Weird rule? Topic

sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
Ok, so in Cal Ripken I was looking for an owner to take over a team and control them the rest of this season and stick around for next season.  I found a taker in krushers.  However, admin replied to my ticket that krushers is ineligible to take over a team.

When I inquired as to why, they said that it is policy that an owner may only control one transferred team at a time.

Does this not seem like a very arbitrary rule to enforce when worlds are having as hard a time filling as they are?
2/5/2015 5:12 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
It's not the best rule but I imagine they had someone hanging around, taking teams, never buying and playing constantly.    Maybe they caused trouble in some worlds because what's the worst that could happen?   They'd have the free team taken from them.

It's kind of a dumb rule but you can find someone to take an abandoned team pretty easily.    Worse comes to worse, send it to poiuyt.   He's awesome.
2/5/2015 5:18 PM
hypnotoad
Posts: 2525 (1)
Hall of Famer
2 122 165 259
Veteran
I hate that rule.
2/5/2015 5:47 PM
sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
Here's another one.  I had a new owner approach, wanted to take over the team and get a feel for how the game is played before next season begins.

From Admin:

"We apologize for the frustration here, but ****** is not eligible to receive a transferred franchise.

We require that all replacement owners have at least one full season of HBD experience, and owners taking over an abandoned franchise have at least 3 seasons of experience so they can access the Advanced Rosters Mode that is commonly needed to restore a franchise back to a competitive state after being abandoned.

Hope this helps your search with future candidates."

It seems to me that with all the difficulty worlds are having filling from season to season, admin should not be so limiting in efforts to keep a world full.

2/11/2015 9:45 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
That rule is to avoid alias abuse.
2/11/2015 9:49 AM
sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
Fair enough, I guess, but again...when worlds are having such a hard time filling already, they should be willing to relax certain rules a little bit for a world that's making every effort to stay full.  It's all well and good to enforce rules strictly when things are going well, and all worlds are filling with little effort.
2/11/2015 10:00 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

What's worse for a world?   An abandoned team or an owner with 2 or more teams in it?

I get that you're having a problem.    But carte blanche for giving away free teams isn't a good idea.  That could wreck a world faster than anything.  

A couple of seasons ago, we replaced 5 owners in Foxx.   I pretty much led the way as no one else felt the need to take the initiative.  I could have created 5 aliases and had all 5 sent to me.   That's 6 teams/one owner.    Fantastic.

2/11/2015 10:10 AM
sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
I can see it from that perspective.  

And in reality, I'm not really in that deep a hole because of it.  Neither of the teams I'm trying to replace are abandoned...they are just the only two owners who are sure they won't be back next season, and have said they will step aside now so that I can find someone to take over so that the world can roll quickly.  Twice I've found owners, and twice gotten back a rule that blocked my efforts, so it is frustrating.
2/11/2015 10:24 AM
shobob
Posts: 3404 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2015 10:10:00 AM (view original):

What's worse for a world?   An abandoned team or an owner with 2 or more teams in it?

I get that you're having a problem.    But carte blanche for giving away free teams isn't a good idea.  That could wreck a world faster than anything.  

A couple of seasons ago, we replaced 5 owners in Foxx.   I pretty much led the way as no one else felt the need to take the initiative.  I could have created 5 aliases and had all 5 sent to me.   That's 6 teams/one owner.    Fantastic.

This is a LIE!!! I was taking initiative too.
2/11/2015 11:22 AM
sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2015 9:49:00 AM (view original):
That rule is to avoid alias abuse.
According to admin, the reasoning is quite different.

"The reason we have the rule for first time HBD players is because if they were to take over an transferred team, they would be put at a disadvantage of not being able to use their promotional $4.95 first season offer."
2/11/2015 11:59 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
ADMIN is full of ****.   FACT!!!
2/11/2015 12:23 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by shobob on 2/11/2015 11:22:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2015 10:10:00 AM (view original):

What's worse for a world?   An abandoned team or an owner with 2 or more teams in it?

I get that you're having a problem.    But carte blanche for giving away free teams isn't a good idea.  That could wreck a world faster than anything.  

A couple of seasons ago, we replaced 5 owners in Foxx.   I pretty much led the way as no one else felt the need to take the initiative.  I could have created 5 aliases and had all 5 sent to me.   That's 6 teams/one owner.    Fantastic.

This is a LIE!!! I was taking initiative too.
Yeah, but you were trying to send them all to "family members" who "wanted to try out HBD."
2/11/2015 12:23 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
FWIW, what's cheaper?   $4.95 or $0?

And, if they tried it out, liked it AND wanted the discount, why wouldn't they just create a new username?    It's not like they "created" a franchise from scratch.   They took over a team, mid-season, and learned a thing or two.
2/11/2015 12:25 PM
sgmedia
Posts: 680 (0)
All Star
1 43
Prospect
I know.  But that was the response I got.
2/11/2015 12:35 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
That's why I said it's a BS response.  

Truth is, they should be happy that someone wants to try it out without committing $$$ to it.    WifS has been paid so that could be dragging in a new customer.   That said, unless said user is a personal reference, who would spend the time waiting for a replacement job instead of plunking down $5?   I wouldn't be looking in the classifieds for "replacement needed" if I just signed up to play.
2/11/2015 12:41 PM
12 Next ▸
Weird rule? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.