Warrior General Games

An easy fix would be to not set the leagues in stone til the end of the Pre-season. A lot of rosters are nowhere near complete when the leagues are sorted at the moment.

What i would suggest is to do team movements as usual, but then re-shuffle them just before the end of the pre-season, using team strength as a yard-stick. This would help even out leagues a bit. Could still use rivalry points in this.

Also, up the chem hit for signing players once the season starts.

doobas™

RE. the new salary caps -

So after all the ideas in this thread regarding restructuring the leagues to make them more competitive, nothing has been done? There are still going to be 11 minor league caps (including an uncapped minors - weren't we getting rid of uncapped minors?), in addition to AA, AAA, Pro and WL.

So what was the point of this thread, exactly?

Originally posted by 5STAR
consolidate leagues and quit spreading the user base over some many different options.

Example would be casual and normal....make normal easier to run and remove casual.

Way too many caps...we have a cap for just about every level...serious overkill

Stop adding layers to the game. Each time you add an additional layer it is something the best teams will master creating a bigger gap between the haves and have nots.

You gotta ask yourself...
Do we really needs coaches? Because it will be one thing teams must have to win

Do we really need 55 man rosters? Most average teams can not field a full team and thus have no shot

Do we really need to increase the energy/morale drain? You are causing more morale spirals making decent games blow outs

Do we really need to add more options to team finances? Another thing great owners will master while the average guy has little chance

AEQ and VAs are another thing that kills competition. The best dots always have the best VAs and AEQ and that leads to blowouts. If you want to have VAs and AEQ you need to cap it at like 30 VAs and 1-2 AEQ pieces or the normal user will NEVER compete.

ALGs force dots to be built in a way that is counter intuitive.....if you do not train correctly or hit high caps early enough you will never compete. Plus building in this manor make the lower leagues worthless. People do not want to build a dot for a full calendar year to spend 2-3 seasons playing meaningful games but yet ALGs make them do just that.

League structure is a very minor problem to the competition problem. The main cause is there are way too many things for the normal user to keep up with and in result he gets annihilated by teams who can manage everything.

This game has been on a track to cater to the hardcore user for so long it has lead to a few elite teams and 29 others that have no chance in EVERY league.


i agree!!!! this game is going to be too much to handle for a lot of guys.
me too, I'm just wondering if I had the time to take care of two teams next season with all those financial stuffs etc.... I will drop one of them if not. There are too many things to do, and this automaticaly do not means it's a better game. League is a minor problem.
you can make some super pro league with teams and people that want, are able (and have enough time!) to take care of all the aspects of this game and minors league with easier controls. For me the new financial stuffs, stadium maintence and others are also too much for casual teams

Put people in leagues with comparable age/lvl players rather than based simply on performance. Leagues vary by difficulty so much because of the wide variety between avg lvl and avg effective lvl within the same league.

Should go back to the previous way of doing things where the cap wasn't just a signing cap but a legit cap at the start of the season as to a players lvl on your team. If a team gets demoted that has players 5-10 lvls above the cap what sense does it make to have one? (other than restrict every other team's ability to sign players in order to compete with the demoted team)

Originally posted by Ravenwood
RE. the new salary caps -

So after all the ideas in this thread regarding restructuring the leagues to make them more competitive, nothing has been done? There are still going to be 11 minor league caps (including an uncapped minors - weren't we getting rid of uncapped minors?), in addition to AA, AAA, Pro and WL.

So what was the point of this thread, exactly?



Catch said it would not likely happen this season. The purpose was to get ideas, and see what folks willing to discuss rather than cuss thought. Uncapped minors has been gone.

Originally posted by Ravenwood

So what was the point of this thread, exactly?



To calm the rioting.

Originally posted by Ravenwood
RE. the new salary caps -

So after all the ideas in this thread regarding restructuring the leagues to make them more competitive, nothing has been done? There are still going to be 11 minor league caps (including an uncapped minors - weren't we getting rid of uncapped minors?), in addition to AA, AAA, Pro and WL.

So what was the point of this thread, exactly?



The restructure may not happen this offseason (only 2 weeks left), but it will probably happen sometime. So they still needed ideas.

If it does happen this offseason, then the announcement will probably be revised.

IMO there is no way you can shuffle teams and for it to still be competitve through out the game. Having the best builds is still 75% of what is needed to win games and stretegy is 25% or maybe less. This would explain why even in World Pro a team can still average 60 pts a game on offense. How do I know it's not just a team with a great AI gameplan because even in casual leagues, you can find the same thing in the Pro's and this comes just from having the best builds across the board. If the game could ever find a way to make where stretegy plays a bigger part than we may have something...

Until than we minus well compare this game to college football rather than a professional sport. So if we do go this route than I think we should take on the college football league structure as well. Why not make it 120 teams or so leagues with various conference and structure the conference where we try and group teams with even performance in that conference instead of trying to do it with leagues. There can be Bowl games offered to each conference or teams even have a shot to play a couple of bowl games for the top teams in that conference. This will give more oppertunities for teams to win something even if there are not the best team in the league but they tried extremely hard, it is still possible for them to walk away with something of a championship or play in something of a championship and not feel after 5 seasons of playing in the elite, they always come close but walk away empty handed due to a more well built team in there conference of 15 other teams. Less leagues, A few massive size leagues, but smaller conference. Make it so the GLB Bowl game is the biggest bowl game and similar to a championship game so that way #1 and #2 can still play for the title.

It's a crazy idea that many have suggested before, but it might just work and if it does't than there is no lose as I am sure that alot of teams who get beat in the 2nd or 3rd round would of like it if they could of atleast play for some kind of title to go up on their team wall than walking away with nothing. So atleast it would make it more fun and easier to manage the competition level with a rank system over what we have now.

If this was true you it would be a rare thing that a team with lower effective level beats one with a higher. Which of course is common.


And this second statement is an assumption based on a flawed idea that strategy is limited to the AI.


Originally posted by Maddencoach
IMO there is no way you can shuffle teams and for it to still be competitve through out the game. Having the best builds is still 75% of what is needed to win games and stretegy is 25% or maybe less.


How do I know it's not just a team with a great AI gameplan because even in casual leagues, you can find the same thing in the Pro's and this comes just from having the best builds across the board. If the game could ever find a way to make where stretegy plays a bigger part than we may have something...

Originally posted by Dr. E
If this was true you it would be a rare thing that a team with lower effective level beats one with a higher. Which of course is common.


And this second statement is an assumption based on a flawed idea that strategy is limited to the AI.

Effective level isn't always telling of a good build though. There is such a thing as too much efficiency and too little effectiveness.

effective level is not the best way. SP value isn't too bad.

Originally posted by Vortus
effective level is not the best way. SP value isn't too bad.

Age. Simple as that. Really.

Personally I think a born on date is the way to go.

Originally posted by Warlock
Effective level isn't always telling of a good build though. There is such a thing as too much efficiency and too little effectiveness.

So? Bad players deserve to LOSE, not be given a handicap. Effective level is good for that.

Originally posted by Hagalaz
So? Bad players deserve to LOSE, not be given a handicap. Effective level is good for that.

Huh? I was just saying that beating a team with a higher effective level isn't always a measure of how much game-planning and strategy is worth in the overall scheme of wins/losses.