Suggestions against tanking

Hi all,

I feel compelled to write some suggestions to Nordeus against tanking, even though I know there will be little chances to see them enacted, because I feel reducing the level of tanking in this game is the number 1 priority for making the game better.

Players tanking reduce the level of enjoyment for people who would like to play this game at the best of their possibilities; it reduces the fun for both players who invest a lot of time in it, and players who invest some money in it, because sometimes you are drafted in leagues in which no (reasonable) amount of money would allow you to compete with a 150% team coming from 3-4 seasons of tanking in a row.

Furthermore, I believe the new rules on associations not only have been little effective in reducing tanking, but also have created a new type of tanker: the "floating tanker". The floating tanker is a type of player who is not sure whether his association will be promoted, stay level or demoted, and so attmpts to float around 8th place in the league until the final days of the season, when he finally decides whether he wants to be promoted or not. These players are perhaps even more disruptive than ordinary tankers becase they tend to completely destroy the balance of the league: one day they might play with a 140% team, the day after with a 50% team, or the same 140% with all players in the same positions, strikers as goalkeepers and vice versa.

So here are my suggestions:

1) give players playing in yellow positions only half the experience from the game, players in red position no experience from the game.
2) allow for players who are constantly played in red positions the possibility to leave the club: after three games in red position in a season they might give a warning, and after five they might say they are pissed off and go away. Tell the player the other (imaginary) club payed the release clause, and give him the player money value, no tokens
3) most importantly: allow for players who are too strong to stay level to leave the club. For example, if a club finishes below 8th place and is not promoted, roll a chance that every single player says "I feel ready to rise to a more competititve league, so bye bye". Reasonable chances in my view could be 1% for players who end the season at 100-119%, 35% for players 120-139%, 75% for players 140-159%, and 99% for players ending the season at 160% quality or more. If the player has still years of contract, again give him the player value as buyout clause; if he is at end contractand has not been renewed, just let the player go away.

I think these suggestions (especially the last one) would give a death blow to tanking. For suggestions 1) and 2) I have actually also an issue of realism, besides game-disruptive behaviour: I constantly encounter teams where strikers have somehow risen to legendary or superstar status while spending most of their previous careers between the posts or as defence sweepers, which I find somewhat disturbing.

All the best

Massimiliano

I am 50-50 with what you mentioned. Let me just say I am neutral with tanking and I see it as an option since there is no save/load.
And also for us FTP players to gather resources to compete which really only applies at higher levels.

Let’s start with what I disagree.
1) Effectiveness of association changes were good! Can you imagine if they brought it back? Tankers would get 100 more tokens. It was effective in reducing tanking but more needs to be done.
2) If we are talking about realism, players playing in off positions long enough might learn a new position and pick up new skills. I do not think you need to change experience gained. This is linked to something I like which is strong players who have gained enough talent and experience request to leave the club and get an offer and say bye bye

I like
1) The suggestion that strong players get up and leave squads that do not promote. This makes sense and we do not need to touch players playing in off positions because the more experience they gain, the higher their rating, the more likely they leave. This requires them to buy again and retrain again benefitting Nordeus so Win win

Adding a question: Are the floating tankers playing weak players or whole team OOP? Because I know the post merger competition and trolling this season has some good non tanking players hovering at that position as well.

With system you suggesting, leagues will be very competitive. Because of that, even if you have good team, you easily can be out of top 8 teams, and loose all your squad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsiderSG

I am 50-50 with what you mentioned. Let me just say I am neutral with tanking and I see it as an option since there is no save/load.
And also for us FTP players to gather resources to compete which really only applies at higher levels.

Let’s start with what I disagree.
1) Effectiveness of association changes were good! Can you imagine if they brought it back? Tankers would get 100 more tokens. It was effective in reducing tanking but more needs to be done.
2) If we are talking about realism, players playing in off positions long enough might learn a new position and pick up new skills. I do not think you need to change experience gained. This is linked to something I like which is strong players who have gained enough talent and experience request to leave the club and get an offer and say bye bye

I like
1) The suggestion that strong players get up and leave squads that do not promote. This makes sense and we do not need to touch players playing in off positions because the more experience they gain, the higher their rating, the more likely they leave. This requires them to buy again and retrain again benefitting Nordeus so Win win

Adding a question: Are the floating tankers playing weak players or whole team OOP? Because I know the post merger competition and trolling this season has some good non tanking players hovering at that position as well.

---

my view is to make compulsory to field 6 best % in all games with as strict limit of how low your % can be and how high for that matter