Bringing Back Player 2 (PP2.5)

[Beaviss 4,957]

3 minutes ago, McWolf said:

 

My thought as well. People would either have two 1000 TPE stars or one 600 TPE Welfare players.  It doesn't make sense to give double the rewards for the same thing.

 

Thats why the three season buffer would be there.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

I hated the do double work for both players when EFL and SBA allowed one for both. We could learn from that and let PT's (capped stuff) be for both players. They have the 3 season gap to help there not be two 1,000 TPE players for one member. This could be fun and be a nice change of pace for some who may want to try it. It's also a reminder that not everyone has to do it and if they try it and it gets to be too much, just let one player go and go back to one.

[Beaviss 4,957]

1 minute ago, Trifecta said:

I hated the do double work for both players when EFL and SBA allowed one for both. We could learn from that and let PT's (capped stuff) be for both players. They have the 3 season gap to help there not be two 1,000 TPE players for one member. This could be fun and be a nice change of pace for some who may want to try it. It's also a reminder that not everyone has to do it and if they try it and it gets to be too much, just let one player go and go back to one.

 

Do the EFL and SBA currently allow for it to count for both?

[CowboyinAmerica 2,889]

11 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

 

That is why there is a three season buffer.

 

OK, then use Franchise Cornerstone and Ay Ay Ron dominating awards as an example. Three seasons doesn't mean much when you're powering that level of TPE.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

Just now, Beaviss said:

 

Do the EFL and SBA currently allow for it to count for both?

 

They sure do. I was claiming affiliate welfare. If I did a PT here, it went for all players across EFL and SBA. If I did it on EFL, same for here and SBA. So yeah, affiliate welfare should count for both players here as well.

[McWolf 3,115]

5 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

 

Thats why the three season buffer would be there.

You could still have a guy in his 4th and 7th or 8th season. If you cap week in week out, that's one guy at what? 800 and the other over 1000? Every season there would be at least one member with two stars, like Bushito right now. It would be easy to have both in contract years at the same time and have them both join the same contending team.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

Just now, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

OK, then use Franchise Cornerstone and Ay Ay Ron dominating awards as an example. Three seasons doesn't mean much when you're powering that level of TPE.

 

Not everyone has the drive to earn TPE at his levels. We may get some at the top of the pack, but I mean Bushito can do that himself and he is a GM. The point is, that you will have some people who can do that and those who can't. I remember watching people like Kendrick pass me up in TPE even though he was like a season behind me. So have I been pissed? Yes. I have learned to live with is but I still did my work and thrived.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

2 minutes ago, McWolf said:

You could still have a guy in his 4th and 7th or 8th season. If you cap week in week out, that's one guy at what? 800 and the other over 1000? Every season there would be at least one member with two stars, like Bushito right now. It would be easy to have both in contract years at the same time and have them both join the same contending team.

 

That's why the rule is that if one player is on a team, you can't bring your other player in. The only way they can be brought in is via trade or draft.

[McWolf 3,115]

Just now, Trifecta said:

 

That's why the rule is that if one player is on a team, you can't bring your other player in. The only way they can be brought in is via trade or draft.

Oh i didn't catch that. Well this helps a little bit.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,889]

1 minute ago, Trifecta said:

 

Not everyone has the drive to earn TPE at his levels. We may get some at the top of the pack, but I mean Bushito can do that himself and he is a GM. The point is, that you will have some people who can do that and those who can't. I remember watching people like Kendrick pass me up in TPE even though he was like a season behind me. So have I been pissed? Yes. I have learned to live with is but I still did my work and thrived.

 

That's my whole point though. Now imagine Kendrick passing you twice. Does the calculus change?

[Beaviss 4,957]

2 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

That's my whole point though. Now imagine Kendrick passing you twice. Does the calculus change?

 

Implying he wins the PP2.5 lotto though which for the first while will be very exclusive 

[Beaviss 4,957]

This is some good discussion its been awhile since we have had something like this

[CowboyinAmerica 2,889]

2 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

 

Implying he wins the PP2.5 lotto though which for the first while will be very exclusive 

 

If you're implementing something, I figure the point is sustainability, which means figuring out what it looks like ten seasons down the road. Just putting in and revoking a second player at will becomes even more needlessly complicated.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

6 minutes ago, CowboyinAmerica said:

 

That's my whole point though. Now imagine Kendrick passing you twice. Does the calculus change?

 

I mean he could have both players pass mine but his P2 wouldn't surpass P1 unless I retired my guy. That's the thing.

[CowboyinAmerica 2,889]

2 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

This is some good discussion its been awhile since we have had something like this

 

Yeah just for the record, I'm all for the discussion and think it's good to bring up new ideas. I just don't agree with this one.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

1 minute ago, Sonnet said:

I feel like we could definitely reach a sort of compromise here if we treat a PP2 as a sort of transition into your next remake, rather than an additional player that can skate alongside your main player and dominate. Focus on minimizing development boredom rather than becoming a huge power player with two all-stars at any given time.

 

That would be if your player was at year 6.5 and you go 1.5 with the 2nd to finish out the 8 on the first and get the 2nd ready. You have to factor in the carryover though which would be a huge jump but SBA does it.

[Victor 10,939]

I basically made it happen last time. Molholt's idea but I did this write up and all and pushed it along. It's dead, I'm sorry, this is one mistake we should never make again.

 

I'll be honest, it really happened because we didn't have enough active members. And I still think that it kept things moving just long enough for the league to not die. Got us a couple good drafts in a decade where most were absolutely shit (imagine if it was like S58/S59 for the entirety of the 50s) and that was important but it was just that, a stopgap solution.

 

It's messy, it's unnecessary, and I appreciate the excitement about the concept because I have literally been in that position 2 years ago but its not a healthy addition to the league.

[McWolf 3,115]

2 minutes ago, Sonnet said:

I feel like we could definitely reach a sort of compromise here if we treat a PP2 as a sort of transition into your next remake, rather than an additional player that can skate alongside your main player and dominate. Focus on minimizing development boredom rather than becoming a huge power player with two all-stars at any given time.

 

Get the buffer up from 3 seasons to 5-6 seasons. So P2 is barely entering his prime when P1 is retiring. They would never dominate together but you'd always have a player in his prime. 

[Peace 1,527]

I don't think two players earning the same TPE is advisable, especially considering that - like some concerns above - one guy mining in TPE will pass you twice with that strategy; VHL already suffers from a lack of Index players. I could get behind the second player earning TPE automatically when the original character is approved for TPE updates - like an automatic welfare for the second player. 

I earn 10 capped TPE weekly since I don't have job pay or review logs, so if the purpose is to inject more players into the Index (so teams have more of their roster filled and VHL can expand) then we shouldn't be loading the index with ten of the same player, you know? I don't think my second player should be earning 10 TPE as well, but more along the lines of what a top end welfare player would be. 

I've only been here a short time but I've already been told and read about the TPE/TPA discrepancies. 

Past 300 - 400 TPE, most people already have the build they want. The difference between 100 and 300 is more significant than 300 to 900, as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong.  

Just my $0.02

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

It's a very healthy one @Victor

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

@Beaviss Could open up the idea that the second player is limited to just 6 a week. Meaning they can just get the Media/GFX or welfare+ to earn their max. They can't earn any extra uncapped though. That could be feasible as it would allow you to have your all out player and then a depth player. I mean you could end up with a guy who has 1200 at the end of his career and another that finishes with say 600. That's not bad as a 600 TPE guy could still be more than capable of helping a team.

[Victor 10,939]

https://vhlforum.com/topic/30543-two-players-the-proposal-so-far/

 

Throwback to when I thought this was a good idea in case anyone has any doubts.

 

There's something from Einstein about insanity and all that.

[Beaviss 4,957]

1 minute ago, Victor said:

https://vhlforum.com/topic/30543-two-players-the-proposal-so-far/

 

Throwback to when I thought this was a good idea in case anyone has any doubts.

 

There's something from Einstein about insanity and all that.

 

I actually read through that prior to writing this and I think I corrected all the original mistakes I could be wrong though.

 

I'm driving home so I won't reply an hour or so 

[Victor 10,939]

To just add an additional point so it's not just "we tried, it failed, forget it", although to be honest that's all that needs to be said IMO...

 

We're seeing discussion about how STHS gives you about 4-5 different player options overall, including goalies. Should we really be encouraging people smashing through those player builds at double the speed?

[Spade18 1,305]

Right off the bat, I'm against this.  I only saw the tail end of the original player 2, but it was obviously not a system that encouraged long term growth of the league.  It was a band-aid, a good band-aid, but the wound needed stitches.

 

I think this is something I COULD get behind if the years are more spaced out.

 

I think three years is too close.

 

As a personal case, I've maxed every week for the past 2 or 3 seasons.

 

I have Colton Rayne who was from S57 who is at 1061 TPE and I have Ismond Kingfisher who was S62 at 427 TPE.

 

One is past his prime and on his way out the door while still being a contributer, the other is just hitting his stride, albeit on a rebuilding team.

 

Kingfisher will not enter "stardom" territory until Rayne is retired.

 

That 5 year gap I think is a perfect point to avoid someone running the league with 2 players.

 

There are still other issues I dont see a solution to yet, but as far as spacing goes, I could support a 5 year gap.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Spade18