Edition 319

[STZ 5,360]

VHL Magazine - Edition 319

 

 

FUTURE OF THE MAG

The Magazine has been running for 319 issues. Let that number soak in. However, the past few months the content has been dwindling, and the consistency has really dropped with our writers. I was pretty close to considering just giving up my job as Editor, as I'm getting three articles a week. Our writers are amazing, and I understand that it's not due to a lack of caring, just more the lack of time with their real life. However, I'm proud to say that it seems as though this trend of small editions is about to be over. Since making a status update to try and generate interest in Mag Jobs, I am proud to announce we have hired Three New Magazine Writers! All three are exciting additions, and no doubt will stir up some discussion. I've chosen to name one of them and keep the other two a surprise for Edition 320. (If those two guys want to tell people they can, but it's their choice)

 

The writer I will announce is our former Editorial writer Devise! The reason I am announcing him today, is because he has an interesting new article to reveal, and needs the community to help him with this project. Here is a quote from the man himself:

 

"Hey VHL faithful, it's Devise here and STZ's call to see more action on the magazine made me realize we don't have much in the way of reader engagement articles on the mag. So starting next edition I'll be handling an article that looks at your questions, your topic points, and your thoughts. As well as of course my own on some of your ideas. Please send any PM's for questions you want directly answered, topics you'd like to see some words written on, or even more in depth thoughts; think letter to the editor style. PM me Devise directly with these and I'll make sure your names are included in my articles. So there you have it, now let's get some back and forth dialogue going because the VHL is great and stuff." 

 

Thanks Everyone!

[Corco 1,237]

In regards to the update scale, maybe it could change in that 90-99 would need 5 points instead of 4?

[STZ 5,360]

15 minutes ago, Corco said:

In regards to the update scale, maybe it could change in that 90-99 would need 5 points instead of 4?

 

I think it is being explored.. Pajodcast went into it on their last episode, pretty interesting listen if you have some spare time/patience to listen to those three.. 

[BluObieZ 1,125]

Well... if you told me you were trying to keep it a secret I would have kept my mouth shut

[Devise 4,475]

Good edition boys happy to be back on board. Send me those PM"s VHL like seriously I'll cover whatever the hell you want me to cover no matter how controversial.  I see people post in the suggestions forum all the time and wish some of their ideas got some more notice, so go for it let's get discussion happening on your thoughts and we'll keep the mag and league strong going forward here.  

[Baozi 1,658]

Honestly people always talk about how OP welfare is but just howmany players have HOF welfare players?

[Devise 4,475]

9 minutes ago, tfong said:

Honestly people always talk about how OP welfare is but just howmany players have HOF welfare players?

 

Honestly it isn't as much of a debate of TPE whores vs welfare players as it looks like it is. Sterling had some thoughts in the BoG echoing yours thinking we were targeting the welfare guys and trying to make it so they can't have any success. That isn't the case. It's more so that by having the number of competent players with 90's or above in some of the more important attributes (skating, passing, defense, scoring) we have less consistent sim results, particularly for players. What team you are on, who your linemates are, they seem to play way bigger of a difference now than they used to. Not that they didn't always play some impact. But you can have a guy on a rebuilding club with sub 300 TPE light the league up, or you can have a 400 TPE guy on a rebuilding club do shit. There just isn't any way to tell how your player is going to do just by earning TPE anymore. The actual proposed scale shouldn't hurt any welfare member that much, especially if you have attributes that aren't at 90 yet since the update scale only changes when you hit 85. 

 

The total amount of TPE that was proposed to change per attribute is only 18 to get to 99. It would be instead of 116 to get an attribute to 99, it is instead 134. With 85-90 going to 4 TPE per, 90-95 5 TPE, and 95-99 6 TPE. 

 

As it stands right now there is some consensus that both player build varieties are lacking and that there isn't really much incentive to earn that much more TPE. The guys who primarily earn welfare and create good players out of it do other things, jobs etc. There is nothing wrong with building a good player out of welfare and this shouldn't mess with that formula. It just gives those who do earn the extra sometimes only 2-3 per week actual reason to keep doing so. We are seeing a huge uptake in players who earn enough to hit 400-500 and then they slow down because the need for the higher TPE is less.

 

From my viewpoint if we were to maintain that course we may as well get rid of PT's since eventually people would stop using them as more and more learn of the curve. 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2017 by Devise

[Baozi 1,658]

I forgot to mention I'd be ok with a harder limit from 90 or 95+ to 99. 

 

Just lets not make it harder for welfare peeps!

Edited February 19, 2017 by tfong

[Kendrick 4,741]

@STZ If you need an article every two weeks I can write one for it in relation to draft classes?