Originally posted by supgreg
Originally posted by haole
Originally posted by thegreat23
This is a good idea but I think you should be able to create secondary positions for players before this idea takes effect. That way there won't be an OOP or if there is one, it wouldn't affect players much. Sorry if something like this was suggested already because I didn't go through every page of this thread.
As stated in the first post in this thread (which has been occasionally updated to reflect the discussion), there has been quite a bit of discussion about OOP penalties.
The prevailing thought seems to be that the majority is willing to accept OOP penalties and consider them part of the strategy of the Iron Man League, especially if that will help move this idea from suggestion stage to reality.
Back to the top.
It is funny to see other people keep bringing up the OOP. I would bet your "majority" that is willing to accept the OOP the way it is, is the same 5 people that have 55% of the posts, and the people that keep bringing up the OOP are the new people reading the thread.
I'd be willing to bet if you counted up the for and against the OOP, you would get more individuals for reducing the OOP, you obviously can't vote twice.
The majority who support keeping the OOP penalties as-is comprises of:
1) People who have read the OP, which states that the game's original OOP penalties will be uses as-is and considered part of the Iron Man strategy, then posted their support of the proposal as listed in the OP.
2) People who read the OP, offered reservations about the OOP penalties not being changed, listened to the explanation on why they wouldn't be changed at least initially, and expressed support for the idea nonetheless.
3) People who did not read the OP, asked that question, and then followed up with the discussion.
For people who asked the question, and never read the answer or never returned to comment after asking about OOPs, your guess is as good as mine. For people who stayed with the discussion, there has been mostly agreement.
And the funny part about your talking about the "same ol' people" who support keeping the OOPs as-is in order to get the league started is actually more reflective of the other side of the argument -- it's actually just the same couple of people who keep revisiting this thread to harp on the OOP penalties (or the one person obsessed with reducing stamina).
So for the sake of the math, majority vs. minority, I did not count them among the majority who are for suggestion as it is listed: limit roster sizes to 15 with no other changes to the game's core coding. Adding it up, I think you find that the VAST majority who have posted in this thread are for the suggestion as listed. You are welcome to do the math if you disagree.
