comparison to the league average, the more starting morale he will have
2) team possessions - the more items you have like jumbotrons, luxury locker rooms, etc, the higher morale your players will have
3) temporary items - these are basically like team possessions but they don't last as long - usually only 1 home game (like the bobblehead promotions), or a 1-season bonus (chartered flights, cheerleaders, etc)

That's basically all there is to it. A lot of people don't like it because they think getting penalized on morale will make everyone demand a max contract, but they don't realize that morale can be made up with team possessions very easily.

You have to choose between investing in the long run (permanent items), short run (temp items), or your players themselves (contracts). Finding a good balance that will still allow your players to play with 100 morale going into every game, and will also allow you to invest in your team's future will be the job of a CFO.

I actually converted like 2 users who were completely against the system into supporting it in the last few hours.

This tbqh. This a hundred times. This system was not that difficult to understand, people just don't bother to read that much information, so they assume that they must spend 1000 times for time here to compete. Just read this.

Originally posted by David Stern

Original idea was perfect except players who were underpaid would start at less than 100 % morale.

Deathblade made a post to boost morale on the highest paid players, thus giving a small bonus. (conf/stam is going to be double next yr)

Basically this is a player driven game, you want people to enjoy every aspect of it. having 20% of your user-base play at -20% morale bc they're not paid high enough was a flaw (IMO). IF it was just bonuses to the higher paid players, rather than negatives to the lower paid guys it would have been a WIN WIN WIN in the "original idea".

That was the only issue with the old system. Not sure how that didn't get fixed, everything else looked to be pretty damn awesome.

Great post imo

Bort - Give players something to do with money, and then you'll probably have more support for a salary cap, for players WANTING more money. Then, if we can find a way to raise salary demands by performance, fame and "potential" (EL), then this idea of yours can go a long ways in encouraging parity without turning it into a complete balance. The smart teams will still excel, mainly by tactics (which need work, but another topic) and by using certain builds in a certain way.

Salary Cap, Player Cash having meaning, Performance Rewards, Archetypes, potential sim fixes and tactic "fixes" and such things could be a HUGE step in the right direction with improving competition.

Speaking as someone who has never been a part of any of the elite cliques in this game, preventing teams from signing who they want is an awful solution with absolutely no logic or foresight.

Who cares if an elite dot signs to an elite team for the minimum, when "realistically" he should be making more money? This isn't the NFL where a Peyton Manning only comes along every 20 years. Go build your own Thom Yorke. Problem solved.

Originally posted by Staz
I don't think it is a deterrent. The key to this whole thing working is this:

GIVE THE PLAYERS A REASON TO WANT MORE MONEY. Then, you actually have a reason to build well, to encourage players to want to get paid more, to want to go to teams that allow this, etc. I don't think we have that right now, though.

Also, we really need to find a way to reward players for performance, for fame (which is currently next to useless) without making it "better" to sandbag and exploit the system.

How do you reward players for getting more money, but yet not give them any performance bonus (or penalty)?

Here are the problems/points:

- Nobody cares about salary right now because it doesn't give them any benefit.
- People don't want salary to give you a benefit, but still have a purpose.
- People don't want salary to penalize you in any way because then you are "at the whim of an owner"
- People feel entitled to EQ, and want it pretty much for free. I'm fine with that; it's become part of the game.

These things don't mesh with each other at all.

Originally posted by Catch22
Wasn't really a minority this time Sik. Trust me.

come on catch22...i thought you were a poker player? you couldn't read that bluff?

There were already plans floating around today and people were coming to grips that the new rules were not all that complicated and not really that much more work.

You guys said yourself that you understood it was not that complicated when you really understood it.

implement the grand vision...people will adapt quickly...

Take effective level out of the equation, go by base level so there is an actual benefit to having a good build instead of a penalty.
Make sure all teams can get atleast 50 players in under this new salary cap that are at the top of their Level allowance for their leagues, and it should work well.

The Pro/AAA/AA leagues would have their talent balanced out better becasue of this, and really give incentive for AA teams to move up to increase their salary cap. Should work for minors as well.
Just make sure the salary cap doesn't kill team without a committed 55 player roster for 10 seasons from being able to compete via Free Agency, etc.

Originally posted by David Stern
Originally posted by Bort

LOL, no winning I guess?

Current system: doesn't work.
Original idea: too complicated somehow
New idea: not complicated enough?


Original idea was perfect except players who were underpaid would start at less than 100 % morale.

Deathblade made a post to boost morale on the highest paid players, thus giving a small bonus. (conf/stam is going to be double next yr)

Basically this is a player driven game, you want people to enjoy every aspect of it. having 20% of your user-base play at -20% morale bc they're not paid high enough was a flaw (IMO). IF it was just bonuses to the higher paid players, rather than negatives to the lower paid guys it would have been a WIN WIN WIN in the "original idea".

That was the only issue with the old system. Not sure how that didn't get fixed, everything else looked to be pretty damn awesome.

That -20% morale would be offset by team items like promotions, 4 star hotels, cheerleaders, etc though. Your base-line starting morale would be -20%, but all the team bonuses would be added on after that, and would most likely bring you to 100.

Make higher salary give you more fame or something. Add some more fame-based VAs that help builds. That would make this interesting I think. If you do that then you can make it realistically possible to recruit anyone you want regardless of talent, but if there are a few ego guys out there that want big contracts or if a team strategically wants to pay more for a player to get access to those VAs then they have to make sacrifices by having less players.

Originally posted by Bort
How do you reward players for getting more money, but yet not give them any performance bonus (or penalty)?

Here are the problems/points:

- Nobody cares about salary right now because it doesn't give them any benefit.
- People don't want salary to give you a benefit, but still have a purpose.
- People don't want salary to penalize you in any way because then you are "at the whim of an owner"
- People feel entitled to EQ, and want it pretty much for free. I'm fine with that; it's become part of the game.

These things don't mesh with each other at all.

Bort,

Here is where you make an executive decision.

You are dead on about #1 and #4, and you need to make an executive decision and stick with it for #2 and #3, I felt you did that originally with the new changes,

Now you are backing off from that, and a lot of people don't understand why.

Originally posted by David Stern

Original idea was perfect except players who were underpaid would start at less than 100 % morale.

You take that out and you might as well not pay them at all.

Originally posted by Bort
I think the obvious solution is: perma ban everyone

+1

Edit: you forgot to Nerf everything too.

Originally posted by ChicagoTRS
Originally posted by Catch22

Wasn't really a minority this time Sik. Trust me.

come on catch22...i thought you were a poker player? you couldn't read that bluff?

There were already plans floating around today and people were coming to grips that the new rules were not all that complicated and not really that much more work.

You guys said yourself that you understood it was not that complicated when you really understood it.

implement the grand vision...people will adapt quickly...

Yeah, I think the initial ragequit crowd was dying down as well, and after people got over the initial shock, they didn't mind the new system, and even ended up liking it. At least that was my experience when talking to a lot of agents I know. Like I said, I convinced 2 users to completely change their stance by just explaining it to them in simple terms.