Gaging Interest in a DL/OL Combo for Users

[AdamS]

This is just me putting this thought out there to see what the league itself thinks. Preferably this will be answered by just the players, as the GMs/HO already get to talk about it behind the scenes. It's mostly just me spitballing to see what the community itself thinks interms of interest before I see if this should actually be pushed further.

So here's the basics:
Someone who creates oline or dline would be allowed (not required) a 2nd player on the opposite side of the line. Obviously none of the technical stuff is set up because there's no real need to dive into it without garnering interest first.

Since people are going to ask anyway:
My initial theory is 1 salary for both players, drafted together to the same team with one pick, plus some sort of salary cap hit to the team that accounts for having 2 players so as not to create an unfair advantage. All that's way beyond this though.

Why:
Well to put it kindly, oline sucks. There's noreal stats, you don't see your player do much, and not much happens in general. Dline is...a tiny bit better. Every so often people notice your dot as it covers up the QB. Your stat sheet is also usually not very interesting. We're seeing a dearth of dline creates at times and its a difficult to fill position that also often kinda tops out at 400ish tpe. My theory here is that if you had both, you'd have more things to watch for. Also, more reason to keep earning since Oline usually isn't anything special until you go over 400 tpe. I think that people may be interested in having both and if plausible, lowering the influence and need for bots (dline bots have been discussed several times and pop up fairly consistently). I think it would definitely help people who make want to make dline have something more to push for and also help people who want to make oline have something else to do. It could potentially also lead to lines having varying strength instead of 5 clones, which adds to the realism. It's also pretty unique since no one that I know of is doing this with line players. So them's the theories. Now come the questions.



Does the option of also getting an o-line player increase any existing interest in making a d-line player?

Does the option of also getting a d-line player increase any existing interest in making an o-line player?

Does the option of getting both create new interest in making either?

Do you think it would benefit the league to pursue this idea?


If you have any questions or concerns, I'd love to hear them, preferably before you answer the questions so that you have a better sense of where it might potentially go. I'm gonna try to knock out a few ahead of time here.

No this isn't intended as a start to general multiple players.
EFL uses bots for both lines so it's actually not the same thing they do.
In terms of separate update pages or sharing one, I'd defer to the updaters on what they think would be easier.
Yes, this would most likely still leave the need for 1 bot even at full strength operation.

[37thchamber]

I understand the logic, but I think the technicalities DO need to be worked out before this goes out for interest, because the manner in which it's implemented might affect that.

For example, if the rules on agents (the first announcement) had been made clear previously, it definitely would have affected the number of people interested in becoming an agent.

In principle, the idea is fine. But in practice, I think there are hurdles that need to be addressed.

[TomHanks]

Probably won’t come as a shock to anyone, but I’m a big fan of this idea. There definitely needs to be a way to balance this, since you’re buying training for 2 players on 1 player’s salary, which would mean you’ll have to produce a lot of media/graphics to have both be top earners. I don’t know if this would change the number of created linemen, but I do think it’ll help with retention since there’s more going on, and I think anything that will help retention is good for the league and should be explored.

[iseedoug]

I actually like this idea quite a bit, but I also cognitively would want it to be 1 guy playing both sides of the ball. So, maybe it is actually two sets of attributes for the sim logic, but from the leagues point of view its 1 guy playing both sides.

It would feel almost like PBE does with the choosing between batting and fielding, but instead DL and OL.

And a team could choose, based on TPE choices, whether to start both the OL version of the player or the DL version of the player.

Edit: also agree with 37thchamber about the details needing to be worked out before it gets hyped up. The agent thing was a mess.

[Eco]

And a team could choose, based on TPE choices, whether to start both the OL version of the player or the DL version of the player.

This is a waaaaaay better idea.

[Rising Equinox]

I understand the thought process, but I don't think it's a very good idea. In the end, people choose which position to play. If they choose OL or DL, they had interest in that position despite the lack of stats and interaction as a player. If you allow this, then you get people questioning why they can't do a WR/CB combo or a RB & LB. One of the good things about these positions is that they are a premium position in most drafts. Just being an above average earner as a DL or OL makes you a draft priority for most teams. Changing this would make more people want to play those positions, ruining their biggest positive aspect.

[AdamS]

I understand the logic, but I think the technicalities DO need to be worked out before this goes out for interest, because the manner in which it's implemented might affect that.

For example, if the rules on agents (the first announcement) had been made clear previously, it definitely would have affected the number of people interested in becoming an agent.

In principle, the idea is fine. But in practice, I think there are hurdles that need to be addressed.

well there was some question of whether there would even be interest, so assuming there is any at all working out technicalities is the next step

[AdamS]

Probably won’t come as a shock to anyone, but I’m a big fan of this idea. There definitely needs to be a way to balance this, since you’re buying training for 2 players on 1 player’s salary, which would mean you’ll have to produce a lot of media/graphics to have both be top earners. I don’t know if this would change the number of created linemen, but I do think it’ll help with retention since there’s more going on, and I think anything that will help retention is good for the league and should be explored.

i think people are always looking for ways to spend money once they start rolling in it so im not too worried about the more expensive equipment

maybe some equipment is designated for both and some isnt? not sure yet

[youngcricket]

gauging

[AdamS]

I actually like this idea quite a bit, but I also cognitively would want it to be 1 guy playing both sides of the ball. So, maybe it is actually two sets of attributes for the sim logic, but from the leagues point of view its 1 guy playing both sides.

It would feel almost like PBE does with the choosing between batting and fielding, but instead DL and OL.

And a team could choose, based on TPE choices, whether to start both the OL version of the player or the DL version of the player.

Edit: also agree with 37thchamber about the details needing to be worked out before it gets hyped up. The agent thing was a mess.

do you man there'd be two builds and gms would decide which version to start that day? i feel like that could get complicated to have to switch back and forth potentially for an entire build based on whether the gms decided to use the dline or oline build this game or that game. would end up requiring extra work by the simmer.

i would almost certainly just prefer two separate consistent builds