|
Post by Grizzlies on Mar 2, 2011 13:11:41 GMT -5
I know this might sound like a dumb idea to some people but I think it could be pretty useful.
Teams in real life can trade 3 million (or cash or whatever) for a late pick, or something like that, so I think it would be cool if we could include the rights to articles in trades. Or maybe a single article limit or something. It would just be another asset we could use, and would be especially useful for a team that is in win now mode but is lacking assets to trade for bench players or wants to add a project player with a late pick.
Yes I realize I would benefit from this, but I would be fine if we didn't use until the future, or if I wasn't allowed to use it. Things like this just help get deals done when you're close, you could just be like "I'll give you a +5 to get it done now". It also might encourage more articles if they become more of an asset for trading as opposed to just upgrades.
Trading +4/5's for depth and late draft picks seems like a useful thing to me.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Mar 2, 2011 13:15:43 GMT -5
We did this in BBS for awhile. Trading of RCs. Similar idea. It became pretty difficult to track.
|
|
|
Post by princemaharajah on Mar 2, 2011 13:28:58 GMT -5
No
|
|
|
Post by germs on Mar 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
I agree with the idea of cash not being represented in the league, but this could get too complicated too fast. We sometimes we behind on normal camps as it is
|
|
|
Post by Grizzlies on Mar 2, 2011 13:52:21 GMT -5
I don't really think trading AC's would be too difficult to track, unless there became some sort of huge flow of articles (doubtful).
I have always wanted the trading of RC's to be done, but that would definitely be too hard to track, unless we traded actual posts (in 200s), which would force Broph to have to edit profiles as a result of trades, which is just annoying.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Mar 2, 2011 14:13:10 GMT -5
I mean maybe if activity was modified into cash, which could be traded. That might make it realistic.
But then it would change the AC/RC thing.
Just thinking out loud, but lets say 100 posts is 100,000. So 200,000 is a +3 RC. You could buy RCs. Etc. IDK.
Once again, it would fuck up the AC/RC system.
|
|
|
Post by Grizzlies on Mar 2, 2011 14:21:12 GMT -5
easy way would just be to take 200 posts from me and give them to the person I traded them to.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Mar 2, 2011 15:49:41 GMT -5
Im guessing youd need a mod to do that. Busy work for Broph is not what we want.
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Mar 2, 2011 17:03:34 GMT -5
Im guessing youd need a mod to do that. Busy work for Broph is not what we want.
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Mar 2, 2011 17:05:38 GMT -5
if we3 can find a smart way to go about this sure, maybe, but I dont want it to be a hassle, which this would be mostly. whoever did articles would have to keep track of written articles, for each GM, kind of a bank of sorts, then when traded move them to the other team
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Mar 2, 2011 17:06:22 GMT -5
I would compensate Footy with an extra RC a year if it came to that, thats more work
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Mar 2, 2011 17:54:11 GMT -5
Id do post editing if it came to that.
Maybe a PM from the GM receiving posts.
Cross reference with the last posts used, to make sure they have posts to trade.
IDK.
|
|
|
Post by Grizzlies on Mar 2, 2011 18:29:51 GMT -5
I don't really think the RC shit is worth it.
for the AC's I don't really see what we need to change. I guess it would be more on the honour system. I mean if someone is gonna try and use an article they traded, they are obviously going to get caught by someone, and then we could punish them.
if the article isn't written by them, have them link to the trade where they obtained the rights to the article.
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Mar 2, 2011 18:49:33 GMT -5
RC's would be too complicated, would rather people know how many posts each has
|
|
|
Post by Garrett Richards on Mar 2, 2011 18:52:26 GMT -5
I know this might sound like a dumb idea nuff said
|
|