Two Players

[Baozi 1,635]

8 minutes ago, ADwyer87 said:

You write some long ass PTs haha. I write for the mag, and usually my articles get cut short because they won't fit, and I've never spent much more than an hour

 

I'm a slower writer than most, and back then for my super active players I tended to try and do alot of research as well. I'm sure there are people that can pump out good quality articles in 30 mins, that wasn't me though lol.

[Baozi 1,635]

2 minutes ago, Molholt said:

I see no reason to limit the second player - you can do PTs for both, because we want to promote activity, but you can only claim welfare for one. I don't see the issue with that - I'm not saying take welfare away, but damn, I don't think you deserve 8-10 TPE a week from welfare for two players. 

 

Lets be honest, it's not hard to get a 6 anymore. Just post something. 

 

Nono, I'm not suggesting you can't do PTs for both. But the suggestion was that one PT was worth 6 to each player rather than the person needing to make one PT for each player. That essentially puts a PT at 12 value. 

 

I mean among the other things that would make it lopsided like free agents could essentially be a package of players going forward unless you limit it and say dual players can't be on the same team etc...etc..

[Molholt 2,183]

Just now, tfong said:

 

Nono, I'm not suggesting you can't do PTs for both. But the suggestion was that one PT was worth 6 to each player rather than the person needing to make one PT for each player. That essentially puts a PT at 12 value. 

 

I mean among the other things that would make it lopsided like free agents could essentially be a package of players going forward unless you limit it and say dual players can't be on the same team etc...etc..

 

But I addressed that in the OP. I said you could limit one player to a specific team and also that the double pt was just a route that could be taken. I'd be fine with it being a separate pt for each. I do think that all extras should apply to both - VHL.com, predictions, giveaways, recruitment, etc. 

[Baozi 1,635]

2 minutes ago, Molholt said:

 

But I addressed that in the OP. I said you could limit one player to a specific team and also that the double pt was just a route that could be taken. I'd be fine with it being a separate pt for each. I do think that all extras should apply to both - VHL.com, predictions, giveaways, recruitment, etc. 

 

My original response was responding to the one PT worth 6 to both players.

I have no qualms about letting people do 2 PTs (good for activity and I support this plus more stuff for me to read).

I have no qualms about predictions being worth both too (makes sense since these usually aren't player bound anyways).

 

 

[jRuutu 2,314]

3 minutes ago, Molholt said:

I see no reason to limit the second player - you can do PTs for both, because we want to promote activity, but you can only claim welfare for one. I don't see the issue with that - I'm not saying take welfare away, but damn, I don't think you deserve 8-10 TPE a week from welfare for two players. 

 

Lets be honest, it's not hard to get a 6 anymore. Just post something. 

This pretty much. It´s not that hard to get that 6, look at my media spots for example   Just write 70-100 words each day and post the finished product during the weekend to get that 6.

 

Two welfare players is just too much in my opinion and will be one step closer in making VHL a true welfare league. 

 

[gregreg 930]

So we can agree that you can do two PTs but not two welfares

[Baozi 1,635]

3 minutes ago, gregreg said:

So we can agree that you can do two PTs but not two welfares

 

From me yep. I think the dual player benefit in itself should be an active PT benefit.

Edited May 16, 2016 by tfong

[evrydayimbyfuglien 600]

4 minutes ago, gregreg said:

So we can agree that you can do two PTs but not two welfares

I don't like the idea of having to do two PTs tbh, but if I'm in the minority, I guess I'll live or just won't create a second player if I don't feel I can handle it. I like to think I've done a pretty good job of earning TPE up to this point but I don't think I could swing two PTs per week.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,709]

1 minute ago, evrydayimbyfuglien said:

I don't like the idea of having to do two PTs tbh, but if I'm in the minority, I guess I'll live or just won't create a second player if I don't feel I can handle it. I like to think I've done a pretty good job of earning TPE up to this point but I don't think I could swing two PTs per week.

 

What I'd probably end up doing is having one PT and one welfare player at a time in this case. Or stagger them so my younger player always receives more TPE when it's more useful at the beginning of his career, and let my older dude do welfare.

[jRuutu 2,314]

3 minutes ago, evrydayimbyfuglien said:

I don't like the idea of having to do two PTs tbh, but if I'm in the minority, I guess I'll live or just won't create a second player if I don't feel I can handle it. I like to think I've done a pretty good job of earning TPE up to this point but I don't think I could swing two PTs per week.

You can always make a ´semi-active´ player with the second one, where you claim welfare and do the PT´s when you got time  

[gregreg 930]

Yeah guys you don't have to have two players. You will have the option no one will force you to make two players 

[Daniel 565]

I like the idea of having a second guy I can just put on welfare and experiment with a little for when I make my next player. I really don't have the time to pump out two PT's a week but nuff respect to those who do 

[Beketov 8,646]

What if we made it that PT's are separate for both players (would need 2 to get max with both) but if you do a PT for one you can claim welfare for the other? Still gives a benefit to those who can do two PT's but doesn't push away people who might want two players.

 

For example, I'm all for 2 players and agree that welfare should only be for one of them. However I DEFINITELY do not have time for 2 PT's a week. I think it's more than fair to have one of them be a welfare player and 1 be a PT player, as long as I don't claim both on both players at the same time.

 

Basically makes the PT options:

 

1. 2 PT's

2. 1 PT, 1 Welfare

3. 1 Welfare

 

Ehich gives people the option to have a blended player (PT some weeks, welfare others), 2 strong players, 1 strong player and 1 welfare player OR 1 welfare player and 1 complete scrub.

 

Seems like it opens a lot of options and doesn't turn off some people (like myself and fuglien above) from creating a second player because they don't have time to devote to both.

 

Edit: I got really long winded with this so it was basically suggested while I was typing but oh well.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Beketov

[gregreg 930]

I agree with you beketov that's how it would work in my world 

[Baozi 1,635]

1 minute ago, gregreg said:

I agree with you beketov that's how it would work in my world 

 

I assumed you could choose which PT to claim on whichever player and use welfare on the other one.

 

Also are we going to label players as primary vs secondaries? Will it matter for stats capturing or award winning? Are we esatablishing rules wheere players with their duals goto the same team?

[evrydayimbyfuglien 600]

Yeah, I realize we don't HAVE to create a second player, which is why I said if I didn't think I could handle it, I just wouldn't do it. 

 

So let's say we went forward with this, how would we handle career length for the "welfare guy" who would theoretically be VHLM eligible for a while, would those years count towards the max years?

[Baozi 1,635]

1 minute ago, evrydayimbyfuglien said:

Yeah, I realize we don't HAVE to create a second player, which is why I said if I didn't think I could handle it, I just wouldn't do it. 

 

So let's say we went forward with this, how would we handle career length for the "welfare guy" who would theoretically be VHLM eligible for a while, would those years count towards the max years?

 

Yes. They count now anyways already so nothing changes.

 

If you choose to stay extra years in VHLM it counts towards your year cap.

[Beketov 8,646]

2 minutes ago, gregreg said:

I agree with you beketov that's how it would work in my world 

There's some stuff that would have to be made clear, for example buying a welfare upgrade only works on the player who buys it. Aside from simple stuff like that though it seems like the best system.

 

I agree with fong that having welfare be limited to 1 per week but giving both players 6 per PT seems pretty unfair to welfare guys so separating them into two PT's makes the most sense. This way it allows players to have that second guy without him having to be a total scrub (or both players being half scrubs) but while still offering a benefit to people who can manage 2 PT's.

[evrydayimbyfuglien 600]

2 minutes ago, tfong said:

 

Yes. They count now anyways already so nothing changes.

 

If you choose to stay extra years in VHLM it counts towards your year cap.

Alright, I wasn't 100% sure on that currently.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,709]

The one issue I could see personally is that it makes it kind of a nightmare for updaters that don't have both players. Would be helpful for the Welfare head to make some sort of weekly master list to make sure only one player per member claimed Welfare in that case.

[Beketov 8,646]

4 minutes ago, evrydayimbyfuglien said:

Yeah, I realize we don't HAVE to create a second player, which is why I said if I didn't think I could handle it, I just wouldn't do it. 

 

So let's say we went forward with this, how would we handle career length for the "welfare guy" who would theoretically be VHLM eligible for a while, would those years count towards the max years?

I don't see why it would change anything. Would be no different than a player who doesn't earn much now. Drafted in your draft year and if you stay in the VHLM for ages than its just VHL years you lose.

 

Also, nothing saying you would HAVE to have a "welfare" player and a "PT" player. You could easily update player 1 with the PT the first week and then player 2 with it the second week, effectively splitting all TPE earned between the two.

[Molholt 2,183]

I say only one player per team - when I was in the baseball league with 4 players, you could never have more than 2 on one team and it worked out, so 50% here seems good too.

[gregreg 930]

5 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

The one issue I could see personally is that it makes it kind of a nightmare for updaters that don't have both players. Would be helpful for the Welfare head to make some sort of weekly master list to make sure only one player per member claimed Welfare in that case.

Just post the player name when you post a PT or welfare

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

The 2 PT thing seems a bit much. I doubt even the best of TPE whores could handle all that.

[Beketov 8,646]

1 minute ago, gregreg said:

Just post the player name when you post a PT or welfare

That seems like the easiest solution. Have it distinctly in the post which player it's being used for so the updater can cross reference when they are doing the updates. Doesn't even make it that you can't change your mind later as you can edit the post so long as the updater hasn't put anything in yet.