S10 "Loophole" on 2nd XV

crisco10

News Item Season 10: Issue/Loophole Fixes New!

There are a couple of issue which need resolving. The first is the wide use of 2nd XV teams. This has made injuries too low again in season 9. The second is the ability for National/U20 squads to have more than 30 players through an injury loophole. More

To fix the 2nd XV issues, you may find that in season 10, if you play a "B-side", your members mood may drop.

To fix the National/U20 issue, for every healthy player after 30 players, the National/U20 squad's defence rating will take a hit.

Things just get trickier!!! I wonder how they will pick the 1st XV from a members POV, I hope its not just CSR. It really shows Jeremy is determined to increase injuries and decrease energy levels. I hope there is a sliding scale of "2nd XV", as in playing your not quite there yet but high-ish CSR sub won't be too penalising but if you played a salary saver contentment would take a big hit.

Annoying though, it makes it hard to come up with a medium term strategy with the playing field continuing to shift...

eoferrall

crisco10 wrote: »

Things just get trickier!!! I wonder how they will pick the 1st XV from a members POV, I hope its not just CSR. It really shows Jeremy is determined to increase injuries and decrease energy levels. I hope there is a sliding scale of "2nd XV", as in playing your not quite there yet but high-ish CSR sub won't be too penalising but if you played a salary saver contentment would take a big hit.

Annoying though, it makes it hard to come up with a medium term strategy with the playing field continuing to shift...

I agree, the constantly changing shift towards depth and back again is frustrating. I have just got myself a decent set of back up players from academy (took some time too!!) and now looks like I will be punished for playing them.

It needs to be very carefully implemented if he is going ahead with this 2nd XV punishment lark, as he could end up ruining it.

On a side note I don't have a 1st XV per se. about 8 of my players are guaranteed to start if big game, but after that its down to form and energy essentially.

to sum up: not happy with this prospective change at all.

JohnButler

Dung. The game is going to end up in tatters and he will lose players through frustration.

Too many changes, and not for the better.

Leadership

I have a A and B team this season and I will probably keep this setup as long as I am in the cup. I have mixed feelings about this, firstly it is more realistic to have a mood drop when playing with weaker players (look at Munster League V's H Cup teams) but I am pissed off with the changes and what will happen with a mixed team of half "stars" half reserves/future stars.

Phonehead

What started out as a addictive simple game is turning into a confused mess of decisions being made then rolled back in a seasons time. Do they have any clear idea where they want to be and how to get there! Rugbymania is looking lots more attractive with it's simple approach

FewFew

There seems to be a lack of planning on the developers part.

It's all too reactionary.

If they increased the energy hit by removing WNWIM's effectiveness, surely they should have predicted managers using a 2nd XV. It makes sense, it's what happens.

This should have been easily predicted and this change should have been at least hinted to.

Now, I don't mind the moral thing, it makes it more realistic (depending on how they judge the best players.) but they've encouraged us to build up a large side and now this move makes a 28 man squad superior to a 31 man squad. I spent a lot of money finding a decent standard of 2nds, this really makes them redundant as I'll never really be able to rest my full 1st XV.

I must say I don't really agree with the argument that they're ruining a nice simple game. Earlier we had a thread about people becoming one-clickers... I think the more depth there is in the game, the more you'll get out of it by putting more in.

crisco10

Poll (and explanation from Jeremy) on this topic at:

http://www.blackoutrugby.com/game/global.clubrooms.php#conversation=27950

FewFew

crisco10 wrote: »

Poll (and explanation from Jeremy) on this topic at:

http://www.blackoutrugby.com/game/global.clubrooms.php#conversation=27950

I voted "No Dice" after some careful consideration.

daheff

This whole thing doesnt make sense to me. On one hand Jeremy is saying that its coz there are enough injuries ("The first is the wide use of 2nd XV teams. This has made injuries too low again in season 9. ")and on the other hes saying "The goal of this change is to prevent people using 2nd XV sides to play LTNT and minimise any contentment losses"

So which is it??I

f its injury related then tweak how injuries happen.
If its to stop people having 30 players then limit squad sizes

I dont agree with it regardless. I should be able to play whatever team i want within reason. 80% of max CSR isnt within reason.

My best team (as I see it) doesnt include some of my top 15 CSR players.
It means that you cant have a couple of players that have a high CSR and not play them (eg if you wanted to rest them against a weaker team) without punishment.

I voted no.

Gelio

i voted no . . sometimes realism isnt whats best for the the game

FewFew

The powers that be seem to miss out on the limiting effect that budgets have on team sizes and depth. I've quite a mediocre team in terms of CSR, levels 3 training/coaches, a full academy and an appropriate size stadium, yet the search for my 2nd XV has financially crippled me. There are going to have to be major cut backs next season, that's without all these contentment issues.
I wish they'd just let it rest for a season and then get back to it. You need to give a new rule change time to settle, you can't be so reactionary.