This should go hand in hand with a drastic reduction in the amount of leagues, tbh.
Forum > Suggestions > Change Team Ownership To 4 Teams Total, But Can Be Any Type
Kirghiz
offline
offline
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Just out of curiosity, what is the reason for this suggestion? Is there something negative happening to the game as a result of humans owning more than 4 teams?
The counter argument is going to be that there is no shortage of teams if people want to buy them, so that is not an issue. Preventing people like a yello1 who own many teams from owning so many doesn't allow others to buy teams - they can do that now anyway if they want - it just creates more CPU teams. Right now those players are on teams owned by a human who is trying to win games. This is better for them and for their competition in leagues as the games will be more competitive.
If you could make an argument for collusion, maybe I could see that, but then that is something support will deal with now anyway on a case-by-case basis. If the argument is about farm teams, this won't prevent that - people will just get other users to own those teams - every network does this anyway for one reason or another (usually to split up the cost). If the argument is that one person cannot keep up with that many teams, how do you know? That is for them to decide and again even a poorly managed human team is typically much better for everyone than an all CPU team.
Overall I just do not see the problem that exists for this suggestion to address and I do not see what positives would come from it, but perhaps you have something in mind I have not considered.
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
Just out of curiosity, what is the reason for this suggestion? Is there something negative happening to the game as a result of humans owning more than 4 teams?
The counter argument is going to be that there is no shortage of teams if people want to buy them, so that is not an issue. Preventing people like a yello1 who own many teams from owning so many doesn't allow others to buy teams - they can do that now anyway if they want - it just creates more CPU teams. Right now those players are on teams owned by a human who is trying to win games. This is better for them and for their competition in leagues as the games will be more competitive.
If you could make an argument for collusion, maybe I could see that, but then that is something support will deal with now anyway on a case-by-case basis. If the argument is about farm teams, this won't prevent that - people will just get other users to own those teams - every network does this anyway for one reason or another (usually to split up the cost). If the argument is that one person cannot keep up with that many teams, how do you know? That is for them to decide and again even a poorly managed human team is typically much better for everyone than an all CPU team.
Overall I just do not see the problem that exists for this suggestion to address and I do not see what positives would come from it, but perhaps you have something in mind I have not considered.
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
Originally posted by Kirghiz
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Just out of curiosity, what is the reason for this suggestion? Is there something negative happening to the game as a result of humans owning more than 4 teams?
The counter argument is going to be that there is no shortage of teams if people want to buy them, so that is not an issue. Preventing people like a yello1 who own many teams from owning so many doesn't allow others to buy teams - they can do that now anyway if they want - it just creates more CPU teams. Right now those players are on teams owned by a human who is trying to win games. This is better for them and for their competition in leagues as the games will be more competitive.
If you could make an argument for collusion, maybe I could see that, but then that is something support will deal with now anyway on a case-by-case basis. If the argument is about farm teams, this won't prevent that - people will just get other users to own those teams - every network does this anyway for one reason or another (usually to split up the cost). If the argument is that one person cannot keep up with that many teams, how do you know? That is for them to decide and again even a poorly managed human team is typically much better for everyone than an all CPU team.
Overall I just do not see the problem that exists for this suggestion to address and I do not see what positives would come from it, but perhaps you have something in mind I have not considered.
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
very well put
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Just out of curiosity, what is the reason for this suggestion? Is there something negative happening to the game as a result of humans owning more than 4 teams?
The counter argument is going to be that there is no shortage of teams if people want to buy them, so that is not an issue. Preventing people like a yello1 who own many teams from owning so many doesn't allow others to buy teams - they can do that now anyway if they want - it just creates more CPU teams. Right now those players are on teams owned by a human who is trying to win games. This is better for them and for their competition in leagues as the games will be more competitive.
If you could make an argument for collusion, maybe I could see that, but then that is something support will deal with now anyway on a case-by-case basis. If the argument is about farm teams, this won't prevent that - people will just get other users to own those teams - every network does this anyway for one reason or another (usually to split up the cost). If the argument is that one person cannot keep up with that many teams, how do you know? That is for them to decide and again even a poorly managed human team is typically much better for everyone than an all CPU team.
Overall I just do not see the problem that exists for this suggestion to address and I do not see what positives would come from it, but perhaps you have something in mind I have not considered.
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
very well putOriginally posted by Kirghiz
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
Winning records is meaningless in this context. Many reasons to not win. How many teams you own is not one of them - unless you are trying to HC all of them. That would not be feasible.
But if you are using Coordinators, you can own twenty teams and it would make no difference.
As for "need", people need however many teams they need to fufill their gaming entertainment goals.
That can be one or 100. It is an individual preference and not something anyone else can judge upon rationally. Well unless its 1000 then its time for a shrink.
Nobody needs nine teams. If you can show me an agent that actually owns nine teams, and they all have more than 50 human dots on them, and they all have winning records (8-8 or better) i'll tell you to lock this. Anyone that actually has 9 teams, or even more than 6 teams, is only half ass running at least some of them. The sad thing is, you can half ass run teams and win championships in pro leagues these days, so .500 on every team isn't a very high bar.
4 teams of any type pretty much covers whatever needs an individual might have. Very few people play more than one league type as aggressively as they do another. Casual players don't play regular or pee wee, pee wee players tend to stay in pee wee. Regular players might dabble with casual sometimes but 4 teams of any type still lets them do that. It's all anyone needs.
Winning records is meaningless in this context. Many reasons to not win. How many teams you own is not one of them - unless you are trying to HC all of them. That would not be feasible.
But if you are using Coordinators, you can own twenty teams and it would make no difference.
As for "need", people need however many teams they need to fufill their gaming entertainment goals.
That can be one or 100. It is an individual preference and not something anyone else can judge upon rationally. Well unless its 1000 then its time for a shrink.
Kirghiz
offline
offline
Originally posted by yello1
Please make yourself the poster child of the "I need 9 teams" side of the debate. This will get done faster.
Thanks!
Originally posted by Bane
I would like to own 4 regular teams and 0 casual/peewee
Also this.
Please make yourself the poster child of the "I need 9 teams" side of the debate. This will get done faster.
Thanks!
Originally posted by Bane
I would like to own 4 regular teams and 0 casual/peewee
Also this.
Originally posted by Dub J
This should go hand in hand with a drastic reduction in the amount of leagues, tbh.
This should go hand in hand with a drastic reduction in the amount of leagues, tbh.
Originally posted by yello1
Winning records is meaningless in this context. Many reasons to not win. How many teams you own is not one of them - unless you are trying to HC all of them. That would not be feasible.
But if you are using Coordinators, you can own twenty teams and it would make no difference.
As for "need", people need however many teams they need to fufill their gaming entertainment goals.
That can be one or 100. It is an individual preference and not something anyone else can judge upon rationally. Well unless its 1000 then its time for a shrink.
Yello1 I will agree that it is impossible for me or anyone else to say what makes you happy on the game. And in reality I do not think anyone here wants to intrude on what makes you or anyone else gaming fun. But here is a aspect that you do not see due to your blinders of what you want. See most team owners on this game actually play the game to win or at the worst be competitive. So let's look at your teams for a minute. How many of them actually have a shot at winning a championship? How many of them are even competitive for the most part? So see by you fielding a bunch of crappy teams you are hurting a bunch of other users enjoyment of the game. As owners we want to face competitive teams each and every game.
Winning records is meaningless in this context. Many reasons to not win. How many teams you own is not one of them - unless you are trying to HC all of them. That would not be feasible.
But if you are using Coordinators, you can own twenty teams and it would make no difference.
As for "need", people need however many teams they need to fufill their gaming entertainment goals.
That can be one or 100. It is an individual preference and not something anyone else can judge upon rationally. Well unless its 1000 then its time for a shrink.
Yello1 I will agree that it is impossible for me or anyone else to say what makes you happy on the game. And in reality I do not think anyone here wants to intrude on what makes you or anyone else gaming fun. But here is a aspect that you do not see due to your blinders of what you want. See most team owners on this game actually play the game to win or at the worst be competitive. So let's look at your teams for a minute. How many of them actually have a shot at winning a championship? How many of them are even competitive for the most part? So see by you fielding a bunch of crappy teams you are hurting a bunch of other users enjoyment of the game. As owners we want to face competitive teams each and every game.
Dub J
offline
offline
I've got 3 rosters almost finished and 2 more I am working diligently to fill and I'm confident those rosters will be finished by the first game of next season. That will be 5 teams in the playoff hunt. Could have 6 but I'm using that other PW to train coordinators so it's up to them to recruit for that team.
Kirghiz
offline
offline
Originally posted by Dub J
I've got 3 rosters almost finished and 2 more I am working diligently to fill and I'm confident those rosters will be finished by the first game of next season. That will be 5 teams in the playoff hunt. Could have 6 but I'm using that other PW to train coordinators so it's up to them to recruit for that team.
We'll revisit this on day 32 and see how they're all doing.
I've got 3 rosters almost finished and 2 more I am working diligently to fill and I'm confident those rosters will be finished by the first game of next season. That will be 5 teams in the playoff hunt. Could have 6 but I'm using that other PW to train coordinators so it's up to them to recruit for that team.
We'll revisit this on day 32 and see how they're all doing.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
