Warrior General Games

I thought of this while reading the league parity thread.

What if when you first buy a team you get X amount of Owner points. There would be a scale on how your team did and you would lose points for getting blown out everyday because A your team is filled with cpus or B you didnt ask for a demotion.

It wouldnt be anything fast, you would have to get blown out for lets say 3-5 seasons to lose enough points but eventually you will lose your team. You will gain some points back every season until you have enough to buy a team again.

Hell make it to where you can use FLex to buy owner points so if people are gonna have farm teams they would have to pay to have unfilled rosters.

nope.

you can't force people to be good at the game.

Originally posted by bigtisme
nope.

you can't force people to be good at the game.

No, but you can penalize them for being terrible at it.

+1 to the OP but it needs to be fleshed out a bit more. Terrible team owners who don't give a shit should lose their teams after underperforming for 2-3 seasons, and you shouldn't be able to buy a new team if you lose a team in this manner for an additional 2-3 seasons. Would discourage owners from keeping all CPU rosters and would force farm systems to fill their rosters and game plan in the lower levels or risk losing the team they are housing the players on.

Originally posted by merenoise
No, but you can penalize them for being terrible at it.

+1 to the OP but it needs to be fleshed out a bit more. Terrible team owners who don't give a shit should lose their teams after underperforming for 2-3 seasons, and you shouldn't be able to buy a new team if you lose a team in this manner for an additional 2-3 seasons. Would discourage owners from keeping all CPU rosters and would force farm systems to fill their rosters and game plan in the lower levels or risk losing the team they are housing the players on.

Exactly where I was going with this.

Lots of input would be needed to make the suggestion whole but the main point is out there.

Its also not about being good, its about actually attempting to play the game instead of just wasting other peoples flex and time. Losing wouldnt have to affect your status unless you were just getting murdered for like 3 seasons in a row.


You play the game to win but at the same time you dont want it handed to you, I want to be in a competitive league. I remember back in season 2 being in leagues where everyone tried and you used to know the other teams well because you played them alot and had rivalries. Those days seem to be gone.

Originally posted by merenoise
Originally posted by bigtisme

nope.

you can't force people to be good at the game.

No, but you can penalize them for being terrible at it.

+1 to the OP but it needs to be fleshed out a bit more. Terrible team owners who don't give a shit should lose their teams after underperforming for 2-3 seasons, and you shouldn't be able to buy a new team if you lose a team in this manner for an additional 2-3 seasons. Would discourage owners from keeping all CPU rosters and would force farm systems to fill their rosters and game plan in the lower levels or risk losing the team they are housing the players on.

I agree with this to some extent. but from a business stand point this will never happen because it would take money out of Borts pocket.

Logically sound, but bad marketing.

GLB is a business. Unless you are a must have commodity monopoly, you can't punish your customers and expect to keep them.

While I see what you're trying to do there is no way that this happens.

-1 Will never fly..always will be bad teams.

It would punish the teams that are slow building.

I see what you are saying but it would never fly.
Flex spent for teams is a big source of income.

N G T H ever

+1