New Sticky Note

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

The draft is underway!

Click here to go to your war room, or visit the war room item in the draft menu.

League Forums

Main - General MFN Discussion

Be careful what you ask for...

By tosu
8/16/2016 6:11 pm
Some people are talking about lack of parity and unfair advantages. They are citing trades as the main culprit for some teams being better than others. The value different folks place on particular rounds and picks varies, as do the value people place on players or positions. A difference of opinion is just that, please don't Socialize it.

T be honest, Game planning removes a lot of chance. If you want more parity, game planning options need to be limited so that random chance factors more into the equation.

Some teams are going to be better than others, no matter what criteria and parameters are present.

The game is fantastic as it is. If you mess with MFN too much more, the game will not be as good as it is now. You will get a select few who are great game planners. Those guys will dominate whatever league they are in across the board and the playing base will shrink considerably.

Changing things like the punt return game is understandable. However, overhauling trades, limiting game planning etc is not a good idea.

Re: Be careful what you ask for...

By punisher
8/16/2016 6:49 pm
that's why it always has been said that you should be careful what you ask for.

Sure you might want it but once you get it you may not want it .

Re: Be careful what you ask for...

By WarEagle
8/16/2016 7:38 pm
There have already been changes made to the game to address many of the issues that lead to "super" teams.

However, none of these will be immediately noticeable unless you join a new league created after version 0.4 was released.

A couple of those items are:
  • Good players demanding higher salaries.

  • Players getting unhappy with you and refusing to re-sign if they aren't getting playing time.


    • The other item that seems to be complained about is trades. Some feel good teams shouldn't be allowed to acquire a 1st round pick in a trade, which also means an owner is not allowed to trade away a 1st round pick if his trade partner is too good already.

    Aside from adjusting how the trade meter evaluates players, I think the trades work fine. I don't see a need to put further restrictions on trades.

    I'm sure some of my teams would be considered "super" teams. The only things I have done are draft, trade, sign FAs and gameplan. I have done absolutely nothing that couldn't be done by any other owner. I have made a lot of trades, some of which I now regret, others that worked out well for me. As far as I can recall, I have only been accused of benefiting from a lopsided trade once, and I took the time to explain why I felt it wasn't lopsided (a weighting issue).

    If changes are made to artificially limit my ability to build the best team I can, I will leave MFN very quickly.

    I'm talking about changes such as:
  • you can only have X amount of 1st round picks

  • you can only have X amount of players rated over 80 on your roster

  • you can only make trades up to a certain value each year

  • etc.

    • Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By blackflys
    8/16/2016 11:17 pm
    How about adjusting just the value a losing teams first is compared to a pervious multi super bowl teams first. So 5 games in a top five worst teams first rounder is not as easy to get as say a middle of the pack team. So a 5-1 team trading a 2-4 team can't swap ones and twos and added in a five and six.

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By Boomtower
    8/16/2016 11:50 pm
    I feel like most of the challenges, and perceptions of unfairness people have with the game stem from lack of information. The time when people get fleeced in trades is when they first start playing because it takes some time to get the hang of things, but that should now be resolved with the 30 day trading grace period. Other than that, trades should be entirely up to the owners.

    In terms of super teams, my experience here is limited to a few leagues. But I think that things are generally fair. Some teams will be better for a while because of the allocation draft, previous owners, etc. But with time and solid game planning most teams can be developed. If that doesn't suit you, wait for a new league with an allocation draft and control your destiny from day one.
    Last edited at 8/16/2016 11:54 pm

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By eyeballll
    8/17/2016 1:20 am
    Good discussion. I have something to add as far as Super teams go: All the really successful teams have the same owner year after year, and that stability gives the time and focus to make a consistent winner.

    I'm in a division with one of WarEagle's 'Super Teams', and he has been the owner of that team since the inception of the league (I think). He has EARNED a winner. He's the solution, not the problem.

    Compare the Patriots to the Browns. One has had stability, on and off the field, for over a decade. The other, well, is the Browns. And just like in MFN, one has had success in the standings. People whine about lack of parity in the NFL, too... It is what it is...

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By raymattison21
    8/17/2016 1:42 am
    Says the owner who bailed on his team to take on a super team . None of these super teams will exist anymore. They will drift in the sunset along with the owners who rely on this strategy. Soak it all up.......your dynasties and 16-0 seasons will be remembered as a widely known exposed glitch in beta testing. Everyone please kneel to honor the fallen legends of MFN!

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By WarEagle
    8/17/2016 5:43 am
    raymattison21 wrote:
    Says the owner who bailed on his team to take on a super team . None of these super teams will exist anymore. They will drift in the sunset along with the owners who rely on this strategy. Soak it all up.......your dynasties and 16-0 seasons will be remembered as a widely known exposed glitch in beta testing. Everyone please kneel to honor the fallen legends of MFN!


    Glitch? Maybe there's a new meaning to this word I'm not aware of yet.

    What "strategy" are you referring to?
    Do you mean drafting well, trading well or gameplanning well? Those are the only strategies I have employed.

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By Tecra031
    8/17/2016 6:51 am
    WarEagle wrote:


    Aside from adjusting how the trade meter evaluates players, I think the trades work fine. I don't see a need to put further restrictions on trades.

    [/li]


    I agree 100%...most trade issues, or the "trade dilemma" as it is now called, really comes from: a) new owners being taken advantage of b)owners not really knowing what they are doing c)owners 'cheating' with multiple teams or conspiring with other players. No tweaks will fix lack of knowledge or morality issues.

    The only thing I think should be tweaked is the value of players and how the trade meter values them.

    Then again, I play mostly with long term players in MFN1 who are classy owners, so my view may be different from those that maintain multiple teams in multiple leagues.

    Re: Be careful what you ask for...

    By GrandadB
    8/17/2016 9:52 am
    eyeballll wrote:
    Good discussion. I have something to add as far as Super teams go: All the really successful teams have the same owner year after year, and that stability gives the time and focus to make a consistent winner.

    I'm in a division with one of WarEagle's 'Super Teams', and he has been the owner of that team since the inception of the league (I think). He has EARNED a winner. He's the solution, not the problem.

    Compare the Patriots to the Browns. One has had stability, on and off the field, for over a decade. The other, well, is the Browns. And just like in MFN, one has had success in the standings. People whine about lack of parity in the NFL, too... It is what it is...

    Oh oh, you mentioned and referenced the NFL!! This is a pro football simulation game! Not the NFL! lol. Its not hard to understand those who have built their super team wanting to protect it and keep it going. But, if you really want a pro football simulation, which would include the potential for a "dynasty", make that "dynasty" have to simulate what the real ones have to do with managing their rosters. There is a "balance", between those getting their reward for creating a great team and winning consistently and those trying to do the same, as in real pro football that the game is trying to simulate as much as possible.

    No need to restrict trades that much more, if at all than they are now, other than accurate value ratings. The answer is in making the simulation more of a simulation, which it is doing as stated above by WE, with the new version adding the re-signing changes. Making the management of the team more of a simulation to pro football will also reduce/eliminate the potential use of "dummy" teams, collusion, and cheating. The focus will be more on obtaining good players along with having to plan and strategize on how to keep them, simulating "pro football", like the NFL. oops, I said it, sorry.
    Last edited at 8/17/2016 10:10 am