Two Players

[scoop 3,384]

Here's a quick idea that I'm not really thinking out completely but just want to get it out there for discussion before I'm off to work

 

First, I think PT/Welfare should be how Beketov laid it out; I'm too lazy to find the post, but essentially your options are this:

 

2 PT

1 PT; 1 Welfare

1 Welfare

 

PTs only count for one player

 

Now here's my idea: each season, you must name one player as your primary and one player as your secondary (you can change it each off-season if you like)

 

Only your primary player can get TPE from jobs, predictions, fantasy, etc. Essentially, your primary gets all the extraneous TPE that you would get now. So fleshing out which TPE is accessible to the secondary player is more important. I'm thinking secondary would be able to get any player-centric TPE: practice facility, VHLM rewards, training camp, award TPE. And then of course they could get TPE from PTs/welfare.

 

That's just a quick thought, because it seems people are trying to find ways to prevent someone from having two superstars and flooding the league with them, which I generally agree with but am not necessarily strongly opposed to.

[scoop 3,384]

4 minutes ago, Smarch said:

Why stop at two players?

not sure if sarcasm in opposition to two-player idea

[Molholt 2,185]

I feel like everyone wants it to be too difficult lol. 

 

Separate PTs, one welfare, jobs and predictions go to both, contracts an bios go to one. Why bog it down with other restrictions and things that need to be tracked and kept up with? 

[Smarch 3,092]

51 minutes ago, Streetlight said:

not sure if sarcasm in opposition to two-player idea

No I want 10 players. Then one might be good. Stats 101

[scoop 3,384]

2 hours ago, Molholt said:

I feel like everyone wants it to be too difficult lol. 

 

Separate PTs, one welfare, jobs and predictions go to both, contracts an bios go to one. Why bog it down with other restrictions and things that need to be tracked and kept up with? 

If we end up expanding, then I'd be more supportive of allowing things to count for both, except point tasks of course.

[Molholt 2,185]

6 hours ago, Streetlight said:

If we end up expanding, then I'd be more supportive of allowing things to count for both, except point tasks of course.

 

I think you'd have to expand. At least by a little.

[gregreg 930]

Go look at the EU.. We don't need to expand for a while. 

[Victor 10,831]

48 minutes ago, gregreg said:

Go look at the EU.. We don't need to expand for a while. 

Are you talking about the European Union because good god that's poignant.

 

15 hours ago, Smarch said:

Why stop at two players?

[CowboyinAmerica 2,841]

58 minutes ago, gregreg said:

Go look at the EU.. We don't need to expand for a while. 

 

I'd personally like a two team expansion at the start, if for nothing else because you're hopefully going to see a massive influx of players at the beginning and I want those new players to have ample playing time and be sold on the idea.

 

Also agree with I think Devise that it should be VHLM teams promoted, but not Moscow because that team doesn't have much non-Vasteras history.

Edited May 17, 2016 by CowboyinAmerica

[gregreg 930]

I'd rather see team fill out then just add two teams that won't have players right away 

[CowboyinAmerica 2,841]

 

1 minute ago, gregreg said:

I'd rather see team fill out then just add two teams that won't have players right away 

 

Just my opinion again but: 

 

On 5/15/2016 at 3:57 PM, CowboyinAmerica said:

Thing is though, I think expansion would have to be necessary. That was the point I was going to make before I saw the last couple posts - I actually don't like the idea of having four full lines at all, even if it corresponds with a new sim engine. You have people as it is not happy about time on ice; well, you're about to see that decreased by about one-third for the top players, by half of more for the players/members further down the depth chart. For me personally, it would be much more fun to have one player at 30 minutes per game than two players at 15. Not to mention the issues of being further behind that YEAH raised. The GM thing is an issue as well, but kill/dramatically retool the VHLM...

[gregreg 930]

1 minute ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

 

Just my opinion again but: 

 

I don't think we will get that right away though. If we work it out that 8/10 teams will have more than two lines right away then maybe but I think expansion would come later after we get the 2nd players slowing into the league

[Tixe 20]

This is a pretty neat idea, but my other self disagrees. 

 

Serious though, do it. 

[gregreg 930]

[scoop 3,384]

I agree with greg in that I don't think we should expand in conjunction with implementing this, but if we do go to two players, we should immediately be preparing for a potential expansion a couple seasons down the road. 

[Devise 4,475]

On 17/05/2016 at 0:16 PM, gregreg said:

I don't think we will get that right away though. If we work it out that 8/10 teams will have more than two lines right away then maybe but I think expansion would come later after we get the 2nd players slowing into the league

 

Our league at least with the current sim does not work well with more than two lines. If we were to switch sims maybe but we are still very concerned about people being ineffective fourth liners and being scrubs. It's why expansion should be considered especially if we can't get four lines working in a way that keeps the balance we have now.

[scoop 3,384]

1 hour ago, Mr. Power said:

 

Our league at least with the current sim does not work well with more than two lines. If we were to switch sims maybe but we are still very concerned about people being ineffective fourth liners and being scrubs. It's why expansion should be considered especially if we can't get four lines working in a way that keeps the balance we have now.

But all those new players won't immediately be in the VHL. That's why I think we would want to be looking at expansion shortly after implementing this but we should get some idea if just how many players we are adding before we expand. Maybe 1-3 seasons after the first crop of second players

[Devise 4,475]

2 minutes ago, Streetlight said:

But all those new players won't immediately be in the VHL. That's why I think we would want to be looking at expansion shortly after implementing this but we should get some idea if just how many players we are adding before we expand. Maybe 1-3 seasons after the first crop of second playersplayers

 

 

I'm fine if we go that road, but we could easily just put all the new players created as second players into an expansion draft and get the two new teams out on the right foot. 

[gregreg 930]

Expansion is something we look at last, after we see how many players we could make two players right away. 

[Will 4,660]

14 hours ago, Streetlight said:

I agree with greg in that I don't think we should expand in conjunction with implementing this, but if we do go to two players, we should immediately be preparing for a potential expansion a couple seasons down the road. 

 

This is probably the route we would go if it did happen. We would start preparing on things like team names, logos, all that jazz but wouldn't actually expand until we were positive it was necessary.

[Baozi 1,658]

Off Topic note:

 

What would happen if we contracted the league and limited endurance to an amount that maxed out played mins to a point where you actually needed 3 lines?

[Higgins 3,618]

Yeah why would there be expansion when there's already a bunch of garbage teams. Increase the salary cap so teams can more often run 6F/4D, 5F/4D, 5F/3D, line ups without waiting until the trade deadline.

[gregreg 930]

Next thing is how far apart each 2nd player will be. 3-4 seasons seems about right 

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

4 minutes ago, gregreg said:

Next thing is how far apart each 2nd player will be. 3-4 seasons seems about right 

 

I believe a minimum of two seasons seems about right. So since I was S49 I can't create til S51 (S50 trade deadline) for S52 draft.

Edited May 19, 2016 by Da Trifecta

[Will 4,660]

On 5/15/2016 at 4:44 PM, Draper said:

And yeah I will say right now that LR's are 100% going back to the bottom if this were to happen