I just don't know man. Good luck with this suggestion and however it turns we'll just have to continue to plug on.
Forum > Suggestions > Epic Suggestions > Give my dots a "Tactics Sharing Option" just like the "Attributes Sharing Option"
Novus
offline
offline
Originally posted by F8n4tune
Why can't that be the one thing the agent has sole control over?
You still WOULD have control over your tactics.
You made the choice to let your team owners see your builds too -- and you still control your builds.
Making the choice to let your team owners see your tactics won't mean you'll lose control of your tactics.
Originally posted by F8n4tune
Which again comes to my previous question way back , why even have the sliders if they're not important anyway?
Which again comes to my previous answer way back: tactics ARE important. But builds are MORE important. And yet you're being more protective of your tactics than you are of your builds.
It's like you're just fine with letting your neighbor borrow your car, but you won't let him borrow your lawn mower.
Why can't that be the one thing the agent has sole control over?
You still WOULD have control over your tactics.
You made the choice to let your team owners see your builds too -- and you still control your builds.
Making the choice to let your team owners see your tactics won't mean you'll lose control of your tactics.
Originally posted by F8n4tune
Which again comes to my previous question way back , why even have the sliders if they're not important anyway?
Which again comes to my previous answer way back: tactics ARE important. But builds are MORE important. And yet you're being more protective of your tactics than you are of your builds.
It's like you're just fine with letting your neighbor borrow your car, but you won't let him borrow your lawn mower.
Novus
offline
offline
Originally posted by F8n4tune
I just don't know man. Good luck with this suggestion and however it turns we'll just have to continue to plug on.
Indeed. Thanks for a spirited debate.
I just don't know man. Good luck with this suggestion and however it turns we'll just have to continue to plug on.
Indeed. Thanks for a spirited debate.
Myd
offline
offline
I'm not arguing the idea that this suggestion could be useful. I'm just of the mindset that it can be abused by an Owner by means of threatening playing time or whatever if a person decides to opt in favor of privacy.
Raiders12
offline
offline
Originally posted by F8n4tune
Again man , it's not the point. The point being what happens when they refuse ? This suggestion does not address that AT ALL. And going to support for help is a whole nother story.......lmao
If this gets installed there needs to be a INSTANT fix for the grief that will come from any disagreements.
Both sides sign the contract,,,the owner has the right to release the player but it hurts the team if they do it during the season, I can see the player being able to gain his release if he doesn't play in a game because he wasn't on the depth chart, however it should negatively impact the player in some way if he releases.
Again man , it's not the point. The point being what happens when they refuse ? This suggestion does not address that AT ALL. And going to support for help is a whole nother story.......lmao
If this gets installed there needs to be a INSTANT fix for the grief that will come from any disagreements.
Both sides sign the contract,,,the owner has the right to release the player but it hurts the team if they do it during the season, I can see the player being able to gain his release if he doesn't play in a game because he wasn't on the depth chart, however it should negatively impact the player in some way if he releases.
Novus
offline
offline
Originally posted by myd
I'm not arguing the idea that this suggestion could be useful. I'm just of the mindset that it can be abused by an Owner by means of threatening playing time or whatever if a person decides to opt in favor of privacy.
Now, apply the exact same logic to builds. An owner can also threaten people over playing time RIGHT NOW if they opt to keep their build closed.
So where is the clamor to force all builds to be closed right now, in order to protect agents from these rampantly widespread owner abuses?
That clamor doesn't exist -- because very very few owners are stupid enough to chase off good agents by doing this.
Plenty of people in this game keep their builds closed and have no problems over it. Read this thread for some detail: http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4435940 . It'll open your eyes.
I'm not arguing the idea that this suggestion could be useful. I'm just of the mindset that it can be abused by an Owner by means of threatening playing time or whatever if a person decides to opt in favor of privacy.
Now, apply the exact same logic to builds. An owner can also threaten people over playing time RIGHT NOW if they opt to keep their build closed.
So where is the clamor to force all builds to be closed right now, in order to protect agents from these rampantly widespread owner abuses?
That clamor doesn't exist -- because very very few owners are stupid enough to chase off good agents by doing this.
Plenty of people in this game keep their builds closed and have no problems over it. Read this thread for some detail: http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4435940 . It'll open your eyes.
F8n4tune
offline
offline
Originally posted by Novus
It's like you're just fine with letting your neighbor borrow your car, but you won't let him borrow your lawn mower.
Pretty damn good one right there. But i'd have to say my car has insurance. 
Again it's nice to disagree with someone who doesn't straight out call you stupid as some do on this board. And can actually see that others disagree for their own reasons and it's just opinions.
It's like you're just fine with letting your neighbor borrow your car, but you won't let him borrow your lawn mower.
Pretty damn good one right there. But i'd have to say my car has insurance. Again it's nice to disagree with someone who doesn't straight out call you stupid as some do on this board. And can actually see that others disagree for their own reasons and it's just opinions.mandyross
offline
offline
God damn, I'm actually going to have to vet who I send my lower-level players to now. 
Novus
offline
offline
Originally posted by mandyross
God damn, I'm actually going to have to vet who I send my lower-level players to now.
How so? If you're worried about someone seeing your Tactics, just keep them closed. The choice will be the agent's, not the team owner's.
God damn, I'm actually going to have to vet who I send my lower-level players to now.
How so? If you're worried about someone seeing your Tactics, just keep them closed. The choice will be the agent's, not the team owner's.
mandyross
offline
offline
Originally posted by Novus
Originally posted by mandyross
God damn, I'm actually going to have to vet who I send my lower-level players to now.
How so? If you're worried about someone seeing your Tactics, just keep them closed. The choice will be the agent's, not the team owner's.
You'll know what I mean when tactics and depth charts leave your players with less than 10 plays a game. And nothing is done about it despite asking. I guess I was in a pretty unusual situation though so this won't be a problem with even a semi-decent owner.
I think your "logic" linking open builds and open tactics is flawed also. I'm still skeptical about the choice actually still belonging to the agent after this change. People generally understand why builds are closed (so nobody copies their 'awesomeness'), but it is much harder to justify why someone would want their tactics closed unless they are choosing not to set them. So to repeat to ad nauseam this equivalence is misleading. I challenge you to keep your tactics private on all your dots after this change and see what happens if you really don't think that problems will arise from it.
Overall though, this is a fine change (I've got good owners atm). And whilst we're at it, I'd like to make my equipment page open for viewing also so people on the team can see what I've got and am working on.
Originally posted by mandyross
God damn, I'm actually going to have to vet who I send my lower-level players to now.
How so? If you're worried about someone seeing your Tactics, just keep them closed. The choice will be the agent's, not the team owner's.
You'll know what I mean when tactics and depth charts leave your players with less than 10 plays a game. And nothing is done about it despite asking
. I guess I was in a pretty unusual situation though so this won't be a problem with even a semi-decent owner.I think your "logic" linking open builds and open tactics is flawed also. I'm still skeptical about the choice actually still belonging to the agent after this change. People generally understand why builds are closed (so nobody copies their 'awesomeness'), but it is much harder to justify why someone would want their tactics closed unless they are choosing not to set them. So to repeat to ad nauseam this equivalence is misleading. I challenge you to keep your tactics private on all your dots after this change and see what happens if you really don't think that problems will arise from it.
Overall though, this is a fine change (I've got good owners atm). And whilst we're at it, I'd like to make my equipment page open for viewing also so people on the team can see what I've got and am working on.
Thanks!+1 Great idea! How about add an "Allow owner to edit tactics" option as well!
Keep up the good work Novus!
Keep up the good work Novus!
Novus
offline
offline
Originally posted by DeeVee8
+1 Great idea! How about add an "Allow owner to edit tactics" option as well!
Hate to disagree with someone who just +1'ed me, but I think that would be a bit too far. Handing over actual control of your dot to someone else, even willingly, opens up too many possibilities for abuse. That's why I was very careful to word this Suggestion so that ultimate control would still rest solely with the agent over whether or not their Tactics would be open or hidden.
+1 Great idea! How about add an "Allow owner to edit tactics" option as well!
Hate to disagree with someone who just +1'ed me, but I think that would be a bit too far. Handing over actual control of your dot to someone else, even willingly, opens up too many possibilities for abuse. That's why I was very careful to word this Suggestion so that ultimate control would still rest solely with the agent over whether or not their Tactics would be open or hidden.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
