They really pay last place teams 4 dollars? That is crazy.

I was disappointed that they didn't include this change in the update. I thought it would curtail the tanking.

i dont come 'round here to much so dont have all the info on why this change would have been brought about. But i'm glad its not.

I use the transfer to my advantage. I usually have ~$30m for my prospect budget. But i also average 100 wins/season.

I would hate for them to take one of my strategies for winning.

mrpolo, Below is the post from sitestaff that explained why they were considering this change. I think it made sense.

"Over time we have noticed that a common strategy is to have an unrealistically small player payroll, take the surplus and transfer it all into the prospect budget. This provides for an unfair advantage over teams that are actually willing to compete.

In nearly every case we are seeing that these franchises tank for several seasons to accumulate minimal player payroll and then build their farm system through the IFA process. In turn, the franchises that are trying to compete season after season are out of the IFA process entirely.

We decided that one way to curb the tanking is to limit the amount of money that can be dumped into the prospect payroll budget. That amount is going to be $30M and max contracts will be handled the same exact way that was outlined in the last update thread."

Read the site staff post with this is mind: they could have simply tweaked up the quality of the draftees and tweaked down the quality of the IFA's, and accomplished the same thing. Instead, the rather ham-handed cap on IFA's had negative unintended consequences before they even implemented it! At least they were smart enough to back off of a change that would have been for the worse. I wish the GD programmers would have had the same insight over the last three years that they have taken that game downhill.

Quote: Originally Posted By snake_p on 1/26/2010Read the site staff post with this is mind: they could have simply tweaked up the quality of the draftees and tweaked down the quality of the IFA's, and accomplished the same thing. Instead, the rather ham-handed cap on IFA's had negative unintended consequences before they even implemented it! At least they were smart enough to back off of a change that would have been for the worse. I wish the GD programmers would have had the same insight over the last three years that they have taken that game downhill

Please explain why you feel that the quality of amateur draft prospects needs to be tweaked up, and the quality IFA prospects need to be tweaked down.

BTW . . . one can already tweak up the quality of the draft class by increasing your scouting budget (you'll see more players, including more of the top end guys). And you can already tweak down the quality of the IFA's by decreasing your IFA scouting budget (you'll see less players, and fewer of the top end guys).

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/26/2010BTW . . . one can already tweak up the quality of the draft class by increasing your scouting budget (you'll see more players, including more of the top end guys). And you can already tweak down the quality of the IFA's by decreasing your IFA scouting budget (you'll see less players, and fewer of the top end guys)

False on both counts. Changing your scouting budgets does nothing whatsoever to change the FA's available, not one bit. It only changes what you see and how reliably you see the projections.

I thought you were a veteran at this game.

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/26/2010Please explain why you feel that the quality of amateur draft prospects needs to be tweaked up, and the quality IFA prospects need to be tweaked down

Please explain what makes you think I said these were needed. I didn't.

What I said was in the context of a discussion of the proposed cap, a proposal that WIS has wisely decided to revisit. Complaints were being made about money being poured into IFA's. Rather than the proposed cap it would have been a logical response to that problem to slightly degrade the IFA market, and slightly upgrade the draftables (which probably would help the game anyway) to keep the total incoming talent pool about the same.

Quote: Originally Posted By snake_p on 1/27/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/26/2010
Please explain why you feel that the quality of amateur draft prospects needs to be tweaked up, and the quality IFA prospects need to be tweaked down.

Please explain what makes you think I said these were needed. I didn't.

What I said was in the context of a discussion of the proposed cap, a proposal that WIS has wisely decided to revisit. Complaints were being made about money being poured into IFA's. Rather than the proposed cap it would have been a logical response to that problem to slightly degrade the IFA market, and slightly upgrade the draftables (which probably would help the game anyway) to keep the total incoming talent pool about the same.

Why is that logical? It's already pretty clear that there are more top-quality players coming through the draft than there are through IFA, and that players acquired through the draft are currently much more cost-effective than their comparable IFA counterparts.

There is no reason to change the distribution of the talent pool. Your saying that there is does not make it so.

Didn't mean to send it right over your head, but you had to ask. Don't let it worry you.

Quote: Originally posted by snake_p on 1/27/2010Didn't mean to send it right over your head, but you had to ask.  Don't let it worry you.

Snake if you are so knowledgeable in HBD.....why are you still not playing to improve on that 97-227 record. You seem to have alot of answers for someone who struggled in his 2 seasons.

Quote: Originally Posted By phillyfan009 on 1/27/2010Snake if you are so knowledgeable in HBD.....why are you still not playing to improve on that 97-227 record. You seem to have alot of answers for someone who struggled in his 2 seasons.

Interesting, isn't it? It would almost make you think I took over a couple of trashbag teams midseason to help out a couple of commissioners, wouldn't it? And it would make you think I must be peacefully playing the game under a different alias, far from the morons that gather around the snake_p name, wouldn't it? IF you could think, that is.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.