MattyBlayze Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I think with the way SuperFights are becoming prevalent, and the interest of some to be able to fight at multiple weight classes (http://www.mmatycoon.com/forums/index.php?...ic=9481&hl=), amongst other things, that it might be time to implement non-exclusive contracts that will increase functionality and fix some minor issues. * I suggest making this a check box on the 'Existing Contracts' page (just like 'Can QFC'). * This will not put the fighter on the Free Agent list, but will allow orgs to sign the fighter to ONE fight contracts. * Fighters can be signed by another org in ANY weight class, but will be ranked according to their "home org" contracted weight class. Furthermore, the fighter will display his "home org"'s icon on his page to add to the SuperFight feel of org vs org. This will allow SuperFights with no risk to the org owner sending a fighter to another org (you don't have to worry that he will never come back and this will result in, hopefully, more superfights). In addition, an org can allow their fighter to 'Non-Exclusive' and use the open slot to sign the fighter to a 1-fight contract at another weight, thus allowing inner-org SuperFights as requested in the above mentioned thread. Finally, this will allow orgs to utilize unused weight classes for title purposes without sacrificing weight class rankings. Logan also mentioned to me in chat the possibility of factoring org hype into the equation. Maybe orgs would be more eager to participate in Superfights if there was some hype that would come to their org for sending a fighter to another org. Maybe a % of the hype generated by the event the fighter appears on - bigger % for a victory, smaller % for a loss; however, you wouldn't want this in the case where an org signs its own fighter to a 2nd weight class (double hype). I think this needs a little refinement and there is further discussion that can also take place here regarding possible abuses of this, and we really need Mike to tell us how feasible this is - I imagine the hardest part is manipulating the database to store this data, and properly pulling it when necessary (I don't expect this to be a quick fix, but something that adds functionality we all want, and fixes some thing we've been asking for). So, have a go...let's see if we can make anything out of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 definitely good idea. I vote yes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I agree, this is a great Idea, would make it easier for Vovchanchyn/Guerrero to happen!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 plus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 YES!! http://urdirt.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/mma_s_sanchez11_57611.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaneOMac Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I think the parent organization should have authority to whom the fighter can sign with, just so that there can be a feeder system in place between companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I think the parent organization should have authority to whom the fighter can sign with, just so that there can be a feeder system in place between companies. We discuss this as well, and while I agree with it, I assumed that this would be an even greater coding nightmare, and considering the current system allows NO authority, at least this gives some semblance of control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misfire200 Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Sounds great, this would be an awesome addition. The only thing i would add, is that they could only sign a 1 fight contract with a max 1 month expiration date so that the fighter could not get kidnapped or what not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 To give the parent or home organization that control, instead of having choosing who they can fight for on their contract just have a list of organizations that you're willing to have any of your fighters sign one of these agreements with with. Just add two pages to the organization company. One will be a list of all the organizations, with a check box format to choose which ones you're willing to work with. The other will be lists, headed by the name of organizations that have given you permission to sign their fighters to one fight contracts, of all the fighters available for such contracts. It should show their cut weight, and maybe some other information, but not much is needed since you can just look at the profile. The pages themselves wouldn't take much coding, but I don't know about all the background stuff. I think it should be noted most organizations would only work with a few other organizations, if any, though managers would probably like the freedom to work with any organization, so this is more of a super-fight fix for organizations than an actual non-exclusive contract fix. I do like the idea, though. I still think true non-exclusive contracts should be worked out, as well, as in completely independent. The same thing, just another ticked box when you offer the contract. It allows the fighter to sign with multiple organizations, maybe with a limit of three to five at a time, and field offers for fights from all of them. The basis of how they would work is that either party can cancel the contract at any time, and because of all the freedom the signing bonuses should be a lot smaller than usual, though base pay and win bonuses should stay about the same. This would help out new fighters a lot, I think, and would hopefully drive up how much fighters get paid for exclusive contracts (even Mike has said fighters get paid shit). The only downside is if a fighter keeps rejecting an organizations offers, but then you can just drop them, and like I said, signing bonuses shouldn't be large so it wouldn't be a big loss. Plus, if they keep doing that they shouldn't have too good of a reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffWanderer Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 It would seem to me that in reality the org would have control even if was just a tick box as it would have to be a four sided negotiation. If the org did not tick the box, it could not happen regardless and after all the pain of going through such a long process there is going to be less crossing of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 if this is implemented i would say that the org owner should be able to 'accept' the fighers contract with another org as well, or at least get a notice, but i thing that the owner should decided or not, because what if your saving that fighter for the next event and then he signs a contract and a fight deal and then they are f**ked cause they cant schedule that main event any more, and some orgs might be big enough where it doesnt matter, but smaller ors might be affected greatly. also there could be org to org contracts, where one org sends a contract to another org, and can say if they would give the org money maybe, but at least say like a number of fighters they can sign at one time and stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Managers should be more well informed of what's going on, anyway. If you're saving that guy for the Main Event and he knows it, he won't go ahead and sign for another fight. And, I do also like the idea of fighter trading and contract selling, but I don't know how realistic the former is. It's not like trading any other athlete, I don't think. Contract selling is a definite possibility, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I do not see a problem with having non-exclusive contracts, what is being discussed here though is slightly different because we have a Main Parent holder of the contract and they have control of that contract with the ability to choose if they are exclusive or not with simply clicking a tick box (similar to qfc) i think this will be much easier to code in general as it is similar with the qfc option, the only difference here is that instead of him signing with the qfc he is signing with someone else for a one fight deal. I actually like this idea more than having non-exclusive contracts (which is basically a case where they sign multiple contracts and fight for whoever books them first) To make this interesting though, i think it would be good if the parent org had the option to add a price tag for that 1 fight deal. This will be VERY interesting, here is how it would work: You tick the non-exclusive option and add a figure in $, there will be a separate search tick box called non-exclusive, this will display all the fighters currently on contract BUT have a non-exclusive deal attached to it. You will be able to see hype (as usual) and there will be a price tag attached. You will offer contracts as usual with exception you will not be able to add any fight length (it is standard set at 1), once he has had the fight then it expires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyBlayze Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 In response to the last couple of posts: I realize that the implementation of this improvement is not easy, and, thus, I have tried to limit the initial proposal to what I deem as "necessary" - meaning what we need to make sure this functions properly. I think it will need improvements and innovations after the fact, but I tried to start off with a basic approach. As it stands now, if an org wants to send a fighter to another org for a superfight, Org A must release the fighter from his contract, Org B must sign the fighter to a 1 fight contract, the fight occurs, and then Org A must sign the fighter back. There is a lot of risk and hassle here. All my suggestion was doing was narrowing the risk - if the fighter is never released or never a FA, there is no risk. Would it be nice to have a list of every org in the game to select who could sign the fighters you allow to be non-exclusive? Yes, but its not "necessary" for the functionality. As it stands, the proposal gives more power to the orgs. In regards to requests about real non-exclusive contracts for fighters in which they can have 5-fight deals with 5 orgs at a time, I see that as overkill and think it would create more issues than good. With this proposal, however, we've got superfights (which I think is most people's interest with non-exclusive) worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 In regards to requests about real non-exclusive contracts for fighters in which they can have 5-fight deals with 5 orgs at a time, I see that as overkill and think it would create more issues than good. You are right with that one for sure, that will never work, all i can see is having one "parent" holder and the option in bringing people for 1 fight deals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 27, 2010 Report Share Posted January 27, 2010 This is definitely an option we have been dying to get at ICON ever since we thought of this Superfight Tournament Idea. We've gotten it to work without it, but everything is done on 1 fight contracts and the risk of losing fighters is real. We're starting our 7th tournament this weekend, which means we've had 56 fighters and over fourty fights done 'the old way' and have only lost 2 guys who bailed after losing their fight in the process. Every guy counts and the two that we lost were no slouches - but I just want to empasize that Superfights are do-able and the risk so far has been well worth it. All of the ICON orgs have put on their best ever card when the Superfight event has come to town. We've done it, and proven it can be done, and are just waiting on the rest of you guys to get with the program so that our ICON World Champs have someone worthy to fight. I think there are a lot of things that could be improved first in the game before Mike gives all of you guys the advantage that ICON didn't have when we started doing our tournaments. - Warehousing to fix the supps and clothing company problems ( or anything else that works ) - Finding a way to make sure the chat room stays open to all. - Displaying multiple belts. (which the dual belt holding ICON World Champs would love) - Embedded youtube videos in the News and Events page to encourage others to make videos - QFC - ranking system to ensure a more fair fight for the guys taking QFC's - Employees / Staff - this still needs lots of work Point being - There are a ton of improvements that I'd like to see in place before Mike give the Nazi-War Tactic org a chance to steal our idea and make it even easier and less risky for them to do what we've already done successfully with all the risk and work included. I'm all for their being other worldwide networks of orgs and I've offered up my help and advice to several of the guys who are teaming up with eachother in order to help them make their Worldwide networks work. Anyone interested in the details of how ICON does what we do - can pm me directly and I'll be more than happy to show them what has worked for us and what hasn't. Well anyone except Blitzkrieg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 27, 2010 Report Share Posted January 27, 2010 Well anyone except Blitzkrieg. haha OH SNAP ! :jerry: :jerry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts