S54: Update Scale Changes

[sterling 1,997]

Just now, jRuutu said:

Max Von Hohenzolleren (s50 player) is at 312 TPE, pure welfare player who I could see getting near 700? Not sure if he will, but even if he wont, his player is still bit too effective for pure welfare player. (at least now, maybe that changes with the new update scale)

 

He's halfway through his career already and has 312 TPE? Seems like he won't get past 700 and keep in mind he has depreciation to worry about 

[Da Trifecta 1,899]

6 minutes ago, Higgins said:

 

Could you list the reasons why this new update scale is bad for people that claim pension and good for people that do PT? I haven't seen any yet.

 

Those who have more time get rewarded more?

[jRuutu 2,464]

Just now, sterling said:

He's halfway through his career already and has 312 TPE? Seems like he won't get past 700 and keep in mind he has depreciation to worry about 

True, but he could still be really effective player even at 500 TPE. No idea when he goes to depreciation though.

[Higgins 3,618]

10 minutes ago, sterling said:

Its very simple - people who earn less TPE have a reduced ability to make good players because it costs more TPE to add to attributes. AKA TPE is worth less. The people who have the least of it are affected the most. Why do you keep asking this question when it has been answered?

 

TPE will be worth less for everyone. I won't be able to maintain 99's with Black Velvet anymore either.

[Devise 4,475]

23 minutes ago, jRuutu said:

True, but he could still be really effective player even at 500 TPE. No idea when he goes to depreciation though.

 

Yes but now his player build decision starts to come into play much more. Under the old update scale, as he entered the VHL Max mainlined scoring to 99 at the expense of other attributes. However because it was so easy for him to mainline 99 he was able to bring some of his other attributes way higher. Now even if he decides on a re roll to mainline scoring back to 99 in this new update scale, that hurts him way more. It hurts him 18 TPE more. Thats 18 vital TPE that can't go to any of the other attributes he upgraded, which will make him less effective in the sim. And for a guy who earns only 4 a week and is at 300 TPE currently, that 18 TPE matters. And that is just one stat. He has another stat that is 90 as well in Skating. Now if he wants to keep that even what it was it'll cost him an extra 5 TPE. And that is just to get those two attributes what they were, your talking about sacrificing a whopping 23 TPE. And as I stated, that is just to get them where they are. When depreciation starts coming into play? Get out of town. Because he chose to have attributes above 90 the harsher update scale means he is going to have a hell of a time trying to maintain the stats to what they are. He just doesn't earn enough TPE to do it. Meanwhile the people who earn more? Sure depreciation hurts more, but they can still handle it and get the majority of attributes they want to high 90's. At a certain point Max doesn't earn enough to keep more than 1 attribute at 99, maybe 2 if he literally says fuck updating any other attribute at all. But that is to the detriment of his player. 

 

Which is where we get into why I don't understand Sterlings frustration with it. Even under this system Sterling a pure welfare player like Max as listed above has to make some serious sacrifices. But where is it stated that he hasn't earned enough to still make a competent player? If he chooses to not mainline stats he gets more value by adding more attributes to 80-85. He has to make that decision. And remember that is just for a pure weflare. For members like yourself, who as you stated and has been stated in this thread countless times earn more than just welfare there is going to be no problem getting and maintaining attributes above 90. Sure the amount of attributes you guys had at 99 and were able to maintain will change, but that comes with the cost of doing business. Remember the PT earners are the ones that should have the benefits of the most flexibility, the most able to maintain high stats, the most able to handle depreciation. They earn more. 

 

But under this system the welfare users who do more than just welfare still have plenty of options when it comes to building a good player. 

 

 

Edited February 25, 2017 by Devise

[jRuutu 2,464]

8 minutes ago, Devise said:

 

Yes but now his player build decision starts to come into play much more. Under the old update scale, as he entered the VHL Max mainlined scoring to 99 at the expense of other attributes. However because it was so easy for him to mainline 99 he was able to bring some of his other attributes way higher. Now even if he decides on a re roll to mainline scoring back to 99 in this new update scale, that hurts him way more. It hurts him 18 TPE more. Thats 18 vital TPE that can't go to any of the other attributes he upgraded, which will make him less effective in the sim. And for a guy who earns only 4 a week and is at 300 TPE currently, that 18 TPE matters. And that is just one stat. He has another stat that is 90 as well in Skating. Now if he wants to keep that even what it was it'll cost him an extra 5 TPE. And that is just to get those two attributes what they were, your talking about sacrificing a whopping 23 TPE. And as I stated, that is just to get them where they are. When depreciation starts coming into play? Get out of town. Because he chose to have attributes above 90 the harsher update scale means he is going to have a hell of a time trying to maintain the stats to what they are. He just doesn't earn enough TPE to do it. Meanwhile the people who earn more? Sure depreciation hurts more, but they can still handle it and get the majority of attributes they want to high 90's. At a certain point Max doesn't earn enough to keep more than 1 attribute at 99, maybe 2 if he literally says fuck updating any other attribute at all. But that is to the detriment of his player. 

 

Which is where we get into why I don't understand Sterlings frustration with it. Even under this system Sterling a pure welfare player like Max as listed above has to make some serious sacrifices. But where is it stated that he hasn't earned enough to still make a competent player? If he chooses to not mainline stats he gets more value by adding more attributes to 80-85. He has to make that decision. And remember that is just for a pure weflare. For members like yourself, who as you stated and has been stated in this thread countless times earn more than just welfare there is going to be no problem getting and maintaining attributes above 90. Sure the amount of attributes you guys had at 99 and were able to maintain will change, but that comes with the cost of doing business. Remember the PT earners are the ones that should have the benefits of the most flexibility, the most able to maintain high stats, the most able to handle depreciation. They earn more. 

 

But under this system the welfare users who do more than just welfare still have plenty of options when it comes to building a good player. 

 

 

The new update scale is sounding better and better every minute  Going to be great to see more variety in players and in their builds. 

 

 

[Jericho 917]

@sterling we covered this in the BoG topic, but I really feel you don't understand how relativity works. We tax people at the highest TPE points, so it should hit welfare guys later.

 

Let's put it this way. Player A is a welfare guy and player B is a PT guy. They create at the same time. For simplicity sake we'll say that they both put all their TPE into one stat. By the time player A gets to 85 under the old scale, player B will be at 94.5. Under thew new scale, Player A will still hit 85 at the same time, since there is no change, but player B is only at 92 and change. It's not a huge difference, but it's definitely better for the welfare guy. It makes things easier on him.

 

Now it will make it harder for a welfare guy to hit 99 in every stat, but it's harder for everyone. Which works out well in RELATIVITY. Having better numbers doesn't make you do well if your competition also have higher numbers. The idea here is that it equalizes the curve. Instead of it being TPE whores beat welfare guys, it means prime payers beat younger players (with depreciated guys getting varying levels of success based on banking). The thing before was that a prime aged welfare guy had a good chance at getting fucked over by a young player who mainlined scoring or something. Basically the effect should stop young TPE whores from crushing welfare players in their prime.

 

As for your "it's worked for years so don't fuck with it", that's a really poor argument. I remember a lot of guys saying that as a point against bringing welfare into the league when we introduced it. If something can be improved upon, it should be. And history isn't always right. The old scale worked well for the VHL in it's early years. You guys had a harder time getting TPE back then. But the numbers have grown, and the scale never did. When TPE has effectively doubled over a career and we introduce a MODEST change to the update scale you shouldn't be claiming the sky is falling.

 

I agree recruitment and retention are bigger issues, but those are also tougher to tackle, and the two aren't mutually exclusive. If you really aren't coming back because of this we'll miss you, but you're really ending things on a sour note for a bad reason. I feel like you either are too stubborn to realize the goal here isn't to fuck you over, or you did realize it after we had pages of arguments and data to back up our opinion and you don't want to admit that you made a mistake. You did a lot of good things for a long time, but that doesn't mean that your word is gospel. I feel like the BoG part of this debate was fairly respectful toward your views and we made it very clear that our ultimate goal was to benefit everyone. That changed a bit once it went public, but that's the nature of the league. SOme people have strong opinions, and some of those opinions are stupid. But leaving over this really small change strikes me as childish, and it makes the last chapter in your book kind of a let down.

[TheLastOlympian07 2,388]

1 hour ago, Jericho said:

@sterling we covered this in the BoG topic, but I really feel you don't understand how relativity works. We tax people at the highest TPE points, so it should hit welfare guys later.

 

Let's put it this way. Player A is a welfare guy and player B is a PT guy. They create at the same time. For simplicity sake we'll say that they both put all their TPE into one stat. By the time player A gets to 85 under the old scale, player B will be at 94.5. Under thew new scale, Player A will still hit 85 at the same time, since there is no change, but player B is only at 92 and change. It's not a huge difference, but it's definitely better for the welfare guy. It makes things easier on him.

 

Now it will make it harder for a welfare guy to hit 99 in every stat, but it's harder for everyone. Which works out well in RELATIVITY. Having better numbers doesn't make you do well if your competition also have higher numbers. The idea here is that it equalizes the curve. Instead of it being TPE whores beat welfare guys, it means prime payers beat younger players (with depreciated guys getting varying levels of success based on banking). The thing before was that a prime aged welfare guy had a good chance at getting fucked over by a young player who mainlined scoring or something. Basically the effect should stop young TPE whores from crushing welfare players in their prime.

 

As for your "it's worked for years so don't fuck with it", that's a really poor argument. I remember a lot of guys saying that as a point against bringing welfare into the league when we introduced it. If something can be improved upon, it should be. And history isn't always right. The old scale worked well for the VHL in it's early years. You guys had a harder time getting TPE back then. But the numbers have grown, and the scale never did. When TPE has effectively doubled over a career and we introduce a MODEST change to the update scale you shouldn't be claiming the sky is falling.

 

I agree recruitment and retention are bigger issues, but those are also tougher to tackle, and the two aren't mutually exclusive. If you really aren't coming back because of this we'll miss you, but you're really ending things on a sour note for a bad reason. I feel like you either are too stubborn to realize the goal here isn't to fuck you over, or you did realize it after we had pages of arguments and data to back up our opinion and you don't want to admit that you made a mistake. You did a lot of good things for a long time, but that doesn't mean that your word is gospel. I feel like the BoG part of this debate was fairly respectful toward your views and we made it very clear that our ultimate goal was to benefit everyone. That changed a bit once it went public, but that's the nature of the league. SOme people have strong opinions, and some of those opinions are stupid. But leaving over this really small change strikes me as childish, and it makes the last chapter in your book kind of a let down.

/thread

although I dont think it should have came to this point in the thread where someone had to break it down like this. We should trust the blue team and the BOG to do what's right for the league because  they wouldn't make changes if it was absolutely going to make the VHL better. I like this, it should make people want to work hard to get be one of the best.

Also @jRuutu stop with the welfare bashing. without welfare there isnt a VHL today. We need those members. 

[boubabi 4,725]

they took er jobs

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

For what it's worth, I'm a PT guy almost every week and I was all in for the change.

 

I'm not sure why there was such a strong debate in here, because to me it seems like such a small change. It seemed too easy to get to 99, and this makes it harder. That's the point. That's the only point I needed to see. Welfare or active, doesn't matter.

 

 

Also, if any of you "welfare guys" want a job, there's like 5-10 positions available in grading. They've been available for months.

[Ahma 1,428]

Ruutu just wants my player to suck.

[jRuutu 2,464]

1 hour ago, Ahma said:

Ruutu just wants my player to suck.

I´m the older brother, I don´t want you to steal my sunshine 

[Advantage 2,891]

21 hours ago, sterling said:

Again, I've stated my opinion many times that the league needs to be focusing on new members and not on changing things that have worked for the entirety of the league. Two players was a very cheap band-aid to a larger problem and when I noted these scale changes would alienate welfare players even more so my concerns were easily dismissed.

 

like I've said, when you've done point tasks and other roles in the league for ten years there should some understanding and respect of your former contributions

Some who supported it have done that too you know.  

 

The fact is there is simply more support for it and at the end of the day no one is disrespecting your contributions..as they are indeed league saving and incredibly noteworthy.

 

This is not even that massive of a change and I cannot believe you are going to leave cause of it.  For a guy who put so much effort into making this league what it is, to turn your back due to something so small that the majority agreed with..seems rather ridiculous.

Edited February 26, 2017 by Advantage

[eaglesfan036 4,603]

22 hours ago, sterling said:

I don't react well to poorly thought out ideas that don't target the real problems in the league, no. And I've been here long enough and led the league so my opinions are valid despite your ad hominems. I should also add that I personally helped to foster many of the changes that made this league successful for 10 years

Of course we're all grateful for the work you've put into the league, I'm not sure how you thought otherwise. It's just that almost every change brought up in the BOG you have been against. This is one that the majority of the league agrees with. I was against project player 2 but that hasn't made me leave the league. This is similiar

[sterling 1,997]

I didn't say I was leaving The league I said I wasn't recreating because of the changes that have been made to pension, update scale and the 2 player system. I can decide to leave when I want and after being here for 10 years I'd rather not have a player that is below average. The original pension plan was a way to keep older members here and I feel the changes have not made it worthwhile to create another player.

[sterling 1,997]

I'm also not entirely sure why a lot of you are writing novels to disagree with me, this is purely my opinion and I understand how many people don't share my point of view. I do, so slag off

[Jericho 917]

29 minutes ago, sterling said:

I'm also not entirely sure why a lot of you are writing novels to disagree with me, this is purely my opinion and I understand how many people don't share my point of view. I do, so slag off

 

Well because debate is healthy and productive. We also like to try and form some sort of consensus, which is why we did research and discussed things in detail, rather than closing our eyes covering our ears and telling everyone who disagreed with us to fuck off. We disagree with you based on our research, you disagree with us because....you're stubborn I guess? You haven't made a single argument that isn't based purely off speculation. 

[Devise 4,475]

29 minutes ago, sterling said:

I'm also not entirely sure why a lot of you are writing novels to disagree with me, this is purely my opinion and I understand how many people don't share my point of view. I do, so slag off

 

For me it was more making sure there wasn't a part of this perspective I was missing. In your case in was just curious what about this change bugs you so much. But it seems your of the opinion that those who wanted to see any changes to the update scale regardless of how it's done is wrong. And that's fine as you said, I was just curious if there was more of a middle ground we weren't meeting on this subject. 

 

But you don't want it tinkered with at all which I think wasn't going to happen. Too much league opinion on the state of welfare vs PT earning that doing nothing here I think eventually costs us more members in the long run.

[Devise 4,475]

2 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

Well because debate is healthy and productive. We also like to try and form some sort of consensus, which is why we did research and discussed things in detail, rather than closing our eyes covering our ears and telling everyone who disagreed with us to fuck off. We disagree with you based on our research, you disagree with us because....you're stubborn I guess? You haven't made a single argument that isn't based purely off speculation. 

 

That's not true at all. Even if it's still possible for welfare members to make good players the reality is they earn less and now what they earn is worth less if they go above 85 TPE in any attribute. Even that small of a change a enough for some. Remember we tried to make this transition as smooth as possible but people are allowed to like things the way they are.

[sterling 1,997]

1 hour ago, Jericho said:

 

Well because debate is healthy and productive. We also like to try and form some sort of consensus, which is why we did research and discussed things in detail, rather than closing our eyes covering our ears and telling everyone who disagreed with us to fuck off. We disagree with you based on our research, you disagree with us because....you're stubborn I guess? You haven't made a single argument that isn't based purely off speculation. 

I've actually made a lot of valid points, but good try.

[evrydayimbyfuglien 600]

2 hours ago, sterling said:

I didn't say I was leaving The league I said I wasn't recreating because of the changes that have been made to pension, update scale and the 2 player system. I can decide to leave when I want and after being here for 10 years I'd rather not have a player that is below average. The original pension plan was a way to keep older members here and I feel the changes have not made it worthwhile to create another player.

Wait, you're leaving? 

[sterling 1,997]

And for argument's sake, since @eaglesfan036 and @Jericho like to attack my character instead of having a logical argument, I would find this change more palatable of it were accompanied by an increase to career length and changes to the depreciation system. With that said, I still don't think your argument is valid based on a few high TPE earning members who can max their attributes out to 99 at present meanwhile the rest of us can't and won't. The only tennant of your argument was that a 569 TPE player led the league in goals last season which is a blasphemy to a lot of you, but not to me.

[Jericho 917]

1 hour ago, sterling said:

I've actually made a lot of valid points, but good try.

 

Name one. I haven't seen a single one in the entire BoG thread besides "Fuck you guys this shits on welfare guys".

 

I wouldn't say I'm attacking your character, I think you mean well but I don't think you're very good at entertaining ideas that disagree with you. I think you're a bit arrogant and you tend to dismiss anyone with different ideas with a "Shut up child I know more than you". I entertain a few of those qualities myself, but when I make a case I try and use logic and data to back it up when possible. If you'd like, we can go back post by post and go by examples. Or if you'd like we could turn this into a podcast because I think that'd make for some very interesting listening for the rest of the league.

[BOOM 8,748]

I haven't read every post so I apologize if this was mentioned before, but will this possibly mean(for good or bad) more players not going the full career?

[Advantage 2,891]

1 hour ago, sterling said:

And for argument's sake, since @eaglesfan036 and @Jericho like to attack my character instead of having a logical argument, I would find this change more palatable of it were accompanied by an increase to career length and changes to the depreciation system.

I actually agree..been on that train myself.

Edited February 27, 2017 by Advantage