12-03-2021, 09:56 AMAcsolap Wrote:

12-03-2021, 09:46 AMleviadan Wrote: @Acsolap I understand that, but what I don't feel like is being communicated, and maybe I'm just dumb for not understanding this because I'm not particularly engaged with the GM / FHM side of the site, is what is inherently wrong with more people hitting 2K or with 2K being hit earlier? Why is it such an issue that it justifies totally gutting the work that many of us have put in over the last two years vs. simply a steeper fall off?

As of right now you are on 41 more tpe than I "reached" and I was in the top 10 earners in site history at the time. Which means by the time all the off season tpe is added you'll probabaly end up closer to or over 2300 tpe.

The idea is to narrow the width between the super stars of the league, the middling players and the rookies entering the league and therefore create a more competitive and interesting environment.

I get that it doesn't feel great being on the receiving end of it but it you imprint your career onto mine you'll see that there isn't much difference at all. I was 1810 tpe after regression my first season for example. It's important to note that everyone is getting beaten with the same stick outside of the few remaining geriatrics in the league who borderline retirement anyway (I'm done this off season which was nothing to do with this).

Ultimately you'll still be at the top of the pile come next season and there or there abouts the season or two after. The major difference is that your peak will be shorter as will all future generations but this needs to happen for the sake of this game we mostly enjoy playing. The league is stagnating badly and without significant change it won't be able to sustain itself.

I'm not arguing against a shorter peak, I am comfortable with and able to stomach a much quicker regression than I was expecting. Like I said 12, 15, 15 even 12, 15, 18 is way steeper than before but is easier to take than-- as RED put it-- the psychological effect of having 400+ TPE robbed on two weeks notice.

I'm still not sure I am fully seeing the argument for why inflation is bad for the league other than "it used to be harder to get 2k." Do 2200 players perform significantly better than 2000 players? When I look at the scoring leaders I don't really feel like that's the case. A lot of the guys there are 2k or sub 2k players. Seems like they're more or less on par with 2.2k folks? Like I said I might just be ignorant to this stuff because I'm not on that side of things, but I feel like this kind of thing should be communicated better to those of us that aren't. Inflation is presented as a self-evident problem without any explanation as to why.