User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Game Changes Discussion > Archived Changes > If you were to change the league structure
Page:
 
Skoll Wolfrun
offline
Link
 
A: Semi-locked leagues in Minors from level 1-40 : basically, teams that are unable to complete may be Voted out by a consensus of the other Owners of the League. These teams will be replaced with similar average skill teams.

B: Level 40 up: these would compare with the current A & higher leagues now.

1: Forced Promotion. Top 2 in each Division move up if there are CPU teams or Demotion from the higher league, period. No opting out.

 
Ravenwood
online
Link
 
The bottom line is, the minor league cloud leagues were brought in to increase competition. The price we paid for this competitive environment was the eradication of team rivalries, league forums, and regional identity.

I'm sure they did it with the best of intentions, but it just didn't work. We still don't have competitive leagues, and we've lost the rivalries, active league forums, and regional identities.

At the very minimum, we need to admit the cloud was a mistake, and go back to some form of the old structure.

The trick to keeping the upper tier leagues competitive is to give agents as much incentive as possible to sign their players to the highest tier team they can get an offer from.

If everyone is trying to move up the ladder instead of down, the leagues can't help but become more competitive.
 
Link
 
Originally posted by Kendo 1
Originally posted by DigitalDaggers

How would you change it?

The goal being to keep the leagues as competitive as possible.


Fire those ideas out here.


4 types of league Hardcore/Normal/Uber Casual/Casual

each league is tiered

WL/Pro/AAA/AA/46/42/38/34/30/26/22/18/14/10/6/2

4 conferences per tier North/South/East/West

16 per conference. Tournament at end between 4 conferences to decide champion.
Straight 2 up 2 down promotion/demotion

Not enough owners for Casual Teams ? all casual West either goes CPU or is removed.



Further segregation is not what GLB needs imo.
 
DONKEIDIC
pinto
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Ravenwood

The trick to keeping the upper tier leagues competitive is to give agents as much incentive as possible to sign their players to the highest tier team they can get an offer from.


This. Give perks to players that boost. No one can complain. More people will boost. If any non-boosters ever complain just post this.

"Without boosters there would not be a GLB."
 
DONKEIDIC
pinto
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ImTheScientist
Further segregation is not what GLB needs imo.


Yeah, that post got a real life face palm out of me.
 
OttawaShane
offline
Link
 
[Originally posted by Ravenwood


The trick to keeping the upper tier leagues competitive is to give agents as much incentive as possible to sign their players to the highest tier team they can get an offer from.



Fame was supposed to help with this - but the original intent was never realized, and its become irrelevant, just like effective levels was supposed to be used to group teams.

So much lost potential to have fixed things before it got to this.
 
DONKEIDIC
pinto
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by OttawaShane

Fame was supposed to help with this - but the original intent was never realized, and its become irrelevant, just like effective levels was supposed to be used to group teams.

So much lost potential to have fixed things before it got to this.


The way fame reads is lower leveled players get punished for playing up, but not as much as players playing down. Not sure why that is.


How much fame do I lose out on by not being at the right level?
The further you are outside of the recommended levels, the less fame you will receive, up to and including receiving zero fame. It is much worse to be too high than too low of a level, however.
 
Ravenwood
online
Link
 
Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
It is much worse to be too high than too low of a level, however.

I think they mean it's much worse to be too high a level for your league than too low of a level for your league.

 
DONKEIDIC
pinto
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Ravenwood

I think they mean it's much worse to be too high a level for your league than too low of a level for your league.



Yeah I know. What isn't clear about that. Low level players that are "playing up" a league get fame punishment. Is that what you read or not?
 
islander1
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ImTheScientist
Further segregation is not what GLB needs imo.


I agree.

Although most of the 'segregation' to date has been pretty well thought out, the problem is population as I know you agree with.

The biggest gripe agents have - dot quality and level regardless - is lack of competition. Redoing the league structure and reducing the conferences is a necessary evil. Just like it was necessary to open all of these regions due to burgeoning population - it's now time to close two (if not four) of them next season, and restore competition (outside of world league) back to the game.
 
Kendo 1
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ImTheScientist
Originally posted by Kendo 1

Originally posted by DigitalDaggers


How would you change it?

The goal being to keep the leagues as competitive as possible.


Fire those ideas out here.


4 types of league Hardcore/Normal/Uber Casual/Casual

each league is tiered

WL/Pro/AAA/AA/46/42/38/34/30/26/22/18/14/10/6/2

4 conferences per tier North/South/East/West

16 per conference. Tournament at end between 4 conferences to decide champion.
Straight 2 up 2 down promotion/demotion

Not enough owners for Casual Teams ? all casual West either goes CPU or is removed.



Further segregation is not what GLB needs imo.


may be true, but looks like it's coming

 
Link
 
Originally posted by islander1
Originally posted by ImTheScientist

Further segregation is not what GLB needs imo.


I agree.

Although most of the 'segregation' to date has been pretty well thought out, the problem is population as I know you agree with.

The biggest gripe agents have - dot quality and level regardless - is lack of competition. Redoing the league structure and reducing the conferences is a necessary evil. Just like it was necessary to open all of these regions due to burgeoning population - it's now time to close two (if not four) of them next season, and restore competition (outside of world league) back to the game.


+1
 
Raiders12
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by BP
Ok D, here is your plan...you can thank me later via a large flex deposit into my account (I don't want a job, but thanks )

For everything above the Capped Leagues

Eliminate Oceania and One of the Europes

here is your new league set up

1 WL
6 Pro
12 AAA
24 AA

take the oceania and one europe teams and redistribute them. Teams that made the playoffs in those leagues in Pro go into pro in the other leagues, those that didn't get distributed into AAA. You make room in Pro in the 6 leagues by demoting non-playoff teams in order of record down to AAA. Then repeat those steps in AAA and down and all league will be filled up. 6 teams demote from WL each season from each region instead of 8 in this scenario.

AA is horrible right now, 24 leagues is probably perfect for how many teams/players you have.

Very simple solution. We'll have 6 great regions with great competition. Not 8 with waaay too many AA's and horrible competition below AAA.



For the capped leagues...a little tougher, but the level caps don't work. Even though SSB has effectively been killed, non-boosters with 8 old season lvl 38 players still ruin things for the boosters.

You have to decide how interested you are in keeping non-boosters around and if those profiles really bring you money in.

If they don't and you don't care about them

1) Leagues with date creation caps

if you do

2) Make boosting a requirement to enter non-casual capped leagues. How you would this is have a maximum level AND a minimum creation date for capped leagues that use a full AI setup. Make the casual leagues have no such rules. That way, casual players can play casually...serious players play seriously. You'd probably have to reduce the amount of regular capped leagues and increase the amount of casuals in this scenario



Just to qualify my plan, I currently own my own business...I did in gross transactions about 10 million dollars in 2008/2009 (no I didn't make that much..only a fraction, a small fraction, nobody ask me to buy them flex please ). I have no employees and do it all myself. I'm not some angry ass 16 year old with ideas, running businesses and putting together good solid plans is what I do. Take it for what it's worth.


I would back this plan with some other suggested modifications applied..they are:

1. End ALGs.
2. Reduce roster sizes to 45/48.
3. The making fame mean something suggestion.
4. Base the league caps on date of creation AND force non-boosters into the Casual leagues.
5. Arrange teams in leagues based on the effective level (once items 1-3 have been put in place).
6. Don't (ever) implement the coaches idea.
7. Leave team financing as is or revise the current planned changes to incorporate a lot less than proposed.
8. Not a big fan of the proposed training changes, but they may not be too bad once Item #1 has been implemented.
 
BP
offline
Link
 
I think alot of your riders really don't have to do with the league issue, raiders. 1/3/6/7/8 are really just things that you (and alot of people) don't like, but they really address the financial and training changes.

Let's try to come up a good solution to the league competition problems, and leave the other issues for another thread. While I agree with some of your other points, it makes it hard to come up with a consensus on a particular issue when you involve non-related issues in the discussion.

BTW, raiders fan here too..thank god they finally are about to give up on Russell..I hear he's 300 lbs now. What a POS.
 
DONKEIDIC
pinto
offline
Link
 
I would suggest that DD or whomever is interested in this take the ideas, make a thread for each, and have us pick them apart.
 
Page:
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.