Warrior General Games

Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
A new minors pyramid would be created each season. So it would essentially be a capped league. No exploiting this. No signing a non-booster that is level 38/48. These would funnel into the main pyramid at I use season 7 as a time line(it could be altered). At which time the best teams (A+B+C) move into the main pyramid, and all others are sold back.

The free agents from the teams that didn't make the cut would move in to fill in "Pro" teams easing recruitment for teams that need to recruit to stay competitive. We all know how similar the builds of great and mediocre dots are. The main difference is play calling and supporting staff. "Syndicate" teams already have farms teams set up and will not have many of the troubles recruiting. This way teams that have not set up a farms system can continue to stay competitive. They did get there by being a decent Owner/coach...

Not sure if I had said this but promotion/demotion would likely need to be doubled in the minor pyramid.

Here is an example of how I see different teams working:

Regular builders(Pee Wee style):

imo These types build dots for immediate success. They would end up at the top or close to it in this "Capped" League's pyramid in the second season. Then depending on their game planning (un-measurable variable) move up or down. If they move up it is because they deserve to be with better teams if they move down the opposite. Result: Competition.

Cap builders:

These build dots for success at the top of the game. They care the least about the lolminors, and would not even try and be competitive. They would still end up with other teams that are , trying or not, un-competititive) As their build even out the would start working their way to the top. Result: Competition.

non-boosters:

These guys would start out closer to the top of the pyramid. They would lay against like teams, and loose ground every few seasons to boosting teams as they can no longer keep up. Result: Competition.

Etc...



Ok so we get a new Pyramid each season for new teams that plays for 7 seasons. When those 7 season are done, those teams either make or they don't based one what cut off? What happens when there is no room in the Pro Pyramid? Do less teams make it? What if there is room for no teams? Do we just create a new Pro Pyramid? Then we are filling two pyramids each season with only one lower level one each season. There will come a point where flow will not longer be able to keep up with demand. The other issue with your idea is that it has set teams. Which requires your to have a set amount of teams each season. What if there are not enough teams made in a season to fill up a new pyramid? That means 7 seasons down the road their won't be enough teams to flow into pro. You idea relies on having a constant flow of teams which in business steady flow doesn't happen very often.

Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
Seriously you were asked to either give input or stop.

You seem to me, to be one of those guys that is almost intelligent enough to know that no one person has cornered the market on good ideas, but not quite.

Well there is a difference in Input. From what I've read is your input really is only about your idea. You have not really been discussing anyone else' s ideas. Other than turning the conversation to your idea when the group is discussing another idea. What you are doing really can't be called input as it is more trying to drive the conversation to the only input your have really given.

Dorry about the poor quotes, but response to jdbolick

A banner seems rather pointless. The strength of the regional format was not just saying you're from "X," but constantly playing against the same collection of teams as you worked your way up the structure. Throwing in a few token games against other teams flying your "banner" doesn't really seem like an adequate replacement.

The banner is just one way to allow current teams that are attached to them to maintain touch with the various leagues we have now. For myself, ill lost touch with all of them a long time ago and if not changed, really do not care which I go to, as long as there are some teams I have followed up the minors there.

I'm surprised that you even have any "rivals." I would imagine that the very vast majority of minors teams don't have any, since the implementation of rivalry points was fairly recent. Moreover, I'd be really surprised if those were comparable to the old days where you felt a real connection to a collection of opponents.

This is generally the feeling of agents that prefer the higher levels of league play However, we have been playing many of the same teams since we dropped back in season 11. When we have played some of them multiple times, be it real, or scrim, why would we not develop rivalries? The forums are active, the competition is great. Teams are discussing requesting the same regions now so those rivalries are retained.


League competitiveness really isn't that hard to handle. The two things you need to do are limit the number of teams, and then group teams properly. All that can easily be achieved in a regional format. Just having close games doesn't seem like it would be enough to get people interested in low level games again. I think you need something people can truly connect with, although it's possible that ship has sailed.

Low level games are not the only issue. The problem with the regional format is that it is not able to deal with old teams and players leaving, and new ones coming in at different rates. It leaves imbalances leading to teams having 255-0 games more than they should. Because they only choice is to move up teams that should not be there from that region or elsewhere creating a domino effect of bad games. The system must be able to adjust to each level of play and how many teams there are at that level. A ladder system with both lateral and vertical movement can do that. The regional system cannot.

I could also see adding more SP per level up as a way to increase the speed of players developing, and a max level cap. Allowing faster leveling, and a longer plateau as it stands right now. I cannot do the math on my cell, but i imagine doubling the SP per level up would move players up the charts almost twice as fast, decreasing the leagues needed and increasing the length of time they are at the top. Prob add something like that, along with a couple other changes to version three.

Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
A new minors pyramid would be created each season. So it would essentially be a capped league. No exploiting this. No signing a non-booster that is level 38/48. These would funnel into the main pyramid at I use season 7 as a time line(it could be altered). At which time the best teams (A+B+C) move into the main pyramid, and all others are sold back.

The free agents from the teams that didn't make the cut would move in to fill in "Pro" teams easing recruitment for teams that need to recruit to stay competitive. We all know how similar the builds of great and mediocre dots are. The main difference is play calling and supporting staff. "Syndicate" teams already have farms teams set up and will not have many of the troubles recruiting. This way teams that have not set up a farms system can continue to stay competitive. They did get there by being a decent Owner/coach...

Not sure if I had said this but promotion/demotion would likely need to be doubled in the minor pyramid.

Here is an example of how I see different teams working:

Regular builders(Pee Wee style):

imo These types build dots for immediate success. They would end up at the top or close to it in this "Capped" League's pyramid in the second season. Then depending on their game planning (un-measurable variable) move up or down. If they move up it is because they deserve to be with better teams if they move down the opposite. Result: Competition.

Cap builders:

These build dots for success at the top of the game. They care the least about the lolminors, and would not even try and be competitive. They would still end up with other teams that are , trying or not, un-competititive) As their build even out the would start working their way to the top. Result: Competition.

non-boosters:

These guys would start out closer to the top of the pyramid. They would lay against like teams, and loose ground every few seasons to boosting teams as they can no longer keep up. Result: Competition.

Etc...

Again, what is to stop me from making two teams, one full of CPU players and the other full of well-built cap builders? Then jump my cap-built players back and forth to win non-stop trophies (if promotion/demotion is fast) or jump ship with my cap-built players to the CPU player team after the first season and win trophies (until the promotion/demotion system finally puts them in the proper against equal competition).

I think the forced selling of teams is also NGTH, which is a key component of your suggestion.

Originally posted by Pietasters
Well there is a difference in Input. From what I've read is your input really is only about your idea. You have not really been discussing anyone else' s ideas. Other than turning the conversation to your idea when the group is discussing another idea. What you are doing really can't be called input as it is more trying to drive the conversation to the only input your have really given.

I have pointed out flaws with many ideas, and have supported parts of others. Read the whole thread before making accusations.

Originally posted by Pietasters
Ok so we get a new Pyramid each season for new teams that plays for 7 seasons. When those 7 season are done, those teams either make or they don't based one what cut off?

Based on whatever Bort and the devs want. The formula for this would be much simpler than many others being tossed around, and not exploitable.

Originally posted by Pietasters
What happens when there is no room in the Pro Pyramid? Do less teams make it? What if there is room for no teams? Do we just create a new Pro Pyramid?

I am sure that is a problem Bort let alone me would not mind having. It means many more players are enjoying themselves.

Originally posted by Pietasters
Then we are filling two pyramids each season with only one lower level one each season.

There is 8 pyramids right now...

Originally posted by Pietasters
There will come a point where flow will not longer be able to keep up with demand. The other issue with your idea is that it has set teams. Which requires your to have a set amount of teams each season.

Where did I write this? I said fill from the top down. Whatever is left in the bottom tier put all the human teams together.

Originally posted by Pietasters
What if there are not enough teams made in a season to fill up a new pyramid? That means 7 seasons down the road their won't be enough teams to flow into pro. You idea relies on having a constant flow of teams which in business steady flow doesn't happen very often.

Really that is the problem with the idea? What happens now?

This is how big the pyramids would be.

Lv 46 Leagues
Pro/AAA/AA(3 LEAGUES)

Lv 42 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA

Lv 38 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA

Lv 34 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A(ONE LEAGUE)

Lv 30 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A(2 LEAGUES)

Lv 26 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA

Lv 22 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A (5 LEAGUES)

Lv 18 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A(1 LEAGUE)

Lv 14 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A (2 LEAGUES)

Lv 4 Leagues
PRO/AAA/AA/A (3 LEAGUES)

Originally posted by Warlock
Again, what is to stop me from making two teams, one full of CPU players and the other full of well-built cap builders? Then jump my cap-built players back and forth to win non-stop trophies (if promotion/demotion is fast) or jump ship with my cap-built players to the CPU player team after the first season and win trophies (until the promotion/demotion system finally puts them in the proper against equal competition).

True, it's sad, but I can see people doing that.

Originally posted by Warlock
I think the forced selling of teams is also NGTH, which is a key component of your suggestion.

It would not have to be forced selling. It would have to be a forced reset though. I could see people having a problem with that.

As it is With teams being forced into the uncaps there isn't enough teams to fill the pyramids that exist. I would think anyone that made an effort would make it.

This is just my opinion. I can see why some here feel like I am pushing MY idea way too hard, I put alot of thought into it, and believe it would work. I would love to have anyone that first shows they understand it, explain why it would not work, so I could give it up already.

Thanks Warlock you have brought up a few good points.

Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
It would not have to be forced selling. It would have to be a forced reset though. I could see people having a problem with that.

As it is With teams being forced into the uncaps there isn't enough teams to fill the pyramids that exist. I would think anyone that made an effort would make it.

This is just my opinion. I can see why some here feel like I am pushing MY idea way too hard, I put alot of thought into it, and believe it would work. I would love to have anyone that first shows they understand it, explain why it would not work, so I could give it up already.

Thanks Warlock you have brought up a few good points.

I don't fully understand your idea, at least not all the details, but there's a couple key things that need addressing. GLB doesn't have the luxury of trial and error in this matter TBPH, they need to get it fixed and fix it right the first time... people are seriously getting burned out spending a year building a player, just to get maybe 6 months of enjoyment from him before starting the process over again. Right now 2/3rds of a player's career are not entertaining due to the build process and another 1/3rd of what's left over is not entertaining due to a lack of competition... that's a horrible value for your dollar, especially with cost of making the best player possible.

I spent a few minutes looking over your idea and poked a few fairly large holes in it, I understand that no system will be perfect, but there's better options in this situation.

Originally posted by DONKEIDIC
Seriously you were asked to either give input or stop. You seem to me, to be one of those guys that is almost intelligent enough to know that no one person has cornered the market on good ideas, but not quite.
No, you were asked to stop spamming and I was asked to stop bitching about your spamming. You violated your edict, so I followed suit. People, including myself, have explained over and over again why your idea is irreparably flawed, but you never listen because you don't actually care about what problems might exist in your proposal. Basically, your advocacy is not in any way conditional on your idea actually being a good one. You will support it to the death regardless simply because it is yours.



Originally posted by Vortus
The banner is just one way to allow current teams that are attached to them to maintain touch with the various leagues we have now.
I get that, but the value of regions wasn't just saying that you were from "X," it was about having a common history. Back in my first few seasons of this game, it wasn't being in Western Europe that really mattered, it was simply that being in Western Europe A #3 meant that we competed against mostly the same collection of teams over time. So the Leavenworth Inmates, Loch Ness Monsters, Wichita Wild, Manchester Devils, etc were all names that meant something to this day. And then later having my own expansion team in Canadian BBB #4 meant that I eventually saw myself in the context of this game as a Canadian, so I pull for other Canadian teams in the World League. The regions created bonds, and more thoroughly than just sticking with 1 or 2 teams from season to season.

Originally posted by
When we have played some of them multiple times, be it real, or scrim, why would we not develop rivalries?
Well, my thinking was that rivalries take time to develop. In the old days, you'd play many of the same teams 4+ times over the course of multiple seasons. Given that teams didn't get to stick together in promotion through the cloud until recently, I really didn't think that there was enough time for such rivalries to even form. Moreover, even the ones that do are without context. Various teams I've been a part of have had "rivals" from other regions who are scheduled as scrimmages, but it didn't seem to have the same intensity or significance as guys you've gone up against during the regular season.

Originally posted by
The problem with the regional format is that it is not able to deal with old teams and players leaving, and new ones coming in at different rates.
The old model wasn't, but you can have regions without pyramids, in which case you can expand and contract as necessary based on the amount of teams within a region who are suitable for a particular level. Right now there are too many teams in general, especially when you consider how casual teams are drawing away from the player pool.

Originally posted by
A ladder system with both lateral and vertical movement can do that. The regional system cannot.
Actually a regional system definitely can, as I have already explained. The old regional system didn't, but it's fairly easy to improve upon that. Meanwhile a ladder system sacrifices the continuity and community that a regional system can provide.

Originally posted by jdbolick
Actually a regional system definitely can, as I have already explained. The old regional system didn't, but it's fairly easy to improve upon that. Meanwhile a ladder system sacrifices the continuity and community that a regional system can provide.

It doesn't sacrifice it, it merely changes it. Teams will generally stay in or around the same ranking after a few seasons sorts out the proper placement... these teams will likely keep being placed in the same leagues due to how league selection will be based on the ladder ranking. Although, unlike a regional system, you won't have non-competitive teams mucking up the league... just because they happen to be assigned to a specific region.

@ jdbolick
I get that, but the value of regions wasn't just saying that you were from "X," it was about having a common history. Back in my first few seasons of this game, it wasn't being in Western Europe that really mattered, it was simply that being in Western Europe A #3 meant that we competed against mostly the same collection of teams over time. So the Leavenworth Inmates, Loch Ness Monsters, Wichita Wild, Manchester Devils, etc were all names that meant something to this day. And then later having my own expansion team in Canadian BBB #4 meant that I eventually saw myself in the context of this game as a Canadian, so I pull for other Canadian teams in the World League. The regions created bonds, and more thoroughly than just sticking with 1 or 2 teams from season to season.

And has those same teams come up through the current Elite/Competitive/Standard system together, they would still have rivalries. Just as we do with the teams that have come up with us now. I have been in the leagues myself, and they were fun, but no more so than what I am in now. Perhaps I have been on or am on too many teams, but I do not associate myself with any league in particular. And all of my connections with the WE, where my team is from, or from USA where I started in the beginning, I do not feel any connection anymore. I am a Ripper, my teams colors, those are the only colors I really care about. I used to enjoy our games with Bath, Cardiff and others in WE, or Eleven Wise Monkeys, Oregon Ducks, OTR and others in USA, but, all of have moved on and its not the same. Nor will it ever be. It was not better than what I have now either, I like them the same.

Maybe I missed it, and ill review again as I go through and alter some stuff on my own. But, the region idea will not work again for the same reason the current system is failing. To many variations of skill level available for the leagues. In each league there are X amount of good pro teams, Y amount of mediocre Pro teams and Z amount of sub par Pro teams. And its not just Pro, thats for every level of the game from AAA on down. Add in teams quitting, or rebuilding to the mismatches and its destined to fail. But, if all of the good Pro teams are together, all of the mediocre Pro teams are together, and all of the sub par Pro teams are together, they could compete well with one another, and that would develop rivalries if they are not there already, and reinforce those that are there already. In the region system, all those teams are in the same melting pot for each region.

Originally posted by jdbolick

No, you were asked to stop spamming and I was asked to stop bitching about your spamming.

What is the color of the sky in the world you live in?

Good luck GLB !!!

That's all that comes to my mind from reading this thread

Originally posted by jdbolick

I get that, but the value of regions wasn't just saying that you were from "X," it was about having a common history. Back in my first few seasons of this game, it wasn't being in Western Europe that really mattered, it was simply that being in Western Europe A #3 meant that we competed against mostly the same collection of teams over time. So the Leavenworth Inmates, Loch Ness Monsters, Wichita Wild, Manchester Devils, etc were all names that meant something to this day. And then later having my own expansion team in Canadian BBB #4 meant that I eventually saw myself in the context of this game as a Canadian, so I pull for other Canadian teams in the World League. The regions created bonds, and more thoroughly than just sticking with 1 or 2 teams from season to season.

Great post. 100% this.

Originally posted by tonylieu

Good luck GLB !!!

That's all that comes to my mind from reading this thread

there are lots of good ideas in this thread and we have been discussing them.


extra luck never hurts tho.

Originally posted by DigitalDaggers
Originally posted by tonylieu


Good luck GLB !!!

That's all that comes to my mind from reading this thread

there are lots of good ideas in this thread and we have been discussing them.


extra luck never hurts tho.

I just wish you would give us a little more feedback on what you have liked/disliked about the ideas so far. Now that discussion on new ideas have come to a lull we might be more productive with this discussion if we knew which idea matches your vision for the game best and/or what aspects of other ideas you might like to incorporate with it. I think it would help to iron out the details or potentially arrive at something not already considered here.