|
Encuesta de foro
Shall we send them back to Rookie?
Ingresa para votar y ver los resultados de la encuesta
|
| Autor |
Tema: Top 3 Punishment in Elite |
349 respuestas
|
|
|
|
#1 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 21:57:00 (última edición el 2-Ene-2017, 22:27:01 por Patrik Balogh)
|
Citar
|
Dear GPRO Community!
Some people in Quixotic Press (Keeney, Demydov, Pinto, Webster lords) told us that there are some sponsor collusions at the top of Elite, even between different teams. This thing makes much harder for the majority retain for a longer time here, and we better not speak about title chances.
I exchanged a several PMs with two ex-champions, in which I mentioned this collusion theme cursorily. Both managers haven't replied to me since then. Quite fishy, isn't it?
I PM-ed with Jukka too, and he said that he hadn't know about that collusion. His results in Elite correlate with it.
My opinion is that these 'under-the-table' collusions are rather unfair for the most managers who are planning to reach Elite some time in the future. Because I know that most of them, who somehow succeed getting into the top 10; will never be champion, with the present rules. :(
Even with the driver energy: a top guy in Elite can afford himself to buy a 29 years old driver with the bonuses he can offer by sponsors; to train him (because he can afford lower CTs by sponsors), and finish in the top 4 for 4 more seasons.
My suggestion would be that we should send back them to Rookie, who finishes in the top 3 for more than 3 consecutive seasons in Elite, from now on. I PM-ed with Mr. Vladimir Alexandrov in this theme, and it was his extreme idea, but I gave a think about it, and maybe it can work. Probably nobody will risk going back to Rookie, so we can see a little more variety in the top 4.
Besides, I wish nobody to restrict his PM box.
I'm curious if how many people like this idea. Furthermore, I'm open for any conversation, which helps to abolish this sponsor non-agression pact forever and ever.
To finish my post, here is a little statistics about the top 4 in Elite, from past seasons:
S48: Bobolis, Demydov, Postle, Sereno
S49: Bobolis, Postle, Pavlicek, Demydov
S50: Postle, Pavlicek, Hladik, Bobolis
S51: Pavlicek, Postle, Hladik, Sireni
S52: Dimitroglou, Pavlicek, Postle, Bobolis
S53: Pavlicek, Dimitroglou, Bobolis, Postle
S54: Bobolis, Pavlicek, Postle, Dimitroglou
S55: Dimitroglou, Pavlicek, Bobolis, Postle
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 21:57:43
|
Citar
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:00:57
|
Citar
|
Why only top 3?
Let´s send all Elite to rookie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:07:44
|
Citar
|
|
Sorry but these collusions happen everywhere, even more sorry to say thus is probably the daftest idea ever
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:10:13 (última edición el 2-Ene-2017, 22:17:11 por Phil Maunder)
|
Citar
|
I've never been to Elite never mind the top of Elite, and I don't know much about anything (as my team mates will verify!)
What I do know however is that I would hate to get to the top of Elite because the rules said that people better than me had to rookie reset. I mean what's the point of changing the game to something like 'everyone gets a turn' .... you get to be Elite champ cos the current champ had thier go, now it's your go & later on it will be the people behind you to have thier go.
it just devalues the whole point of getting to the top imo
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:10:49 (última edición el 2-Ene-2017, 22:11:21 por Patrik Balogh)
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Jimmy De Roy @ January 2nd 2017,22:07:44 ) Sorry but these collusions happen everywhere, even more sorry to say thus is probably the daftest idea ever
I succeed promoting to Elite without them. Sorry, but there are no statistics about who succeed without them, and who didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:11:38
|
Citar
|
Conspiracy :D
In a room with two people; one having $10 and another having $2, the rich guy must have cheated his way through :D
Stop artificially enforcing outcome equality. We already have equal playing rules.
Do we need to redistribute their success to less fortunate managers?
If someone broke any particular rule, point at the particular instant/manager and mods will deal with it.
No need to fight ghosts if you're not a ghost buster ;)
[/politics]
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:11:43
|
Citar
|
|
Everything would be good but....By reseting to rookie you lose too much. Send them to amateur :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:24:32
|
Citar
|
|
what if top 3 IQ is higher than us? u cant blame the neurons. but if there is something like u told, than punish
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:26:31
|
Citar
|
|
If I see any Edifice members talking to each other about sponsors you'll all be the first to know
|
|
|
|
|
A continuous pact at the top end of the game between the top teams and managers is certainly something ugly, and the refusal in admit this fact is a very popular human vice, something known as cynicism. But there are certainly better ways to solve this, because simply go and punish with extreme relegation those who know how to play the game in all its aspects (not only the ugly, mob-oriented one) brings a certain load of envy to the scenario.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Daneks Britāls @ January 2nd 2017,22:11:43 ) Everything would be good but....By reseting to rookie you lose too much. Send them to amateur :)
Okay, this rule would be applied to the future. If Vlad wants it.
Quote ( Onur Guardian @ January 2nd 2017,22:24:32 ) what if top 3 IQ is higher than us?
So you say that IQ is exponentially growing in Elite, by results. Quite likely. :P
Quote ( Phil Maunder @ January 2nd 2017,22:26:31 ) If I see any Edifice members talking to each other about sponsors you'll all be the first to know
Maybe you are also a victim?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:35:07
|
Citar
|
|
I definitely agree that this is anti competitive, and would certainly not be allowed in the real world, no matter what the industry. I do not however think that an immediate relegation to rookie would be appropriate, as that sounds way out of accordance with the activities that you say have been taking place. Large fines seem more fitting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:38:40
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Phil Maunder @ January 2nd 2017,22:10:13 ) I don't know much about anything (as my team mates will verify!)
This I can verify. It's like talking to a shoe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 22:46:13
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Peter Thompson @ January 2nd 2017,22:38:40 ) This I can verify. It's like talking to a shoe.
Quote ( Rafael Mantovani @ November 18th 2016,17:22:33 )
you know nothing, Jon Snow.
:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:00:20
|
Citar
|
|
My suggestion would be to change the sponsor system instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:01:26
|
Citar
|
i am sure many teams who have had managers in elite or even some master groups will know about this or even engaged in these backdoor sponsor negotiations it is part of the game and part of the "failings" in the sponsor system. i dont think its unfair as you have to work hard to be in a position to deal with this in the first place and its not the managers problem, you should look more at the game its self, the lack of transition in sponsors between mid and top elite has been mentioned many times.
i also strongly feel against the idea of punishing them its not the correct way to fix the issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:03:34
|
Citar
|
Any form of collusion should be dealt with promptly and severely! It is not only unfair but it is unacceptable.
The GPRO Gods (Moderators) should investigate this as soon as possible. There will no doubt be patterns that emerge that can help figure out the colluders etc
Everyone should be investigated including rookie managers
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:12:03
|
Citar
|
|
We should play it safe and just get rid of elite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:13:18
|
Citar
|
|
A prompt response on collision from the admins is a must. If we go another 12 years of it people will really start to take issue with it
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:22:53
|
Citar
|
[Sarcasm mode on]Yup, we know that no one can possibly stay competitive in this game by hard work, skill, intuition and team discussion alone......there must be something dodgy about it!
I'm hoping this suggestion is some sort of New Years joke, if not surely the simplest and fairest thing to do is just reverse the whole pyramid each season and put all the worst, inactive Rookies in Elite?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:30:56
|
Citar
|
If this is true... bahhhh...
even here in GPRO!?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:35:33
|
Citar
|
|
A good base idea, but that penalty is too much. I say that a better solution is to change sponsors and staff and facilities parts. Will be radical, but probably admins will be sure that coalition don't happen anymore. And in-team coalition exists for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:37:46
|
Citar
|
Just send me up there, I'll make light work of the lot of them.
Y'all know I've been sandbagging every time I hit Pro-3 just so I don't unleash 15 cans of raw talent on Elite when I get there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:42:04
|
Citar
|
Where's the 'No, because it's just a silly complaint' option on the pole?
All the No, options are remarkably 'snide'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:47:59
|
Citar
|
You want to know how to get your way
Get good, in the real world, if someone wins all the time because of coalition, they are not breaking the rules, its like having a super gun in a shooter multiplayer or a spammer character in a fighter, its cheap, but not against the rules
so, to remind you, just get good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:55:18
|
Citar
|
|
Oh get over it. The establishment isn't going to give up their pedestal for anyone or anything. They'll vehemently deny such accusations and nothing will be done about it. Nothing to see here folks, just move along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 Publicado el 2-Ene-2017, 23:58:55
|
Citar
|
|
Honestly, this is stupid!! Why on earth demote someone from Elite to Rookie just because he is the best in his class for any period of time?
|
|
|
|
Not a joke, this is my best knowledge.
Quote ( Paul Bright @ January 2nd 2017,23:42:04 ) Where's the 'No, because it's just a silly complaint' option on the pole?
All the No, options are remarkably 'snide'.
'Innocent sheeps' are snide? 'Innocent Jaguars' wouldn't be?
Quote ( Mario Põldma @ January 2nd 2017,22:00:57 ) Why only top 3?
Let´s send all Elite to rookie.
If you persuade the others too, I'm in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 Publicado el 3-Ene-2017, 00:27:29
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Jody Parker @ January 2nd 2017,23:00:20 ) My suggestion would be to change the sponsor system instead.
Don't hold your breath. 56 seasons and it's barely changed. Easily the worst part of the game in every way. Money is so important in the game so sponsors are pretty important. Any system that can be manipulated (and it can in many ways) needs reworking.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
