Warrior General Games

Originally posted by razor9
+100000000 to this

I was going to suggest it if this wasn't already here. I run into situations where the owner is less involved than say the co-owner. But the co-owner can't add someone so it takes like a week to get set up with the team. I know one agent in particular whose wife has her own account owns two teams. She just kind of lets him run the team and she checks in maybe once a week. He doesn't have her login (which in this case he could probably just get save for fear of being called a multi), so it takes forever for anything to happen. Especially if she forgets to add a power (like depth chart or mixes up the AI the GM is responsible for).

dude u bring up another good point. This has happened many times on some teams im on or have been on.
What if your an owner and get called in for active duty??? you pack n go right now!! If the owner has paid up for the team and has already put in for the next season....the Co can keep things afloat in the meantime. What if the team has a real AI bug at that time??? Needs a mod to check it out?? A Co could do that for you. What if during the time of the owners absence....your OC goes inactive?? A Co could rectify that situation. Guys this is endless and not a way of trying to cheat the system and give the Co a free ownership. This is what Co's or Vice's or Subs do in the real world every day.

Even if this doesnt get put to a suggestion for vote....Can a spokesperson from GLB at least pop in here and give their thoughts on the situation for ALL the people whom has spoken up in favor of this?

Coowners should have almost all powers that an Owner has thats the point of being Coowners.

+1

Originally posted by Mordaloch
Coowners should have almost all powers that an Owner has thats the point of being Coowners.

p much, would make things easier on owners.

I am not sure why we are stopping on the adding of GM's. Let them do everything, BUT allow the owner to still dictate what the Co-Owner can and can't do.

+1

I was a co-owner for a friend's team and we both were busy from time to time. Having my hands tied made things difficult at times. If you are bringing someone in to be more than a coach, then there is no reason to not make them able to do those things that a coach can not do.

Implement Now!

+1 and voted for

But yeah, the vote just says add GMs, but I agree there should be a checkbox list of everything an Owner can do, and when you make a guy a Co-Owner, just like you do with the others right now, you go through that list and decide how much you're going to let the guy do.

But yeah, I'd also say normally it'll be everything except selling the team. Otherwise he should be a Head Coach or something else.

+1

Originally posted by aron26
+1 and voted for

But yeah, the vote just says add GMs, but I agree there should be a checkbox list of everything an Owner can do, and when you make a guy a Co-Owner, just like you do with the others right now, you go through that list and decide how much you're going to let the guy do.

But yeah, I'd also say normally it'll be everything except selling the team. Otherwise he should be a Head Coach or something else.

i agree with this completely.

this is now in the voting process. vote yes!

GLB can you pls implement this off season?

was hoping this would have gotten done.

bump for git r dun

GLB i dont know when u guys start to decide what to do in the offseason. Going by all of the threads that have popped up from last season to this season re guarding different ideas of "GIVING THE OWNER THE ABILITY TO DELEGATE" any task seems to be a hot topic and it seems the GLB community has favored just about all of those variations.

Could you guys look into this and try to get a few if not all implemented this offseason?