Warrior General Games

I say that we can throw away the throwing games fear, as a team full of CPUs is going to lose any ways. And if the team was full of real players, how long would it last on the market before someone bought it in order not to have to recruit? IIRC, last season, in a CPU dominated league, 4-6 teams were bought after mid season, and I do not believe any of them were the teams with bad records.

I agree that someone might try to exploit, but to what gain, considering the cost involved. Say you buy me a team, and then sell back immediately, that is going to cost you about 300-400 FP. Why do it knowing that Theo can come along 3 days later and buy that same team, thus your FP is completely wasted? And would not a minimum time owned requirement eliminate that option? Say for each season owned, the GMs get an extra 4 days.

I do remember playoff races being screwed up because good teams belly up mid season. So team A beats teams C and D, but bellies up before team B giving team B a leg up on the other 2. Being that defensive points allowed is the tie breaker, and CPU teams have a hard time scoring, not only does team B get a full game, but in any multi team scenario, they get a points advantage too.

So the issue comes down to, just because people CAN do something, WOULD they? I really think a time owned requirement would all but end any exploits.

Whenever I was on a team that went CPU, I always had to end out releasing myself as GM. Case in point http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=1329 , which is currently CPU now. Originally, I was a part of that team awhile back. It went CPU. I waited awhile, then finally took myself off as GM.



*** That was last season, before you guys came along onto the team, as I just noticed that you are CFO there.

That is funny. i did not get an alert telling me that the team had been sold. The default seems to be 2 days. At least that is how long I was left on C2. We can see if I get bumped in 2 days.

Originally posted by SciFi not Syfy
That is funny. i did not get an alert telling me that the team had been sold. The default seems to be 2 days. At least that is how long I was left on C2. We can see if I get bumped in 2 days.

We didn't get one either. Someone had noticed that we were CPU for awhile and mentioned it. Time will tell though.

Originally posted by SciFi not Syfy
I say that we can throw away the throwing games fear, as a team full of CPUs is going to lose any ways. And if the team was full of real players, how long would it last on the market before someone bought it in order not to have to recruit? IIRC, last season, in a CPU dominated league, 4-6 teams were bought after mid season, and I do not believe any of them were the teams with bad records.

I agree that someone might try to exploit, but to what gain, considering the cost involved. Say you buy me a team, and then sell back immediately, that is going to cost you about 300-400 FP. Why do it knowing that Theo can come along 3 days later and buy that same team, thus your FP is completely wasted? And would not a minimum time owned requirement eliminate that option? Say for each season owned, the GMs get an extra 4 days.

I do remember playoff races being screwed up because good teams belly up mid season. So team A beats teams C and D, but bellies up before team B giving team B a leg up on the other 2. Being that defensive points allowed is the tie breaker, and CPU teams have a hard time scoring, not only does team B get a full game, but in any multi team scenario, they get a points advantage too.

So the issue comes down to, just because people CAN do something, WOULD they? I really think a time owned requirement would all but end any exploits.


you seriously think people on this game wouldn't try to exploit something for the simple reason that they can? come on you see all the trolls in the forum and a chance for them to exploit something and cause some sort of problem would be the only reason they would need to do it. you are still also overlooking the part of the argument where someone gets to run a team that no one is paying for. and that wouldn't be fair to anyone that actually does pay to own a team. If this suggestion was actually implemented what is stopping every team owner from making some sort of pact that they will all sell their teams and then let the co-owner, DC,OC run the teams for them. then they buy them back at the end of the season and rework the roster. I know that the scenerio is a little far fetched but the OPs suggestion opens the game up to stuff just like the scenerio I used. while some people do not think the userbase of GLB would stoop to such a level as to exploit something like the OPS suggestion. I think it is not only a possibility but also likely someone would try to do it.

Originally posted by hatchman
you seriously think people on this game wouldn't try to exploit something for the simple reason that they can? come on you see all the trolls in the forum and a chance for them to exploit something and cause some sort of problem would be the only reason they would need to do it. you are still also overlooking the part of the argument where someone gets to run a team that no one is paying for. and that wouldn't be fair to anyone that actually does pay to own a team. If this suggestion was actually implemented what is stopping every team owner from making some sort of pact that they will all sell their teams and then let the co-owner, DC,OC run the teams for them. then they buy them back at the end of the season and rework the roster. I know that the scenerio is a little far fetched but the OPs suggestion opens the game up to stuff just like the scenerio I used. while some people do not think the userbase of GLB would stoop to such a level as to exploit something like the OPS suggestion. I think it is not only a possibility but also likely someone would try to do it.

I already conceded that a few would and asked for ways to prevent it. I do not know why you keep harping that I do not think anyone would try. The objective now is how to take away any reason for people to want to do it. And there is precedence in GLB to toss out people who game the system. I do not believe there is any chance that a good team would still be available at the end of the season if the team remains intact. And in essence, just do the math and see how stupid this would be. It would be cheaper just to keep the team. The refund that you get for the current season is tiny. So you end up paying double by trying your concern. You also do not take into account how long people hold their teams even when they are not competing. So if the GMs are only grandfathered in based on length of ownership, do you hold a team for 10 or 20 seasons, then risk losing it? I just do not see people doing that. The math just does not support your fear being a real issue.

This is the hard numbers that I know for sure. Selling a team back after 4 games into the 2nd season gets you a 175 refund out of 1000. Last time I owned a team, I had it 29 days, and only got 400 back out of 1000. (6/8/12 was the purchase date if anyone knows exactly what season that was). So you can see that I paid for an entire season+ even though I only owned it for half a season. As far as people GMs running teams that they did not pay for, they already do that, so that point is moot. They are just continuing what they already were doing.