*More of the usual - Printable Version

*More of the usual - Printable Version

+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *More of the usual (/showthread.php?tid=10311)

*More of the usual - ItsJustBarry - 09-07-2018

I’m back and i’m sure many of you probably just let out an audible groan at least that’s what i’m going to imagine. Anyways, I was going to leave it be but listening to sweetwater’s podcast this morning inspired me to address the topic again. For anyone who hasn’t listened to the podcast, I will LINK it here.. As with every ‘cast he’s produced, it is definitely worth a listen. For anyone who has considered making a podcast of their own, do it. I am usually streaming something every day and these give me a great change of pace while also providing a new aspect of the league.

Back to the topic, Sweetwater went into the Bradley Westfield thing for several minutes and while I agreed with his soap box speech directed towards HO, I’m on the opposite side regarding Westfield himself and even the updaters. In the podcast, he eluded that Westfield regressed inappropriately on purpose, intentionally, deliberately, you get the point. I am in the mindset that it was completely accidental. Literally, the only place you can see player build minimums is in the create a player template section of the site. I’m a gambling man and i’m willing to bet that most of you haven’t ventured to that section of the site since you’ve created your player. Aside from kolbe and maybe TC, I bet most of us don’t know the positional attribute limits so I truly believe it was an unintentional mistake.

Sweetwater went on to talk about the updaters and how they should possibly be held accountable for these types of issues. I don’t subscribe to that mindset either. Updating is the worst job in the league and we should praise those who are willing to do it week in and week out. Penalizing them financially or otherwise seems like a terrible approach and will only make finding anyone to update harder. So in my opinion, leave updater alone and probably raise their pay some more.

Now for the fun stuff. Something went wrong and it has to be somebody’s fault, right? Of course it does. I’m sure some of you can guess where I’m going with this. Head office dropped the ball here. Three times if we’re being specific. As I learned this season, RIP my TPE, a calculated regression list is posted, every player or their GM has to regress each player on the list, then link the regressed update page back to the original regression list for audit. So, if I am pointing fingers, it would be right there.

I will be the first to tell you i’m not really and innovative person. I’ve also been told I often take the wrong approach when suggesting “improvements”. So here I am with what I would consider an appropriate method of a process improvement and an easy fix for what could become a common problem as more players hit regression. On the player templates, which almost all of us have copied on our update threads over and over, why don’t we list the attribute range off to the left in parentheses instead of only the MAX? Then the players, their GMs, the updaters, and even the HO thats auditing the player pages would have a constant quick reference.

See Current Template:

Code:
(MAX: 70) Strength: 30 

(MAX: 95) Agility: 70 

(MAX: 25) Arm: 1 

(MAX: 80) Intelligence: 50 

(MAX: 25) Throwing Accuracy: 1 

(MAX: 35) Tackling: 20 

(MAX: 95) Speed: 65 

(MAX: 90) Hands: 60 

(MAX: 35) Pass Blocking: 10 

(MAX: 35) Run Blocking: 10 

(MAX: 100) Endurance: 60 

(MAX: 25) Kick Power: 1 

(MAX: 25) Kick Accuracy: 1

New Proposed Player Template:

Code:
(30-70) Strength: 30 

(70-95) Agility: 70 

(1-25) Arm: 1 

(50-80) Intelligence: 50 

(1-25) Throwing Accuracy: 1 

(20-35) Tackling: 20 

(65-95) Speed: 65 

(60-90) Hands: 60 

(10-35) Pass Blocking: 10 

(10-35) Run Blocking: 10 

(60-100) Endurance: 60 

(1-25) Kick Power: 1 

(1-25) Kick Accuracy: 1

Something like that. I don’t know exactly but it’s a start. Someone can improve on my thought but this would at least get the ball rolling. Anyways, I’m done here. Feel free to leave comments or not. I’ll come back through later to misquote you and leave snarky comments of my own.

*More of the usual - Muford - 09-07-2018

Easy and quick basis of change that can change and help fix a lot of the minor issues, I like it

*More of the usual - kckolbe - 09-07-2018

Solid proposal.

*More of the usual - bovovovo - 09-07-2018

I can dig it

I think a simple line added to the regression post saying “You cannot go below the beginning attribute levels seen HERE” with HERE being a link to the player templates would go a long way as well

*More of the usual - nunccoepi - 09-07-2018

praise

*More of the usual - manicmav36 - 09-07-2018

(09-07-2018, 04:10 PM)ItsJustBarry Wrote:probably raise their pay some more.

Seriously though, this is a such a solution it's almost embarrasing no one had though of it before. Well done.

*More of the usual - White Cornerback - 09-07-2018

Ah another suggestion by one of the inferior leagues snakes! How can we attempt to catch up to never-mind overtake the SHL in the sim league business if we don't even copy their habit of punishing updaters for human mistakes. Keep living in the past folks but at this rate we will all be out of the simleague business by S12.

Good suggestion, is alot easier to read off the bat too.

*More of the usual - speculadora - 09-07-2018

I proposed this exact thing in GM chat a couple of days ago and I eagerly await the snakes who dismissed my saying it would be helpful pretending they think it's great now.

for the record, I endorse this idea 100%