S54: Update Scale Changes

[Devise 4,475]

41 minutes ago, Scooter said:

Ensuring new members can never be as good as past ones.

 

Not to pile on but this isn't entirely accurate. If you earn 9 a week, the maximum cap, this change helps you. Because now the person who earns anywhere from 4-6 a week has a harder time building a player as good as yours. Which is the point. Whether first gen, new, or old if you earn more TPE in a given week and in a season than other people you should be able to put that TPE to as good of use as possible. There should be an advantage. 

 

That is the thing about this change btw guys, it literally is only 18 TPE more to get an attribute from 40-99. It used to be 116, now it's 134. In a given season, assuming you earn the max your only looking at earning anywhere from 16-20 TPE more than the people who don't. I mean most welfare users don't earn just 4, as they do other things so they more likely earn 6 or 7. So the difference is 2 TPE a week, aka about 16 a season. That about lines up with the change in cost to get things to 99. They can do it a bit quicker than welfare + guys, but the welfare + guys can still do it. 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Devise

[Baozi 1,635]

57 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

By saying that though you are basically telling us to reward welfare claimers? Basically a slap in the face to everyone else who is extremely active. Also in the amount of time you spend discussing things, you could write a VHL Fan article.

 

Pension was always seen as a reward for long serving members and an incentive at the same time to keep them around where they would otherwise not be able to compete due to not being fully active. So if thats the stance you want to take, then yes it is a reward for welfare claimers. 

 

I don't get how it is a slap in the face to extremely active players, the welfare system doesn't penalize them. They still make the better players and on off day where they too are too busy to do their PT or whatever, they have the option available as well to claim welfare.

 

This issue isn't just for me, I see it as a group of people that help keep the population numbers here higher than they would be otherwise. If you only kept the extremely active members here then the population dwindles. Its with the addition of the welfare system that there are many more players are available in the pool. Its a give and take relationship, you can either make the VHL super hardcore and only extremely active players are useful or you open up the field so the player pool is larger. I mean its not like TPE whore players get shafted at all by welfare. Like I keep asking, how often does it occur that a pure welfare player can outdo an active player? this is just in keeping with keeping a player pool bigger larger and making the game more accessible for others, not just the super active people.

 

Also this is the exact type of thing I refer to when I say there are semi-welfare players like myself that contribute to discussions and such but don't have the same capacity to do point tasks and such. I mean rarely would i even consider taking this discussion and copy pasting it to the MS section as work, but I do care and I do contribute to discussion.

[Kendrick 4,714]

3 minutes ago, tfong said:

 

Pension was always seen as a reward for long serving members and an incentive at the same time to keep them around where they would otherwise not be able to compete due to not being fully active. So if thats the stance you want to take, then yes it is a reward for welfare claimers. 

 

I don't get how it is a slap in the face to extremely active players, the welfare system doesn't penalize them. They still make the better players and on off day where they too are too busy to do their PT or whatever, they have the option available as well to claim welfare.

 

This issue isn't just for me, I see it as a group of people that help keep the population numbers here higher than they would be otherwise. If you only kept the extremely active members here then the population dwindles. Its with the addition of the welfare system that there are many more players are available in the pool. Its a give and take relationship, you can either make the VHL super hardcore and only extremely active players are useful or you open up the field so the player pool is larger. I mean its not like TPE whore players get shafted at all by welfare. Like I keep asking, how often does it occur that a pure welfare player can outdo an active player? this is just in keeping with keeping a player pool bigger larger and making the game more accessible for others, not just the super active people.

 

Also this is the exact type of thing I refer to when I say there are semi-welfare players like myself that contribute to discussions and such but don't have the same capacity to do point tasks and such. I mean rarely would i even consider taking this discussion and copy pasting it to the MS section as work, but I do care and I do contribute to discussion.

Fong listen to yourself right now. You are saying that with a bonus a Welfare claimer should be able to type "claim" and earn 1 less TPE than myself who puts in a ton of effort for a graphic and/or media spot. Do you know how selfish and stupid that sounds?

 

You always rant and rave about how we should be standing up for Welfare claimers and always state you'll only ever be a welfare player and then you go grab 800 TPE or what not with your players. So what gives?

 

It isn't a give or take in your eyes though. It's a reward guys who only have 5 minutes who could create a solid player and make sure the super active guys do more work for almost equal TPE payout. "How often does it occur that a pure welfare player can outdo an active player", well considering some welfare players in the league right now are killing it, I'd say its a bit of an issue.

 

See your discussion notes and suggestions could be a MS, thats just a lazy excuse on your part.

[Jericho 917]

10 minutes ago, Scooter said:

Fair enough but it still makes me think I'll be at a disadvantage with Abbott and just recreate in a couple seasons. I'm not saying this hampers my interest in the league. At the same time it does make me feel I'm playing on an uneven playing field with this player which absolutely sucks after wasting 40$ on it. 

 

See the thing is that this doesn't hurt newer members, what it does it normalize the career curve a bit.

 

It helps higher TPE counts, rather than letting them get fucked by bad luck of a young player coming in and fucking their breakout year.

 

Look at it this way, Abbot has 2 decent first seasons. Nothing to write home about, but nothing to sneeze at. That's pretty fair, considering there are guys who've been playing for 5-7 years who are ahead of you.

 

Let's say you start to do better in your third season and in the fourth you expect to be competing for trophies. But in the fourth, when you have a great season you get cucked by some rookie with 350 TPE who gets 140 points and takes all the awards. Then in your 5th season some random inactive has a season like that and now you're into your depreciation. That would suck.

 

The idea here is to make it harder for younger players to beat older players the same way. Don't forget that older members could still come in with younger players, we all live on a cycle. What this does is attempt to smooth it out so you start off ok, peak and go strong and then dip a bit towards the end but are still relevant.

[Bushito 1,945]

18 minutes ago, Devise said:

 

Not to pile on but this isn't entirely accurate. If you earn 9 a week, the maximum cap, this change helps you. Because now the person who earns anywhere from 4-6 a week has a harder time building a player as good as yours. Which is the point. Whether first gen, new, or old if you earn more TPE in a given week and in a season than other people you should be able to put that TPE to as good of use as possible. There should be an advantage. 

 

That is the thing about this change btw guys, it literally is only 18 TPE more to get an attribute from 40-99. It used to be 116, now it's 134. In a given season, assuming you earn the max your only looking at earning anywhere from 16-20 TPE more than the people who don't. I mean most welfare users don't earn just 4, as they do other things so they more likely earn 6 or 7. So the difference is 2 TPE a week, aka about 16 a season. That about lines up with the change in cost to get things to 99. They can do it a bit quicker than welfare + guys, but the welfare + guys can still do it. 

Yeah it helps me versus welfare guys but guys in their 3rd season now that are 9 point guys already with 99 attributes will have 5 seasons of advantage on Abbott and then I'll hit regression which will clearly hit me harder than them. Abbott will be retired as soon as I feel the playing field has evened out. Multiple people went over 1000 TPE under the old scale  and now I need about 1200 TPE to be the thousand guys equal. This basically tells me I need to donate $160 to the league to be on par with the guy who donated nothing in the past but was active. I need water, there is a sour taste in my mouth.

[Devise 4,475]

1 minute ago, Scooter said:

Yeah it helps me versus welfare guys but guys in their 3rd season now that are 9 point guys already with 99 attributes will have 5 seasons of advantage on Abbott and then I'll hit regression which will clearly hit me harder than them. Abbott will be retired as soon as I feel the playing field has evened out. Multiple people went over 1000 TPE under the old scale  and now I need about 1200 TPE to be the thousand guys equal. This basically tells me I need to donate $160 to the league to be on par with the guy who donated nothing in the past but was active. I need water, there is a sour taste in my mouth.

 

You don't hit regression until your sixth season. If that player has 5 seasons of advantage on you, guess what? They are hitting regression already. Oh also guess what, by the time your in your fifth season, that player is retired. You only get 8 seasons as of now. 

 

Also don't look at total TPE numbers as a means of comparison. In terms of being a great player in the sim, that happens around 600 TPE depending on how you build. Here is a great rule of thumb, provided you continue to be active and earn you have just as good of a chance of any other actives of creating a great player. 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Devise

[Will 4,600]

Just now, Scooter said:

Yeah it helps me versus welfare guys but guys in their 3rd season now that are 9 point guys already with 99 attributes will have 5 seasons of advantage on Abbott and then I'll hit regression which will clearly hit me harder than them. Abbott will be retired as soon as I feel the playing field has evened out. Multiple people went over 1000 TPE under the old scale  and now I need about 1200 TPE to be the thousand guys equal. This basically tells me I need to donate $160 to the league to be on par with the guy who donated nothing in the past but was active. I need water, there is a sour taste in my mouth.

 

Wait what? It's retroactive, every player attributes will get converted to the new scale at the same time - this off-season

[Baozi 1,635]

17 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

Fong listen to yourself right now. You are saying that with a bonus a Welfare claimer should be able to type "claim" and earn 1 less TPE than myself who puts in a ton of effort for a graphic and/or media spot. Do you know how selfish and stupid that sounds?

 

You always rant and rave about how we should be standing up for Welfare claimers and always state you'll only ever be a welfare player and then you go grab 800 TPE or what not with your players. So what gives?

 

It isn't a give or take in your eyes though. It's a reward guys who only have 5 minutes who could create a solid player and make sure the super active guys do more work for almost equal TPE payout. "How often does it occur that a pure welfare player can outdo an active player", well considering some welfare players in the league right now are killing it, I'd say its a bit of an issue.

 

See your discussion notes and suggestions could be a MS, thats just a lazy excuse on your part.

 

The pension bonus require salary. So by spending their salary on what amounts to like what ~9 additional TPE per season they are missing out on other things from the shop they could actually get to replace those dollars with. Its not "free" your player has to have enough cash to buy it too.

 

I don't know if you've noticed but the 800 TPE build isn't a pure welfare player. I've maxed donations, and I do PTs until I get drafted and occasionally here and there as well as include myself on all the bonus stuff that occurs (fantasy, pick em, double weeks, holidays  etc.....). I'm not an example of a pure welfare player and I'm also fairly active on the site contributing to discussions etc...

 

Which pure welfare players are killing it? Between The awards posting of S51 and S52 is 9 weeks. 9 weeks x 4 is 36 TPE. 5 brings it to 45. A pure welfare player with 8 seasons would get 360 TPE or 405. Let me know what 360 or 405 player is killing it. You can fluctuate the weeks +/- 1 as well and the amount of TPE is still incredibly small.

 

Now we start adding in bonus TPE and all that stuff, but hey you actually HAVE to be active and participate in these things so I don't consider it as welfare points because you actually have to do stuff to get them.

 

Now take an active player (like yourself lets say) and you max your 9 TPE a week. 81 per season over 8 seasons is 648. You have a 37.5% increased gain rate.

 

Now add that to the fact your player is better and you earn more salary. You are now also eligible for better store rewards that the 400 player isn't able to get. With this I don't see how anyone riding on just welfare and not participating in other things does better. As i mentioned before, points gained from participating in things doesn't count because its an active action.

 

On that note of discussions/suggestions being MS worthy, I mean I could. I don't usually because in my mind its not really an MS per the old structure. Maybe I'm just stuck in the original MS format where I have to make it league related and in character and all that jazz. Whatever though. We already know I'm like a semi-welfare person, not pure.  But going upon your suggestion then, would un formatted discussions like this and the time I spend to discuss in a worthy discussion be worth the same as a PT? I don't know, you tell me if you think that would be worth 6 points or would that not sit right with you? Like are we setting up a system where just mere discussion of league topics allows me to earn TPE?

Edited February 23, 2017 by tfong

[Devise 4,475]

@tfong

 

The argument isn't that we should be punishing players who use welfare and then are active to claim other things. The argument is that as you said yourself, by doing welfare and other things you can create just as good of a player as someone who claims point tasks. So whats the point in claiming point tasks? If my chances are just as good at creating a good player as yours, and your on welfare + others, why don't I just go on welfare + others?

 

You see the issue with this? It then becomes, why have point tasks at all? If we are going to be a point task league, the priority incentive should be for point tasks. There is nothing with this change that prevents players in your position from continuing to build good players. It's more now that those who earn more than you (even 1 or 2 a week more) have a better chance at creating GREAT players. Which is their right, regardless if your active they are more active. They do point tasks. As long as we are a point task league, that balance has to maintained otherwise it's pointless...

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

good decision all hail blue team

[Baozi 1,635]

6 minutes ago, Devise said:

@tfong

 

The argument isn't that we should be punishing players who use welfare and then are active to claim other things. The argument is that as you said yourself, by doing welfare and other things you can create just as good of a player as someone who claims point tasks. So whats the point in claiming point tasks? If my chances are just as good at creating a good player as yours, and your on welfare + others, why don't I just go on welfare + others?

 

You see the issue with this? It then becomes, why have point tasks at all? If we are going to be a point task league, the priority incentive should be for point tasks. There is nothing with this change that prevents players in your position from continuing to build good players. It's more now that those who earn more than you (even 1 or 2 a week more) have a better chance at creating GREAT players. Which is their right, regardless if your active they are more active. They do point tasks. As long as we are a point task league, that balance has to maintained otherwise it's pointless...

 

But you can't compare me as the standard welfare player. I've spent max donations, I do PTs through my draft years and early into my career usually and I participate in all the events pretty much. Like on XXX I don't remember where I stopped and went permanently on welfare (I'm going to hazard a guess around 300-400) but even then I did doubles weeks I did special events and such and I'm pretty active on the site.

 

I mean coming from both sides of the coin, my players are definitely not at the same quality as when I had Kanou which was arguably my most active player ever. So I don't think its actually "as good of a chance" of creating a good player as you would think.

 

Looking at the situation, I'm almost like a P2W player really.

 

Edited February 23, 2017 by tfong

[stevo 760]

Meh. MEH

[Jericho 917]

12 minutes ago, Scooter said:

Yeah it helps me versus welfare guys but guys in their 3rd season now that are 9 point guys already with 99 attributes will have 5 seasons of advantage on Abbott and then I'll hit regression which will clearly hit me harder than them. Abbott will be retired as soon as I feel the playing field has evened out. Multiple people went over 1000 TPE under the old scale  and now I need about 1200 TPE to be the thousand guys equal. This basically tells me I need to donate $160 to the league to be on par with the guy who donated nothing in the past but was active. I need water, there is a sour taste in my mouth.

 

We're applying the scale to everyone retroactively. So next season anyone who has 99 in their stats will have less.

 

That's why we're letting everyone re-roll, so if they aren't happy with what they've been left with they can reallocate their TPE. Nobody is going to advantaged to anyone else.

[Devise 4,475]

Just now, tfong said:

 

But you can't compare me as the standard welfare player. I've spent max donations, I do PTs through my draft years and early into my career usually and I participate in all the events pretty much. Like on XXX I don't remember where I stopped and went permanently on welfare (I'm going to hazard a guess around 300-400) but even then I did doubles weeks I did special events and such and I'm pretty active on the site.

 

 

 

But your not the only one who has done that. The fact is ALL OF US have the same opportunity as you because we are all just as active. This isn't coming from people going "man the only welfare players are too good." It's from all of us who are active going "what in the fuck is the point of the extra 1 or 2 TPE we get a week in PT's?" 

 

Why? Because with the player update system the way it was, it doesn't matter if your a only welfare player, a semi welfare/active, a welfare/super active (like you) or the PT guy. All of us are getting 90's to high 99 in a bunch of attributes. You wanna talk about a pure welfare player doing good? See Max on Cologne. 99 scoring, just hit 300 TPE. Rookie of the year last year. That is only one outlier, but the issue we have enough people in the league considering, or who have already decided "fuck point tasks." Of course they decided that. The only purpose to keep up with them now is to better equip you to handle depreciation and to max out irrelevant stats like leadership and penalty shot. 

 

We can't have it both ways. We can't be a PT league if people find there is no benefit to doing them, because the little TPE edge they get doesn't mean much at all. So you either make that TPE edge matter, or you get rid of PT's all together and explore something else. But as it was there was no balance that could be healthily mainlined. If it wasn't for Project Two forcing players not to use welfare, we were headed down a path where PT's would be near extinct. 

[Bushito 1,945]

10 minutes ago, Will said:

 

Wait what? It's retroactive, every player attributes will get converted to the new scale at the same time - this off-season

So every player that has a 99 attribute come this offseason that attribute is now 95?

[stevo 760]

1 minute ago, Devise said:

All of us are getting 90's to high 99 in a bunch of attributes.

I've never had more than 2 or 3 attributes over 85 with WBF

[Will 4,600]

2 minutes ago, Scooter said:

So every player that has a 99 attribute come this offseason that attribute is now 95?

 

Yeah but Depreciation will take place prior to the conversion, so players in their last 3 seasons will be slightly lower than that. But yes, except a 99 actually comes out to a 96 under the new scale I think. 

[Bushito 1,945]

3 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

We're applying the scale to everyone retroactively. So next season anyone who has 99 in their stats will have less.

 

That's why we're letting everyone re-roll, so if they aren't happy with what they've been left with they can reallocate their TPE. Nobody is going to advantaged to anyone else.

It did not read that way to me, my argument is mostly done then. I just need to donate 160$ to be equal to an past active guy that didn't donate

[Baozi 1,635]

1 minute ago, Devise said:

 

But your not the only one who has done that. The fact is ALL OF US have the same opportunity as you because we are all just as active. This isn't coming from people going "man the only welfare players are too good." It's from all of us who are active going "what in the fuck is the point of the extra 1 or 2 TPE we get a week in PT's?" 

 

Why? Because with the player update system the way it was, it doesn't matter if your a only welfare player, a semi welfare/active, a welfare/super active (like you) or the PT guy. All of us are getting 90's to high 99 in a bunch of attributes. You wanna talk about a pure welfare player doing good? See Max on Cologne. 99 scoring, just hit 300 TPE. Rookie of the year last year. That is only one outlier, but the issue we have enough people in the league considering, or who have already decided "fuck point tasks." Of course they decided that. The only purpose to keep up with them now is to better equip you to handle depreciation and to max out irrelevant stats like leadership and penalty shot. 

 

We can't have it both ways. We can't be a PT league if people find there is no benefit to doing them, because the little TPE edge they get doesn't mean much at all. So you either make that TPE edge matter, or you get rid of PT's all together and explore something else. But as it was there was no balance that could be healthily mainlined. If it wasn't for Project Two forcing players not to use welfare, we were headed down a path where PT's would be near extinct. 

 

Honestly, I think its just the direction of the league. In my mind its actually really simple to get this back down to the original PT league. TPE inflation is a very real thing when we looked at S1-7 to now. The solution could be to just going back to having virtually no free TPE anywhere and just get your 6+1 a week from PTs and an extra +1 for staff jobs. Then your top earners are around 600 and few if anyone has max stats anywhere across the board.

[TheLastOlympian07 2,388]

5 minutes ago, stevo said:

I've never had more than 2 or 3 attributes over 85 with WBF

you need to do more pts then

[Jericho 917]

1 minute ago, Scooter said:

It did not read that way to me, my argument is mostly done then. I just need to donate 160$ to be equal to an past active guy that didn't donate

 

in a vacuum yes, but it moreso matters how everyone's skill around you is. Every other player got hit the same way so it's basically the same from those perspectives. On paper you won't have the same stats as the guys in history, but since they were playing against the better players of their time it kind of evens out.

 

Btw, if you ever do think something is being gone about wrong, do feel free to mention it in these threads, even coming up with solutions. Like if we didn't think to apply it retroactively, we aren't going to shoot it down because it wasn't a "BoG idea". As much as we joke that this is a dictatorship that's basically all a big meme.

[Devise 4,475]

4 minutes ago, tfong said:

 

Honestly, I think its just the direction of the league. In my mind its actually really simple to get this back down to the original PT league. TPE inflation is a very real thing when we looked at S1-7 to now. The solution could be to just going back to having virtually no free TPE anywhere and just get your 6+1 a week from PTs and an extra +1 for staff jobs. Then your top earners are around 600 and few if anyone has max stats anywhere across the board.

 

And that's fine too. I've gone on record saying we could turn welfare into a check in and change how we reward those who write and do graphics as well. The point being it couldn't stay the same. This current change is the simplest way to do that without complicating things with larger wide scale changes. Which is probably why it had the most support. 

 

[Baozi 1,635]

3 minutes ago, Devise said:

 

And that's fine too. I've gone on record saying we could turn welfare into a check in and change how we reward those who write and do graphics as well. The point being it couldn't stay the same. This current change is the simplest way to do that without complicating things with larger wide scale changes. Which is probably why it had the most support. 

 

 

And just so we're clear, I'm not against this change to the update scale. I'm just defending welfare in the current VHL environment of balancing the two. Its either you have welfare and make it worthwhile, or don't have it at all and remove welfare/ semi-active players from the equation. If the goal is not to favouring active players or welfare, but instead just to create the largest player base between the two, then you have to take the stance of ensuring welfare players are moderately useful (the stance I take since the creation of welfare). If you want to make it hardcore, then make it hardcore, if you want it casual then make it casual. But because VHL wants to just increase the player pool, then you have to accept that not everyone is super active and ensure that semi-actives moderately successful, otherwise whats the point in even offering the option?

[scoop 3,254]

Tbh anyone who thinks this change is beneficial for the upper echelon of players is wrong.

 

Fyi.

 

 

It makes it harder for the elite to become elite, while everyone with attributes under 90 remain largely uneffected. I'm probably actually wrong, but without putting much thought into it, that's what it seems like to me.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Streetlite

[Will 4,600]

Split. Trying to keep this clear for relevant questions.