Looking at the Removed and Reduced Uncapped TPE Pt.1

[Tagger 2,722]

Removing All Star Game uncapped

This is a change I can get fully behind because, quite frankly, I don’t understand how such large amounts of uncapped TPE were given for it in the first place. While the All Star game is a fun enough side thing that allows us to see the league’s best players compete in the appropriate EA NHL game, there was no good reason for players to be allowed to earn up to 5 uncapped TPE for their performances in a glorified exhibition match. This was especially true in the era where VHL GM’s were allowed to guarantee a player made the All Star game, which usually led to players who would have rightly stood no chance of participating in the game if their fate was decided by a public vote gaining access to a game that was supposed to celebrate the best of the VHL. More than happy to see these rewards dumped.

 

Lowering Award wins from 2 TPE to 1

A change that, given the introduction of All VHL teams, I have no problem with. While I’ve mainly been against giving awards for performances in the sim, I was generally fine with awards TPE given that it was a minor reward for the best of the best and I don’t think there’s anyone in the history of the VHL who can claim that Award TPE alone made them as good as they were. Reducing it to 1 TPE won’t effect a players uncapped TPE too much, but the reasons for the change are solid. A couple of things though; first I would like to see the return of the old rule where a player could not add Award TPE to his new player earned from his old one (as once that player is gone, the purpose of rewarding TPE goes with it). Secondly, I wonder what is set to happen with the All VHL payout, specifically for the second team. It’s not really the same as a tied award, so the same TPE award given to first and second All VHL would be a little weird.

 

Removing Trivia uncapped end of season reward

It’s a shame for Trivia to lose some of it’s rewards given that it’s one of my favourite tasks to partake in (I’m probably one of three people who finds the answers for themselves), but I can also fully understand the reasoning behind the removal of the uncapped benefit. Given that a lot of people will now submit answers based on team-mates/GM’s providing them, trivia has become by far the easiest mini-PT to participate in. Therefore, rewarding a task which requires the least effort with a large amount of uncapped TPE no longer made much sense.

 

Removing Weekly/Monthly Lottery

An interesting removal given the amount of people who were behind a “Fix the lottery” movement when it was at it’s most flawed. The lottery has been around in the VHL for a long time, but in a lot of different formats. We had the old magazine lottery where members picked a unique three digit number, it’s successor which had members participate with a simple poll vote, the very controversial Quik lottery format which rewarded members with lottery entries based on posts in game threads and finally a format that awarded tickets based on capped TPE earned in the week/month. While it’s a bit odd to cite “lack of engagement of the current format” as a reason behind the change given that, for the most part, the lottery didn’t require much engagement in the first place (the lone exception being the game thread lottery, although the engagement required was actually it’s biggest flaw), I’ve never been a fan of luck-based rewarding of TPE, so it’s removal works for me.

[Beketov 9,143]

In other words, so far, @Tagger approved?

[Tagger 2,722]

Just now, Beketov said:

In other words, so far, @Tagger approved?

Pretty much. Not to spoil the other parts, but I don't think any of the changes made were bad and there is only one that I personally would have argued in favour of keeping as it was but can also see the argument behind the change. 

[Renomitsu 934]

What's this? A TAGGER article?

 

Review

Well thought-through and covers a lot of the points actually discussed in BoG, and I do certainly agree that GMs guaranteeing a player goes to the ASG (and therefore gets TPE) was absurd. One thing I'll point out is the use of "its" vs. "it's," which is in contrast to typical possessives: "its" is the possessive form, e.g. "the shirt hardly fit me, as its shoulders were much too narrow," while "it's" is the contracted form of "it is" - in this article, "it's" was used for both. Otherwise, my only criticism would be an occasional run-on, which I'm definitely guilty of on a regular basis.

 

For example, your last sentence:

Quote

While it’s a bit odd to cite “lack of engagement of the current format” as a reason behind the change given that, for the most part, the lottery didn’t require much engagement in the first place (the lone exception being the game thread lottery, although the engagement required was actually it’s biggest flaw), I’ve never been a fan of luck-based rewarding of TPE, so it’s removal works for me.

can be ended after the parentheses; adding the second clause makes it a run on. You can just put a period there instead of the comma.

 

Nit-picky stuff. Anyhow, great work - hope to see you leave more commentary, as I always appreciate the insight from a member who's been here continuously far longer than I have.