bjornmma1 Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 Why not put QFC's as separate amateur records and the other fights in an org as Pro record? QFC's are mostly to test hiddens anyway and should 1) not be part of his pro record and 2) not influence the ranking of the fighter and manager. Example : That would make Conrad have a 4-1-0 pro record with no amateur record and would make Dickie have a 13-1 pro record and an 1-0 amateur record. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBennet Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 That's not a bad ideal actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBK16 Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 The big problem with them not influencing manager rankings is they will be absolutely abused then. If it didn't affect your ranking, people could easily just make fighters, test them, sack them if they don't get Granite Chin with high confidence and they wouldn't have any issues with their own rank. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjornmma1 Posted August 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 Altough it would cost vip days to release and create new fighters all the time and that benefits the game as well. The main point is that there are a lot of managers ( including me ) not happy with the fact that QFC's can make you lose/win more spots in the rankings than a fight in a big org, what makes zero sense. + qfc's are hardly real fights so they shouldn't count for the real records of a fighter . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniConor Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 This is a great idea, I like it. Just a little addition, why don't we do away with this whole QFC thing and just call it Amateur instead... Amateur fights, amateur tournaments, amateur orgs? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBK16 Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 The easy solution to that is simply to not set yourself up to lose in QFC's. This topic has come up before, and it usually has an element of people setting themselves up to lose in QFC's, and then complaining that they drop ranking because they lose. This goes into a whole Pay To Win element then as the people who can easily afford to spend $ on the game can end up with a whole roster of Granite Chin projects, while people who can't afford that will be at a disadvantage - Pretty much the opposite of what Mike wants the game to be. Yeah, it's good for Mike, but shit for the game and what Mike wants it to be. The only way I could see this working is if you didn't get a TOTT indicator of their hiddens in Amateur QFC's. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjornmma1 Posted August 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 This is a great idea, I like it. Just a little addition, why don't we do away with this whole QFC thing and just call it Amateur instead... Amateur fights, amateur tournaments, amateur orgs? That's what I suggest, that qfc's are considered nothing but amateur fights . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjornmma1 Posted August 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 The easy solution to that is simply to not set yourself up to lose in QFC's. This topic has come up before, and it usually has an element of people setting themselves up to lose in QFC's, and then complaining that they drop ranking because they lose. This goes into a whole Pay To Win element then as the people who can easily afford to spend $ on the game can end up with a whole roster of Granite Chin projects, while people who can't afford that will be at a disadvantage - Pretty much the opposite of what Mike wants the game to be. Yeah, it's good for Mike, but shit for the game and what Mike wants it to be. The only way I could see this working is if you didn't get a TOTT indicator of their hiddens in Amateur QFC's. Just to be clear, I don't set my fighters up in QFC's to lose, so that point doesn't go for me. I always want to win my fights. I lose enough already without setting them up to do so . NOt per se that they don't need to count for the rankings at all anymore, but at least a lot less than normal fights. I lost 30 spots with a qfc loss, but win only 5 with a win in a top org against a good manager. How does that make sense...? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBennet Posted August 7, 2015 Report Share Posted August 7, 2015 This is a great idea, I like it. Just a little addition, why don't we do away with this whole QFC thing and just call it Amateur instead... Amateur fights, amateur tournaments, amateur orgs? That's evene better idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted August 8, 2015 Report Share Posted August 8, 2015 The easy solution to that is simply to not set yourself up to lose in QFC's. This topic has come up before, and it usually has an element of people setting themselves up to lose in QFC's, and then complaining that they drop ranking because they lose. This goes into a whole Pay To Win element then as the people who can easily afford to spend $ on the game can end up with a whole roster of Granite Chin projects, while people who can't afford that will be at a disadvantage - Pretty much the opposite of what Mike wants the game to be. Yeah, it's good for Mike, but shit for the game and what Mike wants it to be. The only way I could see this working is if you didn't get a TOTT indicator of their hiddens in Amateur QFC's. Ridiculous argument. Did you notice the whole VIP part of the game? That puts poorer players at a disadvantage. So many people spend rl money buying in game cash, that puts poorer players at a disadvantage. (I havent paid for my own VIP since 12 or 13.) There is also the tiny fraction of managers who churn FA's, which is far more unbalancing than people testing the confidence of their new fighters. I know many of them justify it by using the "put money in mikes pocket argument" and thats all well and good. It's one of the many unbalancing things that goes on in the game that Mike looks the other way for to help his bottom line a bit. Making the claim that mike is so dedicated to having the game be fair for people no matter how little money they can throw at the game is pretty laughable. Also, managers lose on purpose to check confidence. I always throw my new creations first fight to check it. If I didnt care about confidence, then I would try to win the fight. Throwing a fight doesnt get you a better chance of landing a granite chinned fighter nor does it increase the % of these fighters in the game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loveladdy Posted August 10, 2015 Report Share Posted August 10, 2015 I would love to see this added to the game! +1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBennet Posted August 18, 2015 Report Share Posted August 18, 2015 Bumpin' this baby because of this thread. Discuss people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted August 18, 2015 Report Share Posted August 18, 2015 Would be a crap load of work to separate it and I think it would make the profile pages look messy. But I know this is in response to the guy who won QFCs and got too high in the rankings so I am happy to decrease the impact of QFCs on hype. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyosullivan Posted August 19, 2015 Report Share Posted August 19, 2015 There should be a cap enforced where if you're above say the top 300 then your rank isn't improved via QFC 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts