Welfare/pension ruins the league

[Evans 305]

I don't think Pension needs completely removed but how much people can get from it does seem a little ridiculous. You have guys not putting in any work at all getting more than 50% of what the max weekly TPE is. 

[Molholt 2,185]

Allow people to create a 2nd player.

[Victor 11,009]

22 minutes ago, Molholt said:

Allow people to create a 2nd player.

We don't already? Shit.  

[Molholt 2,185]

Just now, Victor said:

We don't already? Shit.  

 

Just saying. It's the quickest way to recruit double the amount of players

 

You've already got the dedicated people, just utilize them. 

[Victor 11,009]

1 minute ago, Molholt said:

 

Just saying. It's the quickest way to recruit double the amount of players

 

You've already got the dedicated people, just utilize them. 

I think the novelty factor dies off and it becomes awkward. Plus you get the mixed loyalty issue you would get from GMing a team and having your player on another, except on a larger scale.

[Molholt 2,185]

16 minutes ago, Victor said:

I think the novelty factor dies off and it becomes awkward. Plus you get the mixed loyalty issue you would get from GMing a team and having your player on another, except on a larger scale.

 

I've never agreed that that's an actual problem. 

[jRuutu 2,474]

3 hours ago, Streetlight said:

I don't know for sure if he still does, but he spent time as the guy who updates players in the sim each week as well, which I think may have been a 2 TPE job that probably took more time each week than it takes for most media spots/graphics that are made.

Yea, well I guess the welfare/pension is more useful for guys who have a job around the VHL, but those guys who don´t have a job and are on welfare/pension, something should be done to them.

[jRuutu 2,474]

3 hours ago, Streetlight said:

But how will getting rid of pension promote activity? Green and I saying we wouldn't be here without pension isn't just us bluffing, trying to get out of doing point tasks. It's the truth. If we weaken pension too much, we'll lose members who otherwise would still be around.

 

Now, I guess if your argument is that keeping pension as is will deter new members from the league, you could maybe have a case. But I doubt that the people who are currently on welfare/pension would opt to do point tasks if the option was taken away.

Well perhaps not getting rid of it, but tweaking it should be at least given some thought from the big guys and girls of the league.

 

 

[Evans 305]

Maybe penalize people for using pension/welfare multiple weeks in a row? So if you use it two weeks in a row, that second time it is only two TPE rather than five. Submitting a point task resets it. Problem solved. 

[jRuutu 2,474]

21 minutes ago, Victor said:

I think the novelty factor dies off and it becomes awkward. Plus you get the mixed loyalty issue you would get from GMing a team and having your player on another, except on a larger scale.

There should be strict rules. Cant have both players you have created on the same team. You can only create a another player when your first one have played at least 4 seasons or something like that. 

 

Welfare/pension is bigger game breaker for me at least than allowing some players to create a another player if needed.

[jRuutu 2,474]

2 hours ago, Evans said:

I don't think Pension needs completely removed but how much people can get from it does seem a little ridiculous. You have guys not putting in any work at all getting more than 50% of what the max weekly TPE is. 

Yep,perhaps it´s not a terrible system, but it could be better.

[Victor 11,009]

5 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

There should be strict rules. Cant have both players you have created on the same team. You can only create a another player when your first one have played at least 4 seasons or something like that. 

 

Welfare/pension is bigger game breaker for me at least than allowing some players to create a another player if needed.

Force them on different teams? Surely that's worse. I think they main issue is when a member ends up on two teams, prefers one to the other, and works to the detriment of one of them.

[Phil 5,129]

23 hours ago, jRuutu said:

Phil is not a ´normal´ user here 

 

There's nothing normal about me; I think we can all agree on that, yes. 

[sterling 2,000]

Pension has saved the league.

[sterling 2,000]

Also, the pension accounts for members who have two 500 TPE players - so these are people who deserve to be rewarded for their work in the league and the kind of people we want to stick around.

[jRuutu 2,474]

18 minutes ago, Victor said:

Force them on different teams? Surely that's worse. I think they main issue is when a member ends up on two teams, prefers one to the other, and works to the detriment of one of them.

Perhaps, there could also be few guys who do everything on both players and have them both on the same team? That cant be that much better option? 

 

 

[jRuutu 2,474]

29 minutes ago, Evans said:

Maybe penalize people for using pension/welfare multiple weeks in a row? So if you use it two weeks in a row, that second time it is only two TPE rather than five. Submitting a point task resets it. Problem solved. 

Something like this would be nice.

[Molholt 2,185]

13 minutes ago, Victor said:

Force them on different teams? Surely that's worse. I think they main issue is when a member ends up on two teams, prefers one to the other, and works to the detriment of one of them.

 

Do people ever really do that? I mean does that ever actually happen? Because if it doesn't happen now why would it suddenly be an issue? People want great players and for the most part aren't gonna sabotage their own fun to get at some GM. Plus, even if they did, they would ruin their reputation and people wouldn't be fooled again. 

 

The closest things to someone do that are myself adding to Savage's fighting, which was a legitimate test I wanted to do and I reset it, or Trifecta retiring all the time - but people know these things and if they are concerned they adjust. 

 

I know this comes up every time I suggest it, and I always reference the baseball league where I've seen this, but we were allowed four players each, no more than two to a single team, and never, in ~35 seasons, did a single instance of a person purposefully sabotaging their player happen. I was more competitive with my players because I had more chances to win a championship, personally. That includes players on teams that I wasn't GMing. I won titles as a GM and as a player on a separate team as a key piece in both instances. 

 

Maybe we had less people acting like idiots or more control, idk. 

 

I know it's a topic I've discussed before and I don't expect anything to change, but it might be time to stop pretending changing recruitment is gonna somehow fix that issue of no one  joining, at least not at the rate people are leaving/going to full time welfare. 

[jRuutu 2,474]

6 minutes ago, sterling said:

Also, the pension accounts for members who have two 500 TPE players - so these are people who deserve to be rewarded for their work in the league and the kind of people we want to stick around.

But if they don´t have jobs in the league, should they be allowed to use pension for 5 points each week?

[Bojo 221]

Just now, jRuutu said:

Something like this would be nice.

 

I like that idea, but maybe after two weeks instead of just one.

[jRuutu 2,474]

1 minute ago, Bojo said:

 

I like that idea, but maybe after two weeks instead of just one.

Why not,start from there and see what kind of effect it has on everything. Not too big thing to make it more strict after that

Edited March 28, 2016 by jRuutu

[Bojo 221]

Just now, jRuutu said:

But if they don´t have jobs in the league, should they be allowed to use pension for 5 points each week?

 

I think it's just a good way to keep members from burning out. Some people just can't put in all that effort every week after a player or two, and it helps keep them around. Plus if you combine it with Evan's idea they'd still be required to do something every once in a while.

[Phil 5,129]

I honestly wouldn't say no to @Victor's suggestion of putting in a PT upgrade in the Player store - where you get an TPE for a total of 5 or 6 weeks of the season you bought it in. It wouldn't have to be very expensive ( I would love to see rookies buying this, so if they are fist gens, they can stay motivated to continue with PTs) and it's again, an option that rewards activity. 

 

If this idea doesn't gain traction here, then I'll spam the BoG.

[jRuutu 2,474]

Just now, Bojo said:

 

I think it's just a good way to keep members from burning out. Some people just can't put in all that effort every week after a player or two, and it helps keep them around. Plus if you combine it with Evan's idea they'd still be required to do something every once in a while.

Yea, something like that actually sounds pretty good!

[jRuutu 2,474]

8 minutes ago, Phil said:

I honestly wouldn't say no to @Victor's suggestion of putting in a PT upgrade in the Player store - where you get an TPE for a total of 5 or 6 weeks of the season you bought it in. It wouldn't have to be very expensive ( I would love to see rookies buying this, so if they are fist gens, they can stay motivated to continue with PTs) and it's again, an option that rewards activity. 

 

If this idea doesn't gain traction here, then I'll spam the BoG.

That is a good one as well and would absolutely be a useful thing to get from the store if it gets added there!