Quote:
Originally Posted by yajeflow
we've got owners who all have different goals. some owners are trying to win titles. some are trying to build great minor league systems (we have trophies for each minor league, too). some are trying to make money and be the most profitable. we even have a team that is focused almost exclusively on ticketing price strategy and generating maximum revenues. we've got a team that treats the players as commodities, buying a guy at a low price and then quickly finding a better price for him elsewhere.
the league was created with an imbalance of talent, and an imbalance of loot. the 'goals' have sprung forth from this universe we plopped into. the point is...'winning' can mean many things. the team that 'won' the title lost $600,000K. to *me*, that wasn't worth it (i am the 'profit' guy).
|
I like the idea of different goals. I'd just add that the best at those goals each year should be celebrated in a way too with a record of each through the years just like the championships record in OOTP, but with maybe including the top 3 finishers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxxvain
great discussion guys, I appreciate your input.
A couple of things that I am considering incorporating in my yet to be invented league...
[snip]
|
1) I'm not a fan of disallowing the trading of high round picks, even just 1st rounders. Trading can be a lot of fun. I don't think it's wise to limit trading unless it's disallowing obviously totally one-sided deals. Let the guys have fun. I think it's smart to disallow the late round picks though because: 1) it makes your job as commish a little easier, and 2) it helps ensure that a team should at least have some picks that might develop.
2) Don't think just having a salary cap will work well. You don't want it too high or too low. You need to find the right cap for your league and that's not all that easy.
3) Do stadium improvements really make much difference, really? If not, then I wouldn't restrict too much one's desire to customize things how they like. If anything, maybe allow for ranges of values.
5) Yeah, there are some traditionalists out there who believe less is better, but this is about what's fun and if only very few teams make the playoffs it could be easy to lose interest.
6) I'm a big fan of promotion/relegation, but how exactly is yours going to be to different?
7) This sounds nice and all, but I'd strongly advise you not to give yourself too much work. Starting a league you might think you have a tonne of great ideas, but it's probably best to try to keep it at least a little simple to start off with otherwise you're likely to burn yourself out fairly soon. This one thing probably wouldn't be that much work, but I'd think it's a good candidate for leaving out initially.
Finally, a note about having parity as a goal. I'm not sure that "parity" is actually a goal that you should really strive for. Take for example late in the
http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...shootouts.html thread where I argue that parity might be a decent goal from an economic standpoint and even an entertainment one, but if it's done to the point where everything just becomes mediocre then it's probably not such an ideal choice. I agree with you that you don't want to make it too easy for good GMs or too difficult for bad teams, but there's also something to be said for having a really great team in the league to look up to and aspire to one day best. For example, previous to last year, Niagara won the last 5 CBL championships and 6 of the last 7. I didn't take them out this last season, in the final I took out the team that took them out, but it still made for a great story that the juggernauts were finally dethroned. If OTOH you have a league where more often than not a different team is winning it every year, well, there's not as much of a triumphant feeling. It's almost a feeling like, "well, it was just our year". So go for parity if you want, but just keep in mind that you might not want to go too far with it either.