S97 Louth & Spirit of Competition Punishments

[Beketov 9,202]

.......

 

I distinctly remember announcing these punishments not long ago and saying that we really need our @VHL GM's to be better with their backup goalie starts and yet here we are with what can only be described as a pile of them... I will be honest, I am disappointed. We're changing up our precedent a bit here on the punishment and will likely use some combination of this and our old stuff and probably some other new stuff going forward but consider this a final warning that we will start using these rules as basis for termination if we have to. I don't want things to get that far, I don't like firing people, but if it gets bad enough we will. We do not impose a lot of rules on the GM's and these 2 don't seem that hard to follow.

 

ANYWAY, where are we at for S97?

 

• Helsinki broke the Louth rule in full playing their human starter the full 72 games.
• Riga broke the Spirit of Competition by playing their bot goalie 1 extra game. 
• DC broke the Spirit of Competition by playing their bot goalie 3 extra games. 
• LA broke the Spirit of Competition by playing their bot goalie 4 extra games.

 

As of the end of the season the lottery looked like this, though that's about to change:

 

1. WAR - 25%
2. LDN - 20%
3. LAS - 17.5%
4. HSK - 15.0%
5. DCD - 12.5%
6. CHI - 10%

 

Riga is currently in the Conference Finals and does not affect the lottery. As for punishments, in part we are introducing a new system this season in which any backup games over the required 8 (specifically from a bot, human backups are fine), in accordance with the Spirit of Competition rules, will officially remove 1 loss and add 1 win to a team's record for the lottery standings. The majority of these punishments include that as well as lottery odd adjustments.

 

Riga: Officially drop to 16th in Round 1. As it stands the best they could be is 14th right now anyway. If Riga wins the Continental Cup they will have another punishment decided as needed.

 

DC: Add 3 wins. Makes their record effectively 29-36-7 for 65 points (which changes nothing). Strip 4% and give 1% each to WAR/LDN/CHI/LA

 

LA: Add 4 wins. Makes their record effectively 20-47-5 for 45 points which means they drop to 4th best odds. Additionally @InstantRockstar is ineligible to claim GM pay for 4 weeks and LA sacrifices their 2nd round pick which cannot be traded.

 

Helsinki: Strip 8% and give 2% each to WAR/LDN/CHI/LA. Additionally @McLovin is ineligible to claim GM pay for 4 weeks.

 

This means the lottery odds for this season are as follow:

 

1. WAR - 28%
2. LDN - 23%
3. HSK - 7%
4. LAS - 20.5%
5. DCD - 8.5%
6. CHI - 13%

 

To be clear as usual the first number represents their draft position, the percentage represents odds of first overall. So even though Helsinki has lower odds than LA at getting first overall they can only drop as low as 4th; LA can drop as low as 5th.

 

@Lemorse7 @qripll @InstantRockstar @McLovin on the punishment front

 

@N0HBDY @Baby Boomer @badcolethetitan on the heart attack front but really just because your odds have increased.

[mattyIceman 1,235]

Can't play 7, can't play 9 eh?  Sometimes sths doesn't do the thing no?

[Lemorse7 1,038]

5 minutes ago, Beketov said:

If Riga wins the Continental Cup they will have another punishment decided as needed.

who da fuk is the cry baby

[Alex 3,306]

Why is Riga’s punishment arguably the worst? Really does not make any sense.

[McLovin 486]

Watch us win the lottery anyways LMAO 

[Beketov 9,202]

4 minutes ago, mattyIceman said:

Can't play 7, can't play 9 eh?  Sometimes sths doesn't do the thing no?

If GM’s are paying attention it’s very easy to account for. The problem lies if they aren’t paying no attention to having bots in on day 10 or if they wait until the end of the season when things can’t be adjusted for later.

 

In general having 1 extra win on your record is unlikely to make substantial changes to lottery. The more one screws up the more affect it may have.

[LucyXpher 1,753]

Without trying to start a whole debate about it, may I ask, how is this a punishment for teams that don't currently hold their 1st round pick?  This is the case for Riga and LA.  Sure, it'll affect the 2nd for LA a little, but we all know that's not gonna hurt much lol.  Like I'm genuinely curious, isn't a lottery odds or draft position punishment only effective if a team actually holds the pick that they're losing position on?  

Edited Friday at 07:49 PM by LucyXpher

[Beketov 9,202]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Why is Riga’s punishment arguably the worst? Really does not make any sense.

It isn’t though. Riga as it stands right now can’t pick higher than 14th anyway and that’s assuming they are eliminated this round. If they make the cup finals they are guaranteed 15th or 16th anyway.

 

Yes, that is potentially a 2 spot drop which is worse than everyone else but I would argue dropping from 3rd to 4th has a heavier impact than 14th to 16th.

[Spartan 4,638]

Just now, LucyXpher said:

Without trying to start a whole debate about it, may I ask, how this is a punishment for teams that don't currently hold their 1st round pick?  This is the case for Riga and LA.  Sure, it'll affect the 2nd for LA a little, but we all know that's not gonna hurt much lol.  Like I'm genuinely curious, isn't a lottery odds or draft position punishment only effective if a team actually holds the pick that they're losing position on?  

Sorry to clarify, the PRG pick will be the one with reduced odds. @Beketov to confirm

[McLovin 486]

Just now, Beketov said:

If GM’s are paying attention it’s very easy to account for. The problem lies if they aren’t paying no attention to having bots in on day 10 or if they wait until the end of the season when things can’t be adjusted for later.

 

In general having 1 extra win on your record is unlikely to make substantial changes to lottery. The more one screws up the more affect it may have.

That being said, I’m a little confused why playing my HUMAN goalie with BETTER stats makes me completely ineligible for GM pay when someone playing a bot more times than one should, in some cases 12 more times than we played ours this season and tanking a record even worse is a lighter offense. If this is a conversation for DMs I’m more than down to take it there, I’d just like a little transparency as how I’m being punished harder personally for my team unintentionally being the best it could this season hahaha

[Beketov 9,202]

Just now, McLovin said:

That being said, I’m a little confused why playing my HUMAN goalie with BETTER stats makes me completely ineligible for GM pay when someone playing a bot more times than one should, in some cases 12 more times than we played ours this season and tanking a record even worse is a lighter offense. If this is a conversation for DMs I’m more than down to take it there, I’d just like a little transparency as how I’m being punished harder personally for my team unintentionally being the best it could this season hahaha

Because the Louth Rule has always been a thing? It can’t just be ignored because you aren’t a competitive team. The whole goal of the rule is to make things fair for teams that prioritize human goalies because otherwise why would you bother if you can just play a better starter for 72 games? Getting a proper backup means for those minimum 8 games you have a better chance at winning.

 

They made mistakes, they left bots in too long, it is true, but that does not excuse you completely disregarding a rule. If it was a game or two missed it may have been less severe but completely ignoring it can’t be overlooked.

[Beketov 9,202]

5 minutes ago, LucyXpher said:

Without trying to start a whole debate about it, may I ask, how is this a punishment for teams that don't currently hold their 1st round pick?  This is the case for Riga and LA.  Sure, it'll affect the 2nd for LA a little, but we all know that's not gonna hurt much lol.  Like I'm genuinely curious, isn't a lottery odds or draft position punishment only effective if a team actually holds the pick that they're losing position on?  

Unfortunately it has a lesser effect when a team doesn’t hold their own pick yes. It’s an unfortunate situation that for infractions like this the amount we can punish isn’t particularly substantial.

 

Do consider that it does go against the GM’s “record” so to speak though, we obviously don’t consider them getting off Scot free. I will admit we should be keeping a closer eye on who owns the picks though.

 

or GM’s could just stop breaking the rules, that would be nice.

[McLovin 486]

Just now, Beketov said:

Because the Louth Rule has always been a thing? It can’t just be ignored because you aren’t a competitive team. The whole goal of the rule is to make things fair for teams that prioritize human goalies because otherwise why would you bother if you can just play a better starter for 72 games? Getting a proper backup means for those minimum 8 games you have a better chance at winning.

 

They made mistakes, they left bots in too long, it is true, but that does not excuse you completely disregarding a rule. If it was a game or two missed it may have been less severe but completely ignoring it can’t be overlooked.

I wasn’t disregarding the rule, I forgot, but there’s no point in arguing semantics over me forgetting to move a backup bot around while I’ve been going through life just like everyone else. It’s the rule and I respect it, I’d just prefer if in this reply you aren’t acting like I’m pissing on your rulebook or something

[Beketov 9,202]

Just now, McLovin said:

I wasn’t disregarding the rule, I forgot, but there’s no point in arguing semantics over me forgetting to move a backup bot around while I’ve been going through life just like everyone else. It’s the rule and I respect it, I’d just prefer if in this reply you aren’t acting like I’m pissing on your rulebook or something

I’m not, I just can’t really judge the reasons, only what I see. Missing them completely feels more intentional than missing a few. Doesn’t mean that it was, just explaining how it comes across.

[McLovin 486]

Just now, Beketov said:

I’m not, I just can’t really judge the reasons, only what I see. Missing them completely feels more intentional than missing a few. Doesn’t mean that it was, just explaining how it comes across.

And I’m telling you it’s not. Again though, it’s semantics and I know better than to try and change commissioners minds once they’re made

[LucyXpher 1,753]

1 minute ago, Beketov said:

Unfortunately it has a lesser effect when a team doesn’t hold their own pick yes. It’s an unfortunate situation that for infractions like this the amount we can punish isn’t particularly substantial.

 

Do consider that it does go against the GM’s “record” so to speak though, we obviously don’t consider them getting off Scot free. I will admit we should be keeping a closer eye on who owns the picks though.

 

or GM’s could just stop breaking the rules, that would be nice.

I understand the track record thing, but then really aren't teams that did nothing wrong being punished for another GM's mistake because they happen to hold a pick that was traded before this and now stands to lose potentially significant value?  I just don't see why a team that followed the rules (for example Prague, who holds LA's 1st, and traded for it in good faith) should be the team serving the material punishment.

[der meister 3,335]

Meh. Just take Riga out and put Toronto in the finals instead. Problem solved.

[Spartan 4,638]

22 minutes ago, LucyXpher said:

I understand the track record thing, but then really aren't teams that did nothing wrong being punished for another GM's mistake because they happen to hold a pick that was traded before this and now stands to lose potentially significant value?  I just don't see why a team that followed the rules (for example Prague, who holds LA's 1st, and traded for it in good faith) should be the team serving the material punishment.

Again just to clarify, I think I miscommunicated when I discussed punishments with Bek with the wording of LA themselves vs the pick they hold. We're specifically punishing LA and the pick that they hold this season, which is Prague's. We don't want to do what you're describing, where an innocent team gets hit in the cross-fire. So the hit will be on the pick they hold, which is Prague.

 

This is the first season where I think the precedent for punishments of this sort is being raised a bit and meant to be more contextual vs just black and white. It'll keep being fine tuned and we'll keep having discussions on what works/doesn't work.

 

im dumb give me a sec

Edited Friday at 08:23 PM by Spartan

[LucyXpher 1,753]

11 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Again just to clarify, I think I miscommunicated when I discussed punishments with Bek with the wording of LA themselves vs the pick they hold. We're specifically punishing LA and the pick that they hold this season, which is Prague's. We don't want to do what you're describing, where an innocent team gets hit in the cross-fire. So the hit will be on the pick they hold, which is Prague.

 

This is the first season where I think the precedent for punishments of this sort is being raised a bit and meant to be more contextual vs just black and white. It'll keep being fine tuned and we'll keep having discussions on what works/doesn't work.

Okay, I mean that sounds fair, but maybe I'm missing something.  I don't see LA holding any Prague picks and none of what you explain here seems to be reflected in the original post. So I am very confused now lol 

Edited Friday at 08:28 PM by LucyXpher

[Spartan 4,638]

5 minutes ago, LucyXpher said:

Okay, I mean that sounds fair, but maybe I'm missing something.  I don't see LA holding any Prague picks and none of what you explain here seems to be reflected in the original post. So I am very confused now lol 

 

14 minutes ago, Spartan said:

im dumb give me a sec

 

[rory 1,980]

So where does the line for the Louth rule start? ~225 TPE difference? A 225 TPE difference between London's two goalers is a massive difference and it'd be remiss for them not to be mentioned here!

[sadie 987]

Yeah maybe rethink that Riga punishment unless you’re just trying to pile on Helsinki even more (or don’t since it’s literally one game). Riga only has their 3rd so I don’t think there’s gonna be any lost sleep over S98 pick changes.

Edited Friday at 08:42 PM by sadie

[Beketov 9,202]

1 minute ago, rory said:

So where does the line for the Louth rule start? ~225 TPE difference? A 225 TPE difference between London's two goalers is a massive difference and it'd be remiss for them not to be mentioned here!

It's a massive difference but they are still two human controlled goalies.

 

TBH Spirit of Competition was always designed to prevent teams, as has happened in the past, from starting a bot for 30+ games to intentionally tank their performance. It was never intended to be a 1 or 2 start thing but teams have kept pushing their luck which means we've had to get more strict. We will likely need to adjust the wording on both rules.

 

9 minutes ago, LucyXpher said:

Okay, I mean that sounds fair, but maybe I'm missing something.  I don't see LA holding any Prague picks and none of what you explain here seems to be reflected in the original post. So I am very confused now lol 

We shouldn't be making decisions like this over lunch breaks while not looking at everything; that much is clear. I have adjusted things in the OP in regards to LA's punishment and we will look into options further in future seasons regarding teams that don't own their picks in order to mores punish the GM's rather than the teams. Or, ya know, people can just follow the rules.

[Frank 5,319]

Get rid of back up games. Nobody cares about Greg Clegane's career stats. @Victor

Edited Friday at 08:39 PM by Frank

[badcolethetitan 965]

Why did we all decide to cheat when I traded away my 1st, to now give NYA better odds. You guys stink! Why didn't you cheat when I was tanking!