![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=495)
+--- Forum: Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Forum: Head Office Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=230)
+---- Thread: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals (/showthread.php?tid=32234)
S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - TomHanks - 05-16-2021
All DSFL specific rule proposals for this year's summit can be found below. Ballot is currently open and will close on Tuesday, May 18th at 11:59am (noon) EST. As with the ISFL and universal proposals, if you have any thoughts, feelings, or concerns with any of the please reach out to your GM or another voting representative. In addition, if you would like to write media about any of these proposals, feel free.
Voting parties for the DSFL ballot are as follows:
DSFL GMs: @Crodyman, @frazzle14, @GuitarMaster116, @Hordle, @IsaStarcrossed, @katarn22, @Kotasa, @NicholasTheGreat, @r0tzbua, @RussDrivesTheBus, @slate, @TMosura, @UberBJ, @WhatAmUs, @zeagle1 & @ZootTX
DSFL HO: @Faded, @nunccoepi & @TomHanks
League Commissioner: @bex
League Owner: @manicmav36
DSFL Simmer: @124715
1. Players added to teams via waivers have their contract pay for their rookie season reduced by $1M for every Activity Check thread that has CLOSED by the time that they are claimed off of waivers, counting since DSFL Week 1 games are played in each season.
2. Add a subsection to the current rule VIII.C.1.d.i ("DSFL Specific Sim Rules - Offensive players") that reads:
"If an offensive player does not start in the Spread/Shotgun formation, they must start in both the Two TE and Shotgun 4 WR formations as long as all other rules are able to be satisfied."
3. Delete these sections of the rulebook that are no longer relevant and are not enforced:
-VIII.D.6.a: "If a DSFL player becomes inactive during the off-season free agency period, the player's original team has 24 hours to sign him to an inactive contract. If they decide not to sign him, that player becomes an Inactive Free Agent."
-VIII.D.7: "If a player on a DSFL team is not assigned a depth chart spot at all for an entire season, the team must release that player to free agency."
4. Depending on how many 200+ TPE call ups an organization has a season, they are given additional GM bots to help alleviate the penalty of losing a bunch of their players. The proposed scale is this:
2-4 Call ups is 1 additional GM Bot
5-8 Call ups is another additional GM Bot
9+ Call ups is one last additional GM Bot
This would mean it is possible for a team to have the normal 2 GM Bots, plus an additional 3 for a total of 5 GM Bots maximum.
This rule change would go into effect in S29 if passed. With the declining numbers in the DSFL right now, the extra roster help in the form of these extra GM bots is necessary immediately to provide the best experience for rookies.
5. DSFL Awards Eligibility:
For a player to be nominated for awards in the DSFL, that player's user must have completed a minimum of 3 activity checks during that season for the player in question.
For a player to be nominated for the pro bowl, that player must be active at the time of pro bowl ballot creation, unless there are not enough active players to fill the ballot.
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - tMuse - 05-16-2021
I think there is some good stuff here but the first one
Code:
1. Players added to teams via waivers have their contract pay for their rookie season reduced by $1M for every Activity Check thread that has CLOSED by the time that they are claimed off of waivers, counting since DSFL Week 1 games are played in each season.Seems bad to me as it doesn't hurt those who already have much money but mostly new users who join the league. This could impact their fun / decrease the incentive to create after the season has already started. Given the fact that we already have some problems getting new users into the DSFL it feels like this extra "burden" shouldn't be put into place
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - Billybolo53 - 05-16-2021
(05-16-2021, 12:15 PM)tMuse Wrote: I think there is some good stuff here but the first oneI think you’re spot on here. I think this intended to not give trade deadline creates an advantage but it will end up hurting players that create durning the season. If it was only for post trade deadline creates I could see it.
Code:1. Players added to teams via waivers have their contract pay for their rookie season reduced by $1M for every Activity Check thread that has CLOSED by the time that they are claimed off of waivers, counting since DSFL Week 1 games are played in each season.
Seems bad to me as it doesn't hurt those who already have much money but mostly new users who join the league. This could impact their fun / decrease the incentive to create after the season has already started. Given the fact that we already have some problems getting new users into the DSFL it feels like this extra "burden" shouldn't be put into place
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - Rockiesfan4ever - 05-16-2021
The waivers one seems really bad. So you get claimed after 4 ACs have closed and you lose out on your entire contract basically.
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - infinitempg - 05-16-2021
(05-16-2021, 12:15 PM)tMuse Wrote: I think there is some good stuff here but the first one
Code:1. Players added to teams via waivers have their contract pay for their rookie season reduced by $1M for every Activity Check thread that has CLOSED by the time that they are claimed off of waivers, counting since DSFL Week 1 games are played in each season.
Seems bad to me as it doesn't hurt those who already have much money but mostly new users who join the league. This could impact their fun / decrease the incentive to create after the season has already started. Given the fact that we already have some problems getting new users into the DSFL it feels like this extra "burden" shouldn't be put into place
seems like this could be solved by just saying new users get the full 6M while recreates lose out on the extra $$$. always seemed silly to me that i could get 6M for creating at the deadline and then another 6M the next season
also don't brand new users get $$$ from rookie tasks?
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - tMuse - 05-16-2021
(05-16-2021, 12:48 PM)infinitempg Wrote:Yeah you get a good amount of cash from doing rookie tasks, but given how expensive the ISFL is I don't think we should impact new users in that way.(05-16-2021, 12:15 PM)tMuse Wrote: I think there is some good stuff here but the first one
Code:1. Players added to teams via waivers have their contract pay for their rookie season reduced by $1M for every Activity Check thread that has CLOSED by the time that they are claimed off of waivers, counting since DSFL Week 1 games are played in each season.
Seems bad to me as it doesn't hurt those who already have much money but mostly new users who join the league. This could impact their fun / decrease the incentive to create after the season has already started. Given the fact that we already have some problems getting new users into the DSFL it feels like this extra "burden" shouldn't be put into place
seems like this could be solved by just saying new users get the full 6M while recreates lose out on the extra $$$. always seemed silly to me that i could get 6M for creating at the deadline and then another 6M the next season
also don't brand new users get $$$ from rookie tasks?
Only applying the rule to recreates COULD work and i bet there are other ways this could be made more reasonable, none of which i thought about tho tbf.
I just felt like sharing my thoughts on the rule as is and in my opinion it shouldn't be put into place in the current proposed state
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - GlimsTC - 05-16-2021
Quote:4. Depending on how many 200+ TPE call ups an organization has a season, they are given additional GM bots to help alleviate the penalty of losing a bunch of their players. The proposed scale is this:
2-4 Call ups is 1 additional GM Bot
5-8 Call ups is another additional GM Bot
9+ Call ups is one last additional GM Bot
This would mean it is possible for a team to have the normal 2 GM Bots, plus an additional 3 for a total of 5 GM Bots maximum.
This rule change would go into effect in S29 if passed. With the declining numbers in the DSFL right now, the extra roster help in the form of these extra GM bots is necessary immediately to provide the best experience for rookies.
Wanted to touch on this one because I think it is easily the biggest one that goes against the spirit of the DSFL. Straight up, losing is part of the DSFL. Bad seasons are part of the DSFL. People have this idea that the Ultimini is a huge make or break goal, and thus they focus on the complete wrong thing. What's the point of winning if the majority of your team is bots? At the end of the day, it's your job as a DSFL GM to develop players and give them a fun experience, win or lose. To set them up for ISFL success. If people are buying into your system, believe me, they'll be having fun no matter what. By trying to fix a temporary issue that falls onto the recruitment team, this rule will end up harming the DSFL for seasons to come. That being said, I understand the intentions behind it, so I don't fault whoever suggested this in the slightest.
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - DarknessRising - 05-16-2021
The first rule about waivers not getting money, is because contracts for DSFL rookies is set to cover WT, therefore these late joiners are getting money that isn't going to be used to cover WT since they have passed. Plus if you want to talk about them being new users, then why are some new users getting an extra $6M over others cause they joined earlier? As I said, they can't pay for older WT so its just a head start to things like equipment, so its not really fair they getting a substantial amount of money compared to those that join later. Joining in the final regular season week and not doing anything, still nets you double the cash of those that join potentially mere days later.
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - tMuse - 05-16-2021
(05-16-2021, 02:27 PM)DarknessRising Wrote: The first rule about waivers not getting money, is because contracts for DSFL rookies is set to cover WT, therefore these late joiners are getting money that isn't going to be used to cover WT since they have passed. Plus if you want to talk about them being new users, then why are some new users getting an extra $6M over others cause they joined earlier? As I said, they can't pay for older WT so its just a head start to things like equipment, so its not really fair they getting a substantial amount of money compared to those that join later. Joining in the final regular season week and not doing anything, still nets you double the cash of those that join potentially mere days later.
it will also leave you with less TPE than those that joined earlier, which will result in lower draft picks and leave you in a situation in which it is harder to get a better contract.
You have the upside that you have more money if you join later, which is true. Tho it is NOT unfair, it levels the playing field a bit more as you could potentially buy equipment to catch up TPE wise.
Given that, even that equipment catchup is only temporary as other still can earn money to get that edge back.
The thing about the DSFL and new users is that they should have fun, this results in more engagement in the league and a higher chance that they will stay an active user. To give those users an artificial burden is nonsense and it could even be harmful for the league in general.
This rule will either result in new users having less fun or waiting with creation which will split the classes even further.
In general it should be better for the league to NOT implement the rule and NOT impact users who join a bit late to the party as the DSFL Teams and the ISFL Drafts heavily rely on new users.
We've seen how big classes can be (S22) or how small they can be.
Given the fact that we are currently seeing one of the smallest (if not the smallest?) DSFL class i highly doubt that implementing such a rule is good for the DSFL in any way.
RE: S29 DSFL Rules Summit Proposals - Kyle - 05-18-2021
Rule number 4 is a joke and whoever proposed it doesn't understand the point of the dsfl.