So +1 if it can be implemented
Forum > Suggestions > allow team ownership to be put into a hibernation mode
Originally posted by Ezra
It can't be that hard to create a new CPU team to fill the void
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
It can't be that hard to create a new CPU team to fill the void
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
Ezra
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
I think a hibernating team should be put off to the side. GLB can make them pay flex for each season of hibernating (at a reduced rate of actually owning the team because Bort is a good guy :/ {ok realistically, even the same fee and some ppl will do it}) 2 records for each team is messy and is more admin/script work which just isn't there atm (if I'm wrong, then so be it.)
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
I think a hibernating team should be put off to the side. GLB can make them pay flex for each season of hibernating (at a reduced rate of actually owning the team because Bort is a good guy :/ {ok realistically, even the same fee and some ppl will do it}) 2 records for each team is messy and is more admin/script work which just isn't there atm (if I'm wrong, then so be it.)
Originally posted by Ezra
I think a hibernating team should be put off to the side. GLB can make them pay flex for each season of hibernating (at a reduced rate of actually owning the team because Bort is a good guy :/ {ok realistically, even the same fee and some ppl will do it}) 2 records for each team is messy and is more admin/script work which just isn't there atm (if I'm wrong, then so be it.)
That's why I added that changes should also be made to do away with team records and make it all "owner record" based. Then you'd never have to worry about it. As long as the team has no human dots on it, then no record would be recorded as it wouldn't matter... even IF it was owned.
I think a hibernating team should be put off to the side. GLB can make them pay flex for each season of hibernating (at a reduced rate of actually owning the team because Bort is a good guy :/ {ok realistically, even the same fee and some ppl will do it}) 2 records for each team is messy and is more admin/script work which just isn't there atm (if I'm wrong, then so be it.)
That's why I added that changes should also be made to do away with team records and make it all "owner record" based. Then you'd never have to worry about it. As long as the team has no human dots on it, then no record would be recorded as it wouldn't matter... even IF it was owned.
Guppy, Inc
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
I don't think a new team would have to be created. The hibernating team could still have CPU dots on it and use a CPU AI while the "owner" is away for however meany seasons. Players on the team would/should be allowed to leave the same as if the team were sold/went CPU. And, to keep with the mantra of accurate record keeping, ALL teams should have 2 records... the win/loss record while under ownership (maybe even WHO owned the team at that time), their record under CPU management, and their overall won/loss record.
Would be even better if OWNERS could simply have the records of their OWN wins and losses tied to the teams owned (with individual records attached to each team). Then team records wouldn't matter as much. After all, who cares what the record of a CPU team is anyways?
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
Perhaps... but I suspect that it doesn't work that way somehow. If it did, then why not have this already? I mean if you "purchase" a team then it should simply cease to exist when you sell it, to be replaced by a CPU team of a different name. I'm saying that, since the number of teams seem to remain stagnant (nothing added... nothing lost)... then there's probably a reason for it. If you "hibernate" a team, it would still remain active on the servers... and if you added a CPU team for that reason, now you have increased the number of teams total... which would mean deleting a team when some team comes back from "hibernation". My thought is more like changing nothing but the "status" of a team... from active to "inactive" which means less work overall. Just fill with CPU dots and run as a CPU team while it waits for owner to return again (meaning nobody else can buy it).
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
Perhaps... but I suspect that it doesn't work that way somehow. If it did, then why not have this already? I mean if you "purchase" a team then it should simply cease to exist when you sell it, to be replaced by a CPU team of a different name. I'm saying that, since the number of teams seem to remain stagnant (nothing added... nothing lost)... then there's probably a reason for it. If you "hibernate" a team, it would still remain active on the servers... and if you added a CPU team for that reason, now you have increased the number of teams total... which would mean deleting a team when some team comes back from "hibernation". My thought is more like changing nothing but the "status" of a team... from active to "inactive" which means less work overall. Just fill with CPU dots and run as a CPU team while it waits for owner to return again (meaning nobody else can buy it).
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
When I lost ownership of a team of mine due to being away a while...the team went from regional pro's and got moved to casual pro's....they jumped leagues while being a CPU team.
Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
some old teams no longer exist at all any more
Yup I can vouch for that
Boston Bulldogs http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=2782
★ILOF Allstars★http://goallineblitz.com/game/roster.pl?team_id=2014
some old teams no longer exist at all any more
Yup I can vouch for that
Boston Bulldogs http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=2782
★ILOF Allstars★http://goallineblitz.com/game/roster.pl?team_id=2014
Ezra
offline
offline
Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Perhaps... but I suspect that it doesn't work that way somehow. If it did, then why not have this already? I mean if you "purchase" a team then it should simply cease to exist when you sell it, to be replaced by a CPU team of a different name. I'm saying that, since the number of teams seem to remain stagnant (nothing added... nothing lost)... then there's probably a reason for it. If you "hibernate" a team, it would still remain active on the servers... and if you added a CPU team for that reason, now you have increased the number of teams total... which would mean deleting a team when some team comes back from "hibernation". My thought is more like changing nothing but the "status" of a team... from active to "inactive" which means less work overall. Just fill with CPU dots and run as a CPU team while it waits for owner to return again (meaning nobody else can buy it).
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
Hopefully the complication isn't admin reluctance.
I'm +1
this is over-complicating things. if a team is hibernating, then it doesnt play games, or have any players. if the team is still playing, then the servers still have to treat the team as if its alive. just have a hibernating flag and when set, no one sees the team but the owner, and its not assigned to a league. when the owner is ready to run it again, support turns off the switch and the team goes back to being normal.
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Perhaps... but I suspect that it doesn't work that way somehow. If it did, then why not have this already? I mean if you "purchase" a team then it should simply cease to exist when you sell it, to be replaced by a CPU team of a different name. I'm saying that, since the number of teams seem to remain stagnant (nothing added... nothing lost)... then there's probably a reason for it. If you "hibernate" a team, it would still remain active on the servers... and if you added a CPU team for that reason, now you have increased the number of teams total... which would mean deleting a team when some team comes back from "hibernation". My thought is more like changing nothing but the "status" of a team... from active to "inactive" which means less work overall. Just fill with CPU dots and run as a CPU team while it waits for owner to return again (meaning nobody else can buy it).
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
Hopefully the complication isn't admin reluctance.
I'm +1
Moretti
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
there are many "no brainer" things that could be added to this game, like this suggestion, that are never addressed. There are suggestions that are voted on with overwhelming positive views that are never implemented. No reasoning is provided, but there are flappy beard and other football games being developed in the mean time.
I dunno... just thinking if it was easy as you say that it would/should already be a feature... or, at least, a no-brainer to make happen. I'm just guessing it's more complicated than that.
there are many "no brainer" things that could be added to this game, like this suggestion, that are never addressed. There are suggestions that are voted on with overwhelming positive views that are never implemented. No reasoning is provided, but there are flappy beard and other football games being developed in the mean time.
Originally posted by Chysil
I'd go for this...
or even just a team retirement, where it locks the team down so no one can steal the history / name / tradition etc
I missed this the first time I read all the posts.... this would work also. I would have done that with a couple of mine
just not to lose them. Hey, it's Not like there aren't enough teams out there for people to buy... Right?
I'd go for this...
or even just a team retirement, where it locks the team down so no one can steal the history / name / tradition etc
I missed this the first time I read all the posts.... this would work also. I would have done that with a couple of mine
just not to lose them. Hey, it's Not like there aren't enough teams out there for people to buy... Right?
Edited by Hottie2.0 on Feb 28, 2014 14:52:41
Originally posted by Moretti
there are many "no brainer" things that could be added to this game, like this suggestion, that are never addressed. There are suggestions that are voted on with overwhelming positive views that are never implemented. No reasoning is provided, but there are flappy beard and other football games being developed in the mean time.
Could be. I'm just one of those that plan-for/think-the worst and hope/work for the better. So I suspect it's something they couldn't do... not didn't do. But yeah... it could've easily been something they never thought of.
there are many "no brainer" things that could be added to this game, like this suggestion, that are never addressed. There are suggestions that are voted on with overwhelming positive views that are never implemented. No reasoning is provided, but there are flappy beard and other football games being developed in the mean time.
Could be. I'm just one of those that plan-for/think-the worst and hope/work for the better. So I suspect it's something they couldn't do... not didn't do. But yeah... it could've easily been something they never thought of.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
