MattyBlayze Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 Well, maybe the solution is a 1 or 2 fighter limit from the owner. I made a 145er for our upcoming FW n00b Tourney as an alternate and last minute replacement should someone drop out on us. (I'm actually an employee, not the owner) If I remember, you did too Matty for the TUM tourney. So there is definitely a legit need for it. I say limit it to 1 or 2 fighters. Perhaps after the 5th event or something if it's not too much to code Yes, I have fought for this knowing full-well, that, for a 1 fight contract, I had my own fighter under contract. And by having my fighter under contract, I can say, without a doubt, that if you have your own fighter in your org it is too easy to be biased. I'm not asking for employees to be included because that is too hard to enforce, and I think there are better logistical ideas (such as Manny's) to use, but having an idea of the coding issues that would require, I don't know how realistic they are. Something needs to be done, and for the sake of the game, it should be all encompassing. There are plenty of orgs to send your fighters to, and plenty of fighters to fill your rosters - I don't buy into the need to have your own fighters in your org. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleventhsun Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 I'm starting to wonder who these guys with records like 0-1 are fighting guys with huge records anyways? I don't care how new you are, who would take that fight? Doesn't make any sense to go on this long... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 i'm not condoning this in anyway but i think the option for an org owner to do this should be available and the option for us to call them out should be available. i don't really like the idea of changing the rules so someone CAN'T do bad. there's punishment for everything. in this case or the case of AA...public knowledge IS the punishment. no one in their right mind would work with these morons unless they're a moron too. i'd like to keep all the morons close so we know where the fuk they are at all times lol. everything done in darkness, comes to light. but to get rid of that darkness completely is just wrong to me. sorry... and for the record, fuk nicola and arlovski Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 In the real world a reputable commission would never let some of these fights happen. This happened recently. Can't remember the fight but one guy was no allowed to fight because the commission called it a mismatch. I think it's just a matter of fighters records. If one guy has one fight and the other guy has eight that fight should not be allowed. As far as having your own fighters in your own org, that is unethical. If this game strives for realism then this should not be allowed. First off you can pay your fighter more than he is worth. Second you can give him easy matches. Third you never need to turn down a fight because you are the one offering them. All BS. Don't care how hard it is to run an org. If all have to play by the same rules then all is equal. Your own fighters already signed to your org is Mike's problem not mine but this should be fixed. Too easy to abuse. I know most of you do not abuse it but people are people and if there is an advantage to be had be sure some one will abuse it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 but in real life...unethical businesses still have the opportunity to operate. they may not get the business they want or may go under because of it but they are not eradicated. there's just a better business bureau that MAKES PEOPLE AWARE...which is damaging enough. these people have no honor, true BUT there are thousands of honorless people walking the streets everyday, some even thriving, should we just get rid of them? these 2 (joel and AA) have been called out. what will these 2 do when NO ONE signs/re-signs with their orgs? when NO ONE accepts fights against their fighters? don't change the rules...just punish them socially (which is what's pretty much happening now) and it will take care of itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 I hate theses 2 little fraglets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 TheCreep69, I think you're thinking of one of Lashley's proposed opponents. Can't remember his name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backelie Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 First off you can pay your fighter more than he is worth. Second you can give him easy matches. Third you never need to turn down a fight because you are the one offering them. 1) Only time this matters is if your org tanks, otherwise you can just withdraw money and give to them anyway. 2) You can offer yourself easy fights but the other guy doesn't need to accept them. 3) Don't see how that is relevant at all. Is someone keeping score how many fights you're turning down? what will these 2 do when NO ONE signs/re-signs with their orgs? when NO ONE accepts fights against their fighters? This isn't ever gonna happen. They're only infamous on the chat and forum, which 90-95% of Tycoon users couldn't care less about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 This isn't ever gonna happen. They're only infamous on the chat and forum, which 90-95% of Tycoon users couldn't care less about. then that's on the people. ignorance does not/should not make you exempt...they'll be aware soon enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 This isn't ever gonna happen. They're only infamous on the chat and forum, which 90-95% of Tycoon users couldn't care less about. Which is why I think this is an issue that needs to be fixed. Its all well and good that we understand the game and how it works and like it, but if we're turning away new players (or less involved players) its a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Problem is they are killing the growth of this game. If i had signed with one of their orgs early in this game i may have become discouraged and never signed in again. Well....probably not me but there are plenty of people that would be discouraged after being crushed by fighters they have no chance against. I understand what you are saying about unethical people being allowed to be unethical but perhaps there should be pm's sent out to tell people about unethical companies. If you sign with a company after being warned then fine...that's your fault. Us experienced players know better. When you start the game you have no idea what a shark tank this game can be. I don't like the idea of thes a**holes taking advantage of new players without any warning. If nothing else the ranking system must be changed. These guys suck and their ranking should show that. Even just a mark beside the name of the fighter when you look at the fighter rankings in an org so you can see if there are fighters managed by the org owner. I think that might be a big help when deciding if you want to sign with an org. Would save a lot of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 TheCreep69, I think you're thinking of one of Lashley's proposed opponents. Can't remember his name. yeah that's the one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Problem is they are killing the growth of this game. If i had signed with one of their orgs early in this game i may have become discouraged and never signed in again. Well....probably not me but there are plenty of people that would be discouraged after being crushed by fighters they have no chance against. I understand what you are saying about unethical people being allowed to be unethical but perhaps there should be pm's sent out to tell people about unethical companies. If you sign with a company after being warned then fine...that's your fault. Us experienced players know better. When you start the game you have no idea what a shark tank this game can be. I don't like the idea of thes a**holes taking advantage of new players without any warning. If nothing else the ranking system must be changed. These guys suck and their ranking should show that. that's the kind of thing i am talking about! excellent! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djohn Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 true BUT there are thousands of honorless people walking the streets everyday, some even thriving, should we just get rid of them? Uhm... yes we should? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Uhm... yes we should? +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Which is why I think this is an issue that needs to be fixed. Its all well and good that we understand the game and how it works and like it, but if we're turning away new players (or less involved players) its a problem. I don't get how you don't see private gyms with 12 elite coach for personal uses as a problem , when your all about fairness ? Granted something has to be done about putting a 8-0 guy in against 0-1 , but Frankie's fighter not being allowed to fight in the best org in the game because he owns the org would be a travesty . Maybe if there was something in place like a fighter who is ranked in the top 100 can't be scheduled to fight someone outside the top 1000 , a fighter in the top 1000 can not fight someone out 3000 p4p etc . or something like that i would stop complete mismatches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Uhm... yes we should? are you willing to be the judge? what gives you the right? who makes the call on what exactly honor is? that's a bold statement... what i'm trying to say is, i don't like the idea of taking away CHOICE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 I don't get how you don't see private gyms with 12 elite coach for personal uses as a problem , when your all about fairness ? Granted something has to be done about putting a 8-0 guy in against 0-1 , but Frankie's fighter not being allowed to fight in the best org in the game because he owns the org would be a travesty . Maybe if there was something in place like a fighter who is ranked in the top 100 can't be scheduled to fight someone outside the top 1000 , a fighter in the top 1000 can not fight someone out 3000 p4p etc . or something like that i would stop complete mismatches There is a whole thread about the gyms, we don't need to hijack this one, but stopping private gyms is unfair. Everyone can run a private gym. Your problem is likely more with an economy that gives everyone the opportunity to run a private gym than it is with people being able to run a private gym. Onto the topic at hand, I don't think its the worst thing in the world if Franky doesn't get to have his fighters in his own org. There are plenty of good fight orgs, plenty of good fighters, and, maybe, this will aid cross-promotion, etc. Restricting matchmaking isn't the answer either. Immediately off the top of my head, I realize that this will eliminate tournaments. One of the major downfalls of having a tournament/GP is the hype mismatches in early rounds. With your suggestions, those won't be an issue because you can't do them anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 There is a whole thread about the gyms, we don't need to hijack this one, but stopping private gyms is unfair. Everyone can run a private gym. Your problem is likely more with an economy that gives everyone the opportunity to run a private gym than it is with people being able to run a private gym. Onto the topic at hand, I don't think its the worst thing in the world if Franky doesn't get to have his fighters in his own org. There are plenty of good fight orgs, plenty of good fighters, and, maybe, this will aid cross-promotion, etc. Restricting matchmaking isn't the answer either. Immediately off the top of my head, I realize that this will eliminate tournaments. One of the major downfalls of having a tournament/GP is the hype mismatches in early rounds. With your suggestions, those won't be an issue because you can't do them anyway. my problem is the ridiculous fighters it creates and huge unfair advantage they enjoy , and the number of companies that are open for a day yet disappear the next day . you know what I mean ? you seem to be a morale person except for when you enjoy the advanatege yourself as everyone of your fighters are in private gym's . this thread was about a challenge to Joel Nociola . He doesn't own an org so who the hell is giving him these fights ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 my problem is the ridiculous fighters it creates and huge unfair advantage they enjoy , and the number of companies that are open for a day yet disappear the next day . you know what I mean ? you seem to be a morale person except for when you enjoy the advanatege yourself as everyone of your fighters are in private gym's . this thread was about a challenge to Joel Nociola . He doesn't own an org so who the hell is giving him these fights ? Its hard for anyone to take your point seriously when your main argument is false beyond belief. Either way, if your problem is with private gyms, this still isn't the thread for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Its hard for anyone to take your point seriously when your main argument is false beyond belief. Either way, if your problem is with private gyms, this still isn't the thread for it. It's hard for me to take your morale high ground seriously . Your the first to promote fairness and denounce anything . Yet you see no problem with funneling cash and unfair advantages if your own fighter benefits Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 It's hard for me to take your morale high ground seriously . Your the first to promote fairness and denounce anything . Yet you see no problem with funneling cash and unfair advantages if your own fighter benefits And I will continue to promote fairness, and I will continue to promote the "correct fix" which is RARELY the obvious fix. You have accused me of having all of my fighters in private gyms? This is utterly false and baseless, and I assume there are 100s of fighters/managers and several gym owners who would agree. Then you somehow insinuate that me thinking private gyms are fair means I am for funneling cash and unfair advantages. Also utterly false and incorrect. If a manager accumulates cash - whether through running a successful company, buying/selling companies, successful fighters - he should be able to spend that cash anyway he wants. That IS fair. If he wants to run an unsuccessful company, let him. Anyone could use the same means to do the same thing. To somehow imply that this opinion means I have no problem with funneling is wrong; however, as I have stated previously, THAT is what needs to be fixed - the economy needs to be fixed. Private gyms are not the problem. People can continue arguing that private gyms need to be brought down, but that will do nothing to fix the economy and nothing to stop funneling. If we were to stop private gyms (which I don't think we should), the funneling and poor economy will just lead to something else. Then we'll have to "fix" that when we could have just fixed the problem to begin with. And, again, the people who put together enough funds to have a private gym should still be allowed to have them because they have earned the right to do with their money what they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misfire200 Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 THis topic got way off base fast=) This is a topic about Joel Nicola, lets keep it on that, move gym discussions elsewhere please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 its actaully a simple fix for private gyms in my opinion. 1. org owners just quit signing private gym fighters 2. managers just quit taking fights against private gym fighters. (theres no shame in rejecting a fight against someone thats training at twice the rate as your normal fighters) 3. maybe the legitamate managers should get together and create a manager rankings list that actually puts these managers that need to use a private gyms just to compete in there actual place. like for instance, any shit inc., oops, i mean, pit inc. manager pretty much would be lucky to be in the top 200 if they didnt get twice the training as everyone else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 THis topic got way off base fast=) This is a topic about Joel Nicola, lets keep it on that, move gym discussions elsewhere please. Sorry. Joel handpicks fights. AA handpicks fight. I think we just turned MMATycoon into The Dating Game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.