Two Players: The Proposal So Far

[eaglesfan036 4,603]

There should be a restriction so that both of a person's players can't be on the same team, for the sake of avoiding conflicts of interest. 

 

Looking at it GM wise, if I make a 2nd player and he is not on my team when I know there is a way I could get him to my team, I am much less motivated to work on my 2nd player if I am just helping out another team instead of helping out my own. However, if I know that my 2nd player is not allowed on my team, I probably don't care as much if my 2nd player helps out a team in the EU for example. This also works for the people who are super loyal to teams such as the cuffys or jaime's of the world so their jimmies don't get rustled either.

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

I think we should just keep it simple. Either allow 100% player movement between teams, or just don't allow 2 players from the same member on the same team.

 

K.I.S.S.

[Victor 10,953]

54 minutes ago, eaglesfan036 said:

This also works for the people who are super loyal to teams such as the cuffys or jaime's of the world so their jimmies don't get rustled either.

I imagine they wouldn't make a second player anyway.

[scoop 3,432]

8 hours ago, Mr. Power said:

Firstly, it should be at least a 4 season restriction, not 3. As in, that member can create their second player in the off-season/season of their players 4th season in the league.

I think we should be looking at it in terms of draft year, just for the sake of less confusion of more definiteness. (wtf definiteness is a word?)

 

But I agree that three might be a little too short, but I'm not adamant about it. At a three draft difference, though, an S50 player like myself could create a second player at the S51 trade deadline. I feel like that may be an unnecessarily short amount of time. However, it could force someone to wait to recreate after retiring a player early, even if it's just their 6th or 7th season, if they also have a younger player.

[gorlab 4,321]

checking in to say i wont be making a 2nd player

 

 

and if there is some advantage about having a 2nd player, ima bitch & moan about it.

[NotAVHLM-GM 1,858]

Wonder what the role of a player doing mostly welfare will be (like Maximoff) in a situation like this. Since it's clear I'll only have one player.

Will there careers still be fun?

[Victor 10,953]

18 minutes ago, Green said:

Wonder what the role of a player doing mostly welfare will be (like Maximoff) in a situation like this. Since it's clear I'll only have one player.

Will there careers still be fun?

I don't see why not. There will likely be more of you and a few more TPE whores.

 

I expect a level playing field will decrease everyone's production but its still going to be a two line league.

[NotAVHLM-GM 1,858]

A two line league still sounds good then indeed, was afraid the welfare players might have been buried to 3rd, 4th liners with low playtime.

[Victor 10,953]

4 minutes ago, Green said:

A two line league still sounds good then indeed, was afraid the welfare players might have been buried to 3rd, 4th liners with low playtime.

Expansion would be preferable to that for sure.

[Victor 10,953]

Updated the OP with the additional discussion had here. Added a section on carryover, cleared up how earning TPE works, and updated the trading rule with Streetlight's suggestion. Also changed the implementation strategy.

[Will 4,660]

On 5/20/2016 at 6:02 PM, Victor said:

* increase $20 donation limit to $40 but only allow to split the rewards from the additional $20 between the players.

 

 

What does that mean?

[Molholt 2,185]

I think asking for double donations is a bit much - especially when the money doesn't seem to be being used for much outside of hosting. 

[Victor 10,953]

Just now, Draper said:

 

What does that mean?

So you donate $20 and it's the exact same system as it is now, except you get double the rewards (since two players),

 

Then you can donate another $20 and $10 worth of rewards goes to one player and $10 worth to the other. So an extra doubles week each if you donate $40.

[Will 4,660]

Hmm, we've got some stuff planned with the S50 Recruitment Drive and for S50 celebrations in general that will cost a good chunk of cash. But, I'm not sure about $40 or offering more recruitment rewards in general. Donations can already get you up to 17 uncapped per season so I don't know about adding another doubles. fz

 

My original thought was to add $5 or $10 dollars to have your donation go to both players. For example, if its a $5 or $10 donation, add another $5 to have it go to both players. If its $15 or $20, add $10 to have it go to both players.  IDK though.

[Da Trifecta 1,899]

Or donate any amount and it applies to both

[Devise 4,475]

Yeah I feel like it should just apply to both. At the end of the day we are still getting people to donate real world money to a fake virtual thing. The better value we make that for members the better that works I feel. 

 

 

[Da Trifecta 1,899]

By doing both players get the one donation, maybe you will get more people to donate because they want both players to be good.

[Higgins 3,618]

yeah 40$ is too much

[Baozi 1,658]

29 minutes ago, Higgins said:

yeah 40$ is too much

 

Can I donate $100 and get a 1000 TPE player?

[Knight 1,289]

For the money, you want to encourage donations, give great value for it, and cap them fairly low. We go through about 5-6 seasons a year, thus asking for $40 would essentially be asking for ~$220/year.

 

I am pretty sure that none of us, save for Robbie, are well off enough to splash that kind of cash. We shouldn't need $220/year from members to keep this thing afloat. $20/season is already a fair bit, but adding value to that will perhaps encourage more donations. It's a fine balance, and one that needs to be respected.

[Devise 4,475]

5 hours ago, Knight said:

For the money, you want to encourage donations, give great value for it, and cap them fairly low. We go through about 5-6 seasons a year, thus asking for $40 would essentially be asking for ~$220/year.

 

I am pretty sure that none of us, save for Robbie, are well off enough to splash that kind of cash. We shouldn't need $220/year from members to keep this thing afloat. $20/season is already a fair bit, but adding value to that will perhaps encourage more donations. It's a fine balance, and one that needs to be respected.

 

/End of discussion on the donation options. It applies to both players. Since welfare can't be doubled with a doubles week anyways those type of rewards would only apply to the one player in most cases anyway.

[Baozi 1,658]

2 hours ago, Mr. Power said:

 

/End of discussion on the donation options. It applies to both players. Since welfare can't be doubled with a doubles week anyways those type of rewards would only apply to the one player in most cases anyway.

 

Welfare can be doubled with donation weeks.Its not usually worth it though cuz well you only get 10 points instead of 12.

Edited May 28, 2016 by tfong

[Victor 10,953]

fine fine edited

 

I'm happy if donations are the main criticism at this point.

[Molholt 2,185]

Status update?

[Victor 10,953]

26 minutes ago, Molholt said:

Status update?

Raised this in admin forum yesterday with the public vote clearly two thirds in favour.