|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 15, 2014 22:54:56 GMT -5
So what about taking this at the end of each season, and for the following season, making everyone sitting at 10 posts a day go with 100 posts for a point. (I would suggest we exempt Bulldozers from this season because he is brand new, but am open to discussion on all of it) Do the math, and that means guys posting 10+ a day are getting a point every 10 days. That STILL gives them higher point production than the people sitting at 3 (who have to post for about 17 days to reach a point). Advantage for activity remains in tact, lesser people are not hurt or affected. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 0:15:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - The Underdog Regime on Feb 16, 2014 0:21:07 GMT -5
Do not care. I just want Lashley to be world champion while everyone else gets neglected in the heavyweight division.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 0:21:28 GMT -5
ok
|
|
|
|
Post by The West Coast Knockouts on Feb 16, 2014 0:30:51 GMT -5
I like it. I like it a lot. A lot of the time though the most active guys gather up a ton of posts through drama with Kruze lol
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 0:35:08 GMT -5
I like it. I like it a lot. A lot of the time though the most active guys gather up a ton of posts through drama with Kruze lol I myself have stopped doing that except when functionally necessary. I have encouraged others to do it, but they are well aware that simply talking to him will involve them in a fight that will never end, thus getting them 150 posts in a weekend.  Really, though, after receiving about 10 complaints last season, I'm going to be more firm with useless arguing. Debating topics, great, but calling people names because they disagree with you, or blatant trolling, not fun for anyone and is ruining the atmosphere of the site. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Camp Cannon on Feb 16, 2014 1:25:15 GMT -5
as a bottom poster fair enough
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Feb 16, 2014 10:26:20 GMT -5
It's kind of whatever to me. It just means I'll take a lot longer to get a point, and that's kind of annoying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Byron's Conquistadors on Feb 16, 2014 12:35:56 GMT -5
anyway we can do this and the thing rocketman said in other thred bout points each month for low posters??? even if it just til we catch up a teeny bit sall be good with me. i now i dont deserve to have 121212 points like phx earns and shit but problem comes when you just you can never stay conpetitive ya know??? tho i guess i am with bj so i donno but its hard work to jus do that. all im askin is if we can think about the point thing rocketman said in other thread with this as well i think that might help sorry for this long post.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Feb 16, 2014 14:16:49 GMT -5
Well, I am honestly against this for the one obvious reason that I have been at 100 posts/point for a season or 2 now, and I was looking forward to having points again for a change. I can, however, tell you firsthand how difficult and daunting it is to obtain a point at 100 posts when you're not simming something and you have fighters on FiD and still have to upgrade your team too. I know folks figure that I post the most on the site, and granted, I do post allot, but 100 posts is ALLOT of posts to obtain a point and my team has suffered over the last 2 seasons because of this and I'm not even competitive really in the league right now, finishing 10th out of 11 teams the last 2 seasons. I know I have a bit of a target on my back because I'm active, I'm vocal and that folks think that I generate a ton of points, but I haven't for a while.
Now, I'd also like to point out again that when I was staff last season, we did lower the folks with less than 1500 posts from 50 posts/point to 25 posts/point, as well as the retro points to that, all to help catch those folks up, but now this is still an issue for folks? To be honest, I don't really understand it and another reson I'm against this. I think that at 25 posts/point combined with RocketMen's idea of a point/month for low end posters is more than ample. I also think that it might cause a dip in activity and not boost it, and no one wants that either.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 14:34:05 GMT -5
WI can, however, tell you firsthand how difficult and daunting it is to obtain a point at 100 posts Do the math, and that means guys posting 10+ a day are getting a point every 10 days. That STILL gives them higher point production than the people sitting at 3 (who have to post for about 17 days to reach a point). Imagine how daunting it is for those people to get 50 with their current post production. 1 every 10 days vs. 1 every 17. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Feb 16, 2014 16:40:25 GMT -5
WI can, however, tell you firsthand how difficult and daunting it is to obtain a point at 100 posts Do the math, and that means guys posting 10+ a day are getting a point every 10 days. That STILL gives them higher point production than the people sitting at 3 (who have to post for about 17 days to reach a point). Imagine how daunting it is for those people to get 50 with their current post production. 1 every 10 days vs. 1 every 17. That's not all that huge of a difference really, and you've also gotta factor in that Bulldozers, Dogs, Rebel Storm, KO's & Byron are at 25 posts/point not 50. I mean honestly, at the rate Dozers is posting right now, he's currently getting 1 point every 2 days dude. So making him exempt from this, if it's done, would be ridiculous... whether he's new or not. But I really don't think any change is needed at all right now. I realize folks like Byron, KO's & Dogs that only post about once a day won't produce as much as I do, but these are also teams that are seasonally always ahead of me in the standings, minus Dogs last season of course. So, I really don't understand what their complaint is here about my post count. If I were a top team every season, that'd be totally different, but I'm not. I'm always at the bottom of the standings or just barely squeaking into the GP if I have a good season. So, I mean, if it's that much of a deal for them, offer those folks a point at the end of the month as RocketMen suggested but penalizing people for post counts simply because of their volume and for no other real reason is kind of ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 17:04:38 GMT -5
Bulldozers did not get 1 point every 25 posts. He has been at 1 for 50 since he signed up. And as I have said on other sites, it's not always about "being the best". It's about options. When you have more points, you have more options. You can choose to have a team of 25. That option is available to you, but it is not available to Knockouts. This proposed suggestion does not hurt high-posters (as I said above - they still get many more points due to posting). As The West Coast Knockouts said, 100 posts is easy to come by for heavy posters. I agree with him, and these stats not only show that but they also show that you still have the much-earned advantage by BEING a heavy poster, compared to a light poster. You still get that edge, it's just not so uneven and daunting for the slower posters to compete. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Feb 16, 2014 17:47:04 GMT -5
Bulldozers did not get 1 point every 25 posts. He has been at 1 for 50 since he signed up. And as I have said on other sites, it's not always about "being the best". It's about options. When you have more points, you have more options. You can choose to have a team of 25. That option is available to you, but it is not available to Knockouts. This proposed suggestion does not hurt high-posters (as I said above - they still get many more points due to posting). As The West Coast Knockouts said, 100 posts is easy to come by for heavy posters. I agree with him, and these stats not only show that but they also show that you still have the much-earned advantage by BEING a heavy poster, compared to a light poster. You still get that edge, it's just not so uneven and daunting for the slower posters to compete. I disagree completely. I was at 100 posts and it did hurt my team immensely. I really don't expect you to understand because you're the simmer and get you 100 posts extremely easy because of that. I don't get any edge because I don't get ahead at all. I'm always at the bottom of the standings. Honestly, what my biggest problem with most of you that are complaining about my post volumes and not being able to catch up, (the xx - Camp Cannon's, the Lord Byron's Conquistadors, The West Coast Knockouts of the league.) is that what you're all failing to realize is that ALL OF YOU are ALWAYS ahead of me in the standings nearly every season and have no real reason to be complaining at all. Look, it was because you folks started complaining early on that I was posting more and accumulating more points than most of you, that I built my roster to a size of 20 (now 24) so that I had to spread out the points I was making at 50 posts/point more thinly to level the playing field out, and even that wasn't good enough for you; Cannon was even bitching about my roster size not thinking that me having a larger roster would even out with the amount of points I was generating. Then I moved up to 100 posts cuz I was staff and was having a difficult time even just barely staying afloat at that level. But now I've gotta deal with this shit again because I've gone back down to 50 posts/point and suddenly the world is ending. All I'm honestly seeing here is that you're all causing problems for me, moreso because you don't like me than it is because of my actual post volumes being unfair. That's pretty sad cuz I hear all this crap about not being able to catch up but all these teams that are saying that are always at or near the top of the standings, minus Byron. This is simply a play to keep themselves at the top and to keep me at the bottom. It's pathetic. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Feb 16, 2014 18:19:28 GMT -5
I think you are over-emphasizing the "you" in all this. No one is talking about standings, we are talking about allowing the Knockouts, Byrons, etc of the league to get more out of the site and not feel like they have no hope in hell of ever catching up - the same feeling GAP mentioned having when he signed up.
No one is out to get anyone. If I was out to get you, I would just slap the rule down and not be asking the lower-end posters their input. It's a community decision about what is best for the community.
|
|
