Originally posted by Gart888
Originally posted by Pietasters
Originally posted by reddogrw
At the end of each season, there is always a playoff of some sort
In order to fairly determine who is in and out of the playoffs and who hosts the playoff games, the teams all need to play the same opponents - a true round robin
So any scheduling that pushes things into a ladder format that doesn't allow for this then does away with playoffs and league championships altogether so what does the end of your season mean?
Wouldn't the playoffs just remain the same. Pretty much any system you use you will always have some type of tiebreaker that will sort through any issues that come up.
if you use a ladder, how do you have a playoff system?
Originally posted by reddogrw
At the end of each season, there is always a playoff of some sort
In order to fairly determine who is in and out of the playoffs and who hosts the playoff games, the teams all need to play the same opponents - a true round robin
So any scheduling that pushes things into a ladder format that doesn't allow for this then does away with playoffs and league championships altogether so what does the end of your season mean?
Wouldn't the playoffs just remain the same. Pretty much any system you use you will always have some type of tiebreaker that will sort through any issues that come up.
if you use a ladder, how do you have a playoff system?
BP
offline
offline
Originally posted by Pietasters
Originally posted by BP
people seem to like my idea D
Hey I went back a read your idea. Basically it's reduce the number of pyramids there are currently and instead of player level we just creation date for league caps? Maybe I missed something while reading it? But how does that solve the competition issues people have. Also defining and limiting casual players most likely would hurt the business in the long run as they would be less likely to become boosting players down the road. But I have no idea how many of those customers exist.
I've been mulling over this issue and it has more parts to it than just structure. Most likely more than I will list here.
1) We have to look at how teams are placed in leagues and how the current pool of teams is being used. Sorting the teams has to be done with more factors than just player level or creation date. There are a lot of things that could tell us about a team. win/loss, average player level, average effective level, team chem and such. The more factors involved the harder it becomes for a team to sandbag the system. You most likely would also see teams recruiting player closer to their average level instead of above as they wouldn't want to be put in a league that is higher than they can handle. You would have to put some thought into the players you add to the team.
2) You have to look at league structure and how you can create a competitive atmosphere within each league. By building a system that creates rivals and helps them stay closer together.
3) You have to build a system that is fluid and can be increased and decreased due to demand. So that changes won't have to be made down the road.
Build a latter list of all teams with as few separate categories as we can. While it is nice to offer everything to everyone you are diluting your player base and that is going to hurt competition in the long run. So you have a latter list for Casual/Normal/Pee Wee. There is talk of hardcore I have no clue what the real demand of that would be.
Drop Regions because what do they really do. They separate teams into certain pyramids but what do were really gain from that other than dividing the teams into 8 pools and a title that loosely bonds teams together. It is clear at this point that pyramids are not working for this game at almost every level but the top.
Build your League and Schedule structure like the NFL. 8 Divisions with 4 teams each. You could name these after the current regions or use the NFL names. But by having the different divisions/regions within each league you give the teams the same identity to bond to as before but have the ability to combined the pools together reducing the disparity curve.
Schedule should be something like this
• Each team plays home and away against its three division opponents, which accounts for six games on the schedule. (This will create rivalry because you will face teams more than once in a season instead of having to wait until next season to maybe get a chance. Would have impact on game plans, scouting and tactics.)
• Each team plays four teams from another division within its conference on a rotating three-year cycle, which accounts for four more games. (Again this creates friendly battles between teams who will more than likely see each other more often as they move upwards.)
• Each team plays four teams from a division in the other conference on a rotating four-year cycle, which accounts for another four games. (This is great because it gets rid of the issue of the best team in the league facing the weakest of the otherside. Instead all the teams in each division/region get to face the same teams each season. So they have all the same level of competition.)
• Each team plays two intraconference games based on the prior year's standings. For example, the first-place team in a division will play against the first-place team from another division within the same conference. The second place team in a division will play against the second-place team from another division within the same conference, etc... (At first I wasn't sure about this idea but the one thing the NFL does really well is make it hard for teams to repeat year after year after year. Each season every team pretty much has the same chances. Their strength of schedule changes due to how good they are)
Once that is in place you have the following seasons to look at. How do you stop the leagues from developing the same issue you have before.
1) We could create the latter list every season and rebuild each league every season with a built in preference for them to always end up in the same division/region within the league when possible. This would mean that the talent would always rise to the top but you might not face the teams as you could change areas.
2) We could build 8 latter lists based on the 8 different divisions and have teams only move up in their select division. That way they would most likely see the same teams more often. But your reducing your team pool into 8 different pools which will sharpen the disparity between teams. It would also slow down teams moving upwards as teams cling to their spots in the top leagues.
3) You would have to look at the playoffs. NFL uses 12 teams with bye weeks, but I think we would be better to run 16 teams so more teams can be involved in the playoffs. But it gives the first games of the playoffs less value when more teams are involved.
4) You could add game of the week. or monday night football by having it on the off day. A little crazy.
This plan
A) Uses as much of the team pool at is can
B) It takes in more factors which will reduce disparity between teams and deal with sandbagging.
C) removes the need for cpu teams ....yay
D) Adds a league structure that give all teams equal footing and will help maintain competitiveness between leagues.
E) Puts a solid structure in place that can expand and retract based on user demand.
F) Every season would be different but you would more than likely see the same teams as they move upwards together.
Gosh this is long..let me try
To address your concerns
my system
1) Just consolidates the existing talent and supply of teams and players so that they can be in leagues that don't have 16 CPUs in them
2) Clears minors out of non-boosters and puts them by themselves so that an 8 season old lvl 35 player with 300 more training points in his build doesn't dominate a dot who boosts and brings the site revenue.
That's all it does. It doesn't turn the world upside down, its a simple and workable solution that will lead to better league competition top to bottom and put dots in the appropriate league based on their participation (IE spending money..this is a business). There should be no business run where the customers who pay little or nothing (non-boosters) ruin the experience of the customers who pay your mortgage and your car notes and your pool service.
As far as basic sorting...the problem with AA+ leagues is that there are too many of them for the available supply of players and teams. The problem with lower leagues is that it's still dominated by players who have extra "stuff" in their build because they don't boost as much as they can.
There is nobody out there stating that their 4-12 AAA team should be in another league...it's all of the 16-0 AA teams who had 14 255-0 blowouts this season that are complaining. I'm not sure why you are trying to make my solution more complex then it is
1) Consolidate
2) Sort Minors by creation date and remove non-boosters and force them to play casual.
Very simple.
Originally posted by BP
people seem to like my idea D
Hey I went back a read your idea. Basically it's reduce the number of pyramids there are currently and instead of player level we just creation date for league caps? Maybe I missed something while reading it? But how does that solve the competition issues people have. Also defining and limiting casual players most likely would hurt the business in the long run as they would be less likely to become boosting players down the road. But I have no idea how many of those customers exist.
I've been mulling over this issue and it has more parts to it than just structure. Most likely more than I will list here.
1) We have to look at how teams are placed in leagues and how the current pool of teams is being used. Sorting the teams has to be done with more factors than just player level or creation date. There are a lot of things that could tell us about a team. win/loss, average player level, average effective level, team chem and such. The more factors involved the harder it becomes for a team to sandbag the system. You most likely would also see teams recruiting player closer to their average level instead of above as they wouldn't want to be put in a league that is higher than they can handle. You would have to put some thought into the players you add to the team.
2) You have to look at league structure and how you can create a competitive atmosphere within each league. By building a system that creates rivals and helps them stay closer together.
3) You have to build a system that is fluid and can be increased and decreased due to demand. So that changes won't have to be made down the road.
Build a latter list of all teams with as few separate categories as we can. While it is nice to offer everything to everyone you are diluting your player base and that is going to hurt competition in the long run. So you have a latter list for Casual/Normal/Pee Wee. There is talk of hardcore I have no clue what the real demand of that would be.
Drop Regions because what do they really do. They separate teams into certain pyramids but what do were really gain from that other than dividing the teams into 8 pools and a title that loosely bonds teams together. It is clear at this point that pyramids are not working for this game at almost every level but the top.
Build your League and Schedule structure like the NFL. 8 Divisions with 4 teams each. You could name these after the current regions or use the NFL names. But by having the different divisions/regions within each league you give the teams the same identity to bond to as before but have the ability to combined the pools together reducing the disparity curve.
Schedule should be something like this
• Each team plays home and away against its three division opponents, which accounts for six games on the schedule. (This will create rivalry because you will face teams more than once in a season instead of having to wait until next season to maybe get a chance. Would have impact on game plans, scouting and tactics.)
• Each team plays four teams from another division within its conference on a rotating three-year cycle, which accounts for four more games. (Again this creates friendly battles between teams who will more than likely see each other more often as they move upwards.)
• Each team plays four teams from a division in the other conference on a rotating four-year cycle, which accounts for another four games. (This is great because it gets rid of the issue of the best team in the league facing the weakest of the otherside. Instead all the teams in each division/region get to face the same teams each season. So they have all the same level of competition.)
• Each team plays two intraconference games based on the prior year's standings. For example, the first-place team in a division will play against the first-place team from another division within the same conference. The second place team in a division will play against the second-place team from another division within the same conference, etc... (At first I wasn't sure about this idea but the one thing the NFL does really well is make it hard for teams to repeat year after year after year. Each season every team pretty much has the same chances. Their strength of schedule changes due to how good they are)
Once that is in place you have the following seasons to look at. How do you stop the leagues from developing the same issue you have before.
1) We could create the latter list every season and rebuild each league every season with a built in preference for them to always end up in the same division/region within the league when possible. This would mean that the talent would always rise to the top but you might not face the teams as you could change areas.
2) We could build 8 latter lists based on the 8 different divisions and have teams only move up in their select division. That way they would most likely see the same teams more often. But your reducing your team pool into 8 different pools which will sharpen the disparity between teams. It would also slow down teams moving upwards as teams cling to their spots in the top leagues.
3) You would have to look at the playoffs. NFL uses 12 teams with bye weeks, but I think we would be better to run 16 teams so more teams can be involved in the playoffs. But it gives the first games of the playoffs less value when more teams are involved.
4) You could add game of the week. or monday night football by having it on the off day. A little crazy.
This plan
A) Uses as much of the team pool at is can
B) It takes in more factors which will reduce disparity between teams and deal with sandbagging.
C) removes the need for cpu teams ....yay
D) Adds a league structure that give all teams equal footing and will help maintain competitiveness between leagues.
E) Puts a solid structure in place that can expand and retract based on user demand.
F) Every season would be different but you would more than likely see the same teams as they move upwards together.
Gosh this is long..let me try
To address your concerns
my system
1) Just consolidates the existing talent and supply of teams and players so that they can be in leagues that don't have 16 CPUs in them
2) Clears minors out of non-boosters and puts them by themselves so that an 8 season old lvl 35 player with 300 more training points in his build doesn't dominate a dot who boosts and brings the site revenue.
That's all it does. It doesn't turn the world upside down, its a simple and workable solution that will lead to better league competition top to bottom and put dots in the appropriate league based on their participation (IE spending money..this is a business). There should be no business run where the customers who pay little or nothing (non-boosters) ruin the experience of the customers who pay your mortgage and your car notes and your pool service.
As far as basic sorting...the problem with AA+ leagues is that there are too many of them for the available supply of players and teams. The problem with lower leagues is that it's still dominated by players who have extra "stuff" in their build because they don't boost as much as they can.
There is nobody out there stating that their 4-12 AAA team should be in another league...it's all of the 16-0 AA teams who had 14 255-0 blowouts this season that are complaining. I'm not sure why you are trying to make my solution more complex then it is
1) Consolidate
2) Sort Minors by creation date and remove non-boosters and force them to play casual.
Very simple.
AngryDragon
offline
offline
Originally posted by DigitalDaggers
yeah, you would have to choose one if we keep them in. some people do like to represent their home region.
I mean like give interesting bonuses for each region. Like USA has more confidence or something like that.
yeah, you would have to choose one if we keep them in. some people do like to represent their home region.
I mean like give interesting bonuses for each region. Like USA has more confidence or something like that.
Pietasters
offline
offline
I guess that regions would have to come in at order of importance. When it comes to a deciding factor for a plan or not.
Factors
Level of competition
Level of league disparity
Repping your Region
For me if it meant that I wouldn't have to face a team with level 70's against a my team with an average level of 54. I would give up the region every time because I would rather have a meaningful shot at the gold instead of knowing that I'm out of the playoffs in round 2.
Factors
Level of competition
Level of league disparity
Repping your Region
For me if it meant that I wouldn't have to face a team with level 70's against a my team with an average level of 54. I would give up the region every time because I would rather have a meaningful shot at the gold instead of knowing that I'm out of the playoffs in round 2.
Pietasters
offline
offline
Originally posted by BP
1) Consolidate
2) Sort Minors by creation date and remove non-boosters and force them to play casual.
Very simple.
I wasn't putting down your idea, yes it is simple but I don't think it goes far enough to solve the issues. What happens if GLB sees a growth spurt followed by another decline we will be in the same boat of to many teams not enough players. Consolidating isn't really a plan, as much as it is a short term solution.
What should a casual player be forced to play the game differently than a boosting player? I've very much a boosting player and I have never had an issue playing against no boosting players because when it comes right down to it my build will be better than theirs.
1) Consolidate
2) Sort Minors by creation date and remove non-boosters and force them to play casual.
Very simple.
I wasn't putting down your idea, yes it is simple but I don't think it goes far enough to solve the issues. What happens if GLB sees a growth spurt followed by another decline we will be in the same boat of to many teams not enough players. Consolidating isn't really a plan, as much as it is a short term solution.
What should a casual player be forced to play the game differently than a boosting player? I've very much a boosting player and I have never had an issue playing against no boosting players because when it comes right down to it my build will be better than theirs.
Pietasters
offline
offline
Originally posted by reddogrw
if you use a ladder, how do you have a playoff system?
A latter is only used to build each league. Not how the league itself plays the game. The latter is a tool to help fight disparity between teams by sorting them from best to worse.
if you use a ladder, how do you have a playoff system?
A latter is only used to build each league. Not how the league itself plays the game. The latter is a tool to help fight disparity between teams by sorting them from best to worse.
Ravenwood
offline
offline
I interrupt this thread to congratulate the Montreal Canadiens who clawed their way back from a 3-1 series deficit to defeat the heavily favoured Washington Capitals 4-3 in a best-of-seven series. The Capitals won the President's Trophy as the best team in the league during the regular season - and in the entire history of the league, no 8th-place team has come back from a 3-1 series deficit.
@ Ovechkin - suck it, dude. Go win the Stanley Cup on someone else's watch.
Go Habs Go!
(And now, back to your regularly scheduled bitchin'!)
@ Ovechkin - suck it, dude. Go win the Stanley Cup on someone else's watch.
Go Habs Go!
(And now, back to your regularly scheduled bitchin'!)
j10er
offline
offline
Originally posted by BP
Scrapping the entire player aging system to make the league structure easier to figure out is easier? lol
Bort and DD are in a thread and listening to customers and contemplating change..that doesn't happen every day...focus brotha...
That's great and all, but here's the problem: none of these suggestions address the underlying issues. They're all band-aids, including your suggestion. Sure, it may make things better for a season or two, but it doesn't actually fix anything.
When the current system allows level 40 players to compete with level 70 players, then it will continue to fail. How do you think AA became the way it is?
Changing the player leveling system would fix, well... everything.
Scrapping the entire player aging system to make the league structure easier to figure out is easier? lol
Bort and DD are in a thread and listening to customers and contemplating change..that doesn't happen every day...focus brotha...
That's great and all, but here's the problem: none of these suggestions address the underlying issues. They're all band-aids, including your suggestion. Sure, it may make things better for a season or two, but it doesn't actually fix anything.
When the current system allows level 40 players to compete with level 70 players, then it will continue to fail. How do you think AA became the way it is?
Changing the player leveling system would fix, well... everything.
Ravenwood
offline
offline
Bloody hell, this is why people get pissed off with these forums -
Originally posted by Jethroz
Doesn't pertain to an upcoming change to the game and starting to go downhill. Ravenwood, please post suggestions for the game in the correct forum.
Locked
http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=3973683&page=last#35481434
It absolutely does pertain to an upcoming change to the game.
That thread is a discussion of how the new finance system will impact player salaries. And in the spirit of this thread, which seems to be encouraging ideas about league structure, that thread is intended to discuss ideas for player salaries in the new finance system.
How the hell does it get locked?
Originally posted by Jethroz
Doesn't pertain to an upcoming change to the game and starting to go downhill. Ravenwood, please post suggestions for the game in the correct forum.
Locked
http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=3973683&page=last#35481434
It absolutely does pertain to an upcoming change to the game.
That thread is a discussion of how the new finance system will impact player salaries. And in the spirit of this thread, which seems to be encouraging ideas about league structure, that thread is intended to discuss ideas for player salaries in the new finance system.
How the hell does it get locked?
ImTheScientist
offline
offline
Originally posted by BP
Cool, so the people now who have teams in Western Europe want to rep WE. Then in 4-5 seasons when all of the teams coming up were never in a region...they are all going to choose USA, cuz 90% of your userbase in from the US.
I dunno, just doesn't seem like a solution to anything...
If that is what they want to do then that is what they do.....I would not choose the USA as my region.
Cool, so the people now who have teams in Western Europe want to rep WE. Then in 4-5 seasons when all of the teams coming up were never in a region...they are all going to choose USA, cuz 90% of your userbase in from the US.
I dunno, just doesn't seem like a solution to anything...
If that is what they want to do then that is what they do.....I would not choose the USA as my region.
refguru
offline
offline
Originally posted by Sapper06
I would propose that currently, it is impossible to take the same players on the same team and have the team AND players together make it to pros, let alone the WL.
Our WL team and our Pro team has done just that. It's very tough but we made it. It takes a lot of great agents, coordinators and luck. The thing is though you have to move up almost every season once you get out of capped leagues. Very tough.
I would propose that currently, it is impossible to take the same players on the same team and have the team AND players together make it to pros, let alone the WL.
Our WL team and our Pro team has done just that. It's very tough but we made it. It takes a lot of great agents, coordinators and luck. The thing is though you have to move up almost every season once you get out of capped leagues. Very tough.
Ubasstards
offline
offline
Originally posted by BP
Originally posted by DigitalDaggers
Originally posted by AngryDragon
Make region choices be like archetypes for teams.
yeah, you would have to choose one if we keep them in. some people do like to represent their home region.
Cool, so the people now who have teams in Western Europe want to rep WE. Then in 4-5 seasons when all of the teams coming up were never in a region...they are all going to choose USA, cuz 90% of your userbase in from the US.
I dunno, just doesn't seem like a solution to anything...
who cares if the USA has more teams? Doesnt hurt anything
Originally posted by DigitalDaggers
Originally posted by AngryDragon
Make region choices be like archetypes for teams.
yeah, you would have to choose one if we keep them in. some people do like to represent their home region.
Cool, so the people now who have teams in Western Europe want to rep WE. Then in 4-5 seasons when all of the teams coming up were never in a region...they are all going to choose USA, cuz 90% of your userbase in from the US.
I dunno, just doesn't seem like a solution to anything...
who cares if the USA has more teams? Doesnt hurt anything
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
