VHLM Cap Rule

[diamond_ace 3,106]

I hate to be the guy who calls for hard and fast rules, but this is my understanding of how it worked with Molholt, and if he's going to have to lose out, then it should just be the rule.

 

You have to be under 175 at the beginning of the season. 

If you are over, you go up. 

You can simply not claim things in order to be under, but if you don't claim them in order to be under, you can't claim them. It doesn't matter if it's next season. The points are gone.

 

Player Store was the one thing I disagreed with how they dealt with it for Molholt, if you purchase something and then have to forfeit it, it should be as though it was not purchased and the money should return to the bank account. Player Store is not a required purchase season by season, many people don't buy Player Store until they have enough for the max package. Actually, same deal with donation money, donation money is for a given season (S36 for example) not an offseason. If you purchase points with donation money, it's up to you when you use that purchase.

 

TC, media articles, prediction points, those all have a specific time when they're due. TC is at the beginning of the season when TC comes out, still considered offseason, still before the cutoff. Media articles are considered to be of the week they were done. If it's the following Monday, those points are considered earned and apply toward your total, whether updated or not, unless you choose not to use them at all. That doesn't mean you get them at the end of the season, and it doesn't mean you have to update everything at that week (I mean everyone knows I update in large chunks) but let's say the following is the case:

 

Player A has 170 TPE. Player A writes a media article in the week that ends before the cutoff date. Several weeks and several articles later, Player A does a big update with 40 TPE to go to 210. All of this is valid, he is allowed to do this, BUT he is considered over the limit because the article for the first week would give him 176, EVEN IF HE DOESN'T UPDATE IT FOR A MONTH like I do.

[Mike 708]

That's the way I've always seen it.

[AwfulHomesick 148]

Just for argument's sake, I'd really like to see a list of names of the players who got away with it and got a slap on the wrist.

[AwfulHomesick 148]

I think that point of view is skewed because in the sim, Player A is still at 170 until he gets that next update later in the month.

 

Right now, Olynick is still at 173 TPE and games have started.

[Molholt 2,183]

You and me both when it happened to me - but it's better for the league that it does get fixed. Someone has to be the first one that doesn't get away with it. If that's me, and you're second, then the league is going in the right direction. It's going in the wrong direction if I get the fair ruling and you get an old ruling.

[AwfulHomesick 148]

You and me both when it happened to me - but it's better for the league that it does get fixed. Someone has to be the first one that doesn't get away with it. If that's me, and you're second, then the league is going in the right direction. It's going in the wrong direction if I get the fair ruling and you get an old ruling.

Then it isn't really fair if you and I get disciplinary action while the other players, assuming they're all from active members, continue to play. Penalize the member's player of the TPE to make it truly fair.

[diamond_ace 3,106]

I think that point of view is skewed because in the sim, Player A is still at 170 until he gets that next update later in the month.

 

Right now, Olynick is still at 173 TPE and games have started.

Then you can stay down, IF you don't add anything else that you have earned prior to the cutoff. That means you don't add them at all, not that you add them at the end of the season. You can add points you've earned after the cutoff at any time you want, but if you earned them before, you can either not use them, or you can be up. Based on the rule, of course. I personally don't know of people getting away with it since the time the rule became a rule, which was with Jaroslav Oslig in my first season, but I've never been one to really look for it. There was talk of something with Fong two seasons ago, but I don't know what result came of it. Pretty sure he was down, I assume then that he dropped the points, but never really looked into it at the time.

[diamond_ace 3,106]

If he didn't drop the points, and claimed them at a later date, he should be made to drop them. (Fong that is)

[Guest]

It's possible Victor misinterpreted or forgot the situation which had established precedent. In the long run, 20 TPE is a very small amount. We have to keep rules in place to avoid slippery situations where people fuck the VHLM over by starting with 250 TPE for the season.

 

Olynick - I really like you and Collier as members, but my point is this: what if you had intentionally not updated 80 TPE because you would have been behind Chekhov anyway? What if you intentionally keep yourself under 175 until next year, bank 150 TPE, and then start the season with 320, using all of your PTs from this year, Training Camp from S37, etc.?  I'm not trying to attack, just trying to show you why we have these rules.

I agree with you here in terms of the examples you used. I just can't understand why Fong's player was allowed to do it before and the rule was made before that as well? Is it cause he is a recreate? I remember it because Fong whined to me as I was the updater.

[NotAVHLM-GM 1,858]

That simply means you aren't eligible for the VHLM. That's how I've always interpreted the rule.

 

Same reason why I was up in Toronto after my 1 year in the VHLM, barely hit the 175, but I had no choice but too move up.

[Devise 4,475]

Awful the purpose of the rule is give the VHLM a fairer point of view, while also giving players that trade off. If people just had to "not update" to keep their TPE but not count for any salary brackets and or VHLM Cap you'd have players debuting in the VHL with 400+ TPE. Because I could technically get to 174 TPE at the halfway point of a season and not update till after the cap and go to above 200. Then I'm still eligible for an achievement bonus, my TPE is already way too inflated for the VHLM and I'll tear it up like all hell.

 

Your argument about the Sterling case as stated is tough because he didn't have a team. Once he did? He was up. He was a 300 TPE player playing in the VHLM but he had spent a season and a half there to get to that point. If the rule was the way you would like it to be for this situation Sterling could of had hell of a lot more TPE than 300 while still playing in the VHLM. The purpose of the rule in close instance like this is to be that trade off. Do you want to go up to the VHL, gain the TPE you earned before the cut off and keep being active? Or do you want practice facility and achievement tracker and VHLM action? 

[Higgins 3,617]

Saying we weren't aware of a rule isn't a valid excuse at all. Besides someone must have known about the rule because why else would you wait until after the season started to add a bunch of off-season earned TPE.

 

I'm not sure what you've claimed over 175 since the update thread has been edited, but I'm guessing it was a PT, grader pay and VHLM Training Camp (About 18 TPE). If true, you should just sacrifice VHLM Training camp and claim last weeks PT + graders pay for this current week and do your next PT for 17-23rd March week.

 

Sure you lose out on a bit of TPE in the present, but you get to stay in the minors and have a shot at winning some awards for TPE, getting 20 TPE from the achievement tracker and getting ~10 TPE from practice facility. Either that or you claim everything now and play in the VHL, so you definitely have more to gain in the VHLM with ~30 TPE from achievement, practice facility and maybe an award or two.

[AwfulHomesick 148]

No matter which way you put it, because I'm a goalie, there's no way in hell I'd like to move up to the VHL. I'm not screwing Bushito out of a starting netminder. Hell, some of the points given to me were graders pay and a podcast. A podcast I was actually extremely proud of. It was the best one I've put out yet. A job I have after only being a member here for another that I applied for, and one that I don't take for granted because I give back to the league. If you really want to take the points I worked my ass off for, then by all means.

This will only demotivate me and any other unfortunate soul who has to go through this. 20 TPE may be nothing to you guys but to me it's a lot considering the amount of TPE my first and only player had. If you want to take away those points from me, then go ahead. I'm done trying to prove to you guys that the league can actually be blamed for something but it just seems like they can't accept that they messed up by not enforcing the rule.

Next time this happens, you guys better hope that it happens to a shitty member because i put a lot of work into my player until now. This only leaves a terrible sour taste in my mouth with the league and the simple "we ignored the other instances, oops!" isn't a valid argument either. But why listen to what I've been saying repeatedly right? If I don't say it enough times it definitely doesn't mean anything.

Edited March 12, 2014 by AwfulHomesick

[Higgins 3,617]

I'm just saying you'll be able to regain that TPE + more with VHLM bonuses.

You gotta agree that a goalie starting over 180 TPE in the minors is a pretty big advantage and turn off for new guys with 10.

[Beketov 8,642]

I'm just saying you'll be able to regain that TPE + more with VHLM bonuses.

You gotta agree that a goalie starting over 180 TPE in the minors is a pretty big advantage and turn off for new guys with 10.

While I agree with that I find it kinda stupid that goalies should have a different rule.

For one, if goalies are brought up 9/10 times they'll only get 8 games and will be miserable the rest of the time. I know because I've been there. Forwards that are brought up, on the other hand, will at least be able to play decent minutes.

For two, how is it any different for a goalie with 10 TPE to go up against forwards with over 180? It works both ways. If you're going to use this intimidation as reasoning it should be recognized that it works both ways.

I do feel like a distinct rule needs to be made and enforced but I also firmly believe that it shouldn't be different for goalies and players. There's already less incentive for goalies (seeing as there can really only be 10 VHL goalies at a time) so why should we make it worse by saying they lose out on things that forwards receive?

Edited March 12, 2014 by Beketov

[AwfulHomesick 148]

I'm just saying you'll be able to regain that TPE + more with VHLM bonuses.

You gotta agree that a goalie starting over 180 TPE in the minors is a pretty big advantage and turn off for new guys with 10.

Do you think seeing Brookside with 100-something TPE when I first joined stopped me from wanting to be the best goalie in the M last season? Did Lars Strummer, a player who had a big lead on me at the start of the season keep me from doing PT's? No. It only made me work harder to be behind Slaughter and Fjorsstrom in just the two months I had to build on my player. If the member is intimidated by my player, then it should motivate them to work harder.

[Devise 4,475]

Homesick it isn't that people somehow think the league is fault proof in this instance. It's that you don't seem to grasp the concept of why the rule is in place. It was put in to avoid people manipulating the system. The benefit of being in the VHLM is getting access to FREE TPE. Practice Facility and Achievement Tracker are things that players in the VHL have nothing that compares to. That is 30 TPE free a season. If someone could stay in the VHLM for two extra seasons or an extra season by refusing to update his player despite having more TPE than the cap they could severely manipulate the amount of TPE gained for zero effort.

 

The hard cap rule is in place, and has been enforced in a prior situation as has been discussed in this thread. You don't really end up losing any TPE in the long run by choosing to stay in the VHLM in your instance. You give up 20 TPE you earned in exchange for staying in the VHLM and having 30 awarded to you by the process of staying down, or you keep your 20 and come up to the VHL.

 

Ultimately the hard cap is a crappy thing that exists but it exists for reasons. Too many times have we had players and GM's conspire to keep high TPE players in the VHLM to dominate the league with long contract talks and on and on. These rules were put in place to make sure new members who enter the VHLM have a chance to do damage in the sim and see progress of their players. The more high end TPE players who arguably should already be in the VHL that play in the VHLM the less likely that is to happen. Thus the system encourages players as they earn more TPE doing what you are doing, with hard work, to join the VHL ranks. Which is why the decision to sacrifice TPE to stay in the VHLM or keep it to come up to the VHL comes up.

 

This isn't the first time this situation has happened either as in tons of recreates go through this. With Rift I stopped doing point tasks to stay in the VHLM another season. I've seen several other members not claim training camp, hold off on player store, stop earning PT for half a month so that they had under the required limit before the season started. At which point they would resume earning TPE as per normal. So the "rule" is actively enforced because most people have been aware of it and plan accordingly if they desire staying down. In this instance the communication to you seems to off been a bit skewed and certainly that is on the league. 

[d3vilsfire 132]

Do you think seeing Brookside with 100-something TPE when I first joined stopped me from wanting to be the best goalie in the M last season? Did Lars Strummer, a player who had a big lead on me at the start of the season keep me from doing PT's? No. It only made me work harder to be behind Slaughter and Fjorsstrom in just the two months I had to build on my player. If the member is intimidated by my player, then it should motivate them to work harder.

 

+1 - Seeing all these guys ahead of me in TPE made me want to beat them. Could you imagine a 1st gen beating a recreate in TPE? i really wanted to get drafted 1st overall in both drafts, and so I was/am very active and trying to get the most TPE I could.

 

Honestly, I think goalies and players should have different rules because a player can get 4th line minutes every game, but they are still getting minutes. Goalies? not so much. Im putting my support behind Awful

[Molholt 2,183]

You'll end up with more points than you lost due to the vhlm AT, practice facility, and I believe more money because you'll be on a vhlm pay instead of against your teams cap. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

I was mad about the tpe lost too. In my case I was gonna be forced into the VHL initially - unlike you who has been in the vhlm this whole time, and I had to fight to stay in the vhlm both for myself and for a whole slew of reasons for Riga. At the end of the day, Victor allowing me to take back some things to stay in the vhlm, even though it meant losing out on points I earned, was a benefit to me. One the league didn't have to give me. Same for you - they could just say screw it, you're in the VHL, that's the rule.

You complain about your interest or motivation, but trust me, sitting on the bench for a season in the VHL, missing out on awards and playing time, and extra vhlm points to ride the pine - those things would be a lot more demotivating to you. That could be the outcome, if they weren't willing to work with you to work around it.

Be mad if you want. I was, and I made an ass of myself. But this has to happen to me, it has to happen to you, and other players who are close to ensure that the rules are no longer blurry and grey.

[Victor 10,534]

I would also like to see where people were allowed to do what Olsen and Olynick tried to do. Definitely not since I've been commish.

So Olsen is the only other issue. For both Olynick and Olsen I've tried to be sympathetic (Riga at the time was at the cap and Cologne has a goalie) and keep the player in the VHLM.

I admit I forgot the details of the Olsen situation. He did have to forfeit VHL TC, so then so will Olynick. He didn't lose player store and donation forever though, this was allowed to be spent in future seasons. Similarly, I allowed Olynick to save 22 (now 12 without TC) TPE for next season.

This is precisely the precedent set previously.

[STZ 5,280]

This is why players who already claim VHL TC shouldn't be allowed to claim VHLM TC too..

 

#inflation #recreateadvantagelol

[sherifflobo 137]

I had 173 TPE prior to the start of the season but that was only because of the Twelve Days of Christmas.  Having a high TPE total didn't exactly help my player in the awards or during the regular season.  I didn't even hit 100 points and didn't win any personal awards, only being nominated for Playoff MVP.

 

I had just over 180 TPE if I recall correctly with Larsson and had to go up.

[Molholt 2,183]

The thread that keeps on giving. Made me sort out my player balance!

[Victor 10,534]

Yeah so Molholt confirmed that he was treated the same way as Olynick pretty much. Except instead of 12 TPE he was allowed to keep his donation and use the player store purchase later (which may have disappeared but that's a separate issue).

So to summarise:

1. If you are over 175 TPE before the VHLM season (including banked points), you can't play in the VHLM (with the exceptions of rare cases like Slaughter who had nowhere else to go). I'll re-post this rule in the updating forum but it has been there for long enough.

2. I am willing to make arrangements for players who want to stay down like Olsen and Olynick when it really is the best situation for them and both their VHL and VHLM teams. This involves forfeiting TC (for greater VHLM benefits) and reshuffling TPE. In Olynick's case, 12 TPE isn't that big of a deal.

3. I like d3vils' idea about carryover being used after people move on from the VHLM or at least after their pre-draft season. Maybe cap it at 28 (the most first-gens can earn with 3 doubles and VHLM TC). It's an interesting proposal which has been lost in the shuffle.

Overall, this thread wasn't necessary since we had already sorted everything out but on the bright side, it's clarified some issues and cost Olynick 10 VHL TC TPE because of the Olsen precedent.

[Guest]

Yeah so Molholt confirmed that he was treated the same way as Olynick pretty much. Except instead of 12 TPE he was allowed to keep his donation and use the player store purchase later (which may have disappeared but that's a separate issue).

So to summarise:

1. If you are over 175 TPE before the VHLM season (including banked points), you can't play in the VHLM (with the exceptions of rare cases like Slaughter who had nowhere else to go). I'll re-post this rule in the updating forum but it has been there for long enough.

2. I am willing to make arrangements for players who want to stay down like Olsen and Olynick when it really is the best situation for them and both their VHL and VHLM teams. This involves forfeiting TC (for greater VHLM benefits) and reshuffling TPE. In Olynick's case, 12 TPE isn't that big of a deal.

3. I like d3vils' idea about carryover being used after people move on from the VHLM or at least after their pre-draft season. Maybe cap it at 28 (the most first-gens can earn with 3 doubles and VHLM TC). It's an interesting proposal which has been lost in the shuffle.

Overall, this thread wasn't necessary since we had already sorted everything out but on the bright side, it's clarified some issues and cost Olynick 10 VHL TC TPE because of the Olsen precedent.

I think it was necessary because of that one word Noah brought up seasons ago "transparency". We need to know what it is. Also Fong was allowed to stay because he whined, just going to point that out. Different rules for Fong? (Yes I'm still mad over that cause he made me look stupid for enforcing the rule).