Warrior General Games

World League has the best set up, the only thing you can argue is that some of the teams who get demoted are still alot better than the teams who get promoted. I do not think there is a way to fix that aspect of it, other than that...There is really no other changes you can make to World Pro

Originally posted by mwoods07
which in turn would make the WL more competitive.

You do watch the WL this season, right? Thinking it could be more competitive than what it currently is is very likely a pipe dream.

The way to fix the pro leagues is not to worry about teams at the top who are stuck there and can't get out. The way to fix it is to get teams a level or two below pro up faster. You don't fix the pros by taking away the best teams. You fix pro by getting better teams in there faster and more consistently.

You can argue all you want about the number of leagues below WL but you can't get the right answer because it's different for every season.

The fundamental design of this game is what makes matchups below WL so hard. Age, level, effective level are all pretty weak ways of comparing dots that are of a "competitive balance". The only place where it's easy is "The very very best possible." And thus WL is pretty good. I haven't watched PeeWee gold but in theory that should be a pretty good place as well, except the sim may not function well at those levels.

Everything else is going to be horrible, and that's just locked in by the game design.

Originally posted by Zickzack
You do watch the WL this season, right? Thinking it could be more competitive than what it currently is is very likely a pipe dream.

yep...and I see 7 teams with 1 win or less...

Originally posted by mwoods07
yep...and I see 7 teams with 1 win or less...

How many had 1 win or less after 5 games in the NFL? (the answer is 9)

Originally posted by mwoods07
yep...and I see 7 teams with 1 win or less...

And I see a 5-0 team barely beating a 2-3 team by 2 points, the other 5-0 team beating a 2-3 by 3, a 0-5 losing to a 4-1 by 9, a 1-4 losing to a 4-1 by 3, a 1-4 beating a 3-2 by 3. How more competitive do you think it should get?

EVERYONE SHOULD BE 2-2-1
Not enough ties up in here, clearly not very competitive.

Originally posted by Zickzack
And I see a 5-0 team barely beating a 2-3 team by 2 points, the other 5-0 team beating a 2-3 by 3, a 0-5 losing to a 4-1 by 9, a 1-4 losing to a 4-1 by 3, a 1-4 beating a 3-2 by 3. How more competitive do you think it should get?

Dudes a scrub who is throwing a fit....don't respond. Test instead.

Originally posted by mwoods07
Originally posted by Zickzack

You do watch the WL this season, right? Thinking it could be more competitive than what it currently is is very likely a pipe dream.

yep...and I see 7 teams with 1 win or less...

This is a player vs player game. Someone will always lose. Everyone can't be a 10win team. Good teams go 2-14 every season. Just like if BSS were here they'd probably get between 2-4 wins but it's not like they're a different team but just one of the teams that are too good for pro but not good enough to consistently compete with the top 16 teams in all of GLB. We're talking about the elite of the elite here. Out of 288 teams in Pro/WL there are probably 60 teams in GLB that seperate themselves from the masses with 32 of them being in WL and only 16 able to make the playoffs. Not everyone can do it. Tons of teams have some great builds but the best teams have those great builds across all 55 positions which is a big difference between the good pro teams and the good WL teams

Originally posted by chronoaug
This is a player vs player game. Someone will always lose. Everyone can't be a 10win team. Good teams go 2-14 every season. Just like if BSS were here they'd probably get between 2-4 wins but it's not like they're a different team but just one of the teams that are too good for pro but not good enough to consistently compete with the top 16 teams in all of GLB. We're talking about the elite of the elite here. Out of 288 teams in Pro/WL there are probably 60 teams in GLB that seperate themselves from the masses with 32 of them being in WL and only 16 able to make the playoffs. Not everyone can do it. Tons of teams have some great builds but the best teams have those great builds across all 55 positions which is a big difference between the good pro teams and the good WL teams

I disagree...no one should come into WL and only win 1-2 games all season (granted we are only 5 games in). But yes, it's 1v1 and someone has to lose...but I truly think we could make it where no team has less than 4 wins if we did it properly. And of those losses, many of them would be within a touchdown. Keeping games close but still losing fits the cause. Losing games by 3-5 TD's more often than not...seems ludicrous for a WL team. Forget BSS, I guess it was a bad example. But we have teams that could get 5 wins in the WL and keep many other losses close...we need to have them up here making this great game as fun as it can be.

Originally posted by ImTheScientist
Dudes a scrub who is throwing a fit....don't respond. Test instead.

Fuck you dude...I'm, not throwing a fit, trying to make a fucking case...get a fucking life.

Originally posted by Zickzack
And I see a 5-0 team barely beating a 2-3 team by 2 points, the other 5-0 team beating a 2-3 by 3, a 0-5 losing to a 4-1 by 9, a 1-4 losing to a 4-1 by 3, a 1-4 beating a 3-2 by 3. How more competitive do you think it should get?

Those examples are PERFECT for what I am talking about...a team sitting at 5-0 but barely winning games is what it is all about! The competitiveness isn't terrible, but it can be improved upon. Are you arguing that we don't have 4-5 teams that could have been in WL this season that would have been more competitive than some of the others? My point is, I don't see why we can't have 32 teams that are all close enough that games are won or lost by a TD 90%+ of the time.

Originally posted by mwoods07
Are you arguing that we don't have 4-5 teams that could have been in WL this season that would have been more competitive than some of the others?
I'll argue that. Pro is shit this season.

edit:
Also, the reason you don't always have the "best 32" is because the non-playoff teams get demoted. But as noted by several, that's one of the best things about the WL. They shouldn't change that just to make it easier for some teams to stay up.

Originally posted by
My point is, I don't see why we can't have 32 teams that are all close enough that games are won or lost by a TD 90%+ of the time.
You're being absurd. There's always going to be a significant talent difference between the #1 and #32 team, as there should be. The WL is a near perfect balance between parity and excellence. You don't want to water that down where everyone is relatively equal just to artificially make the scores closer. It's fun when a lot of teams have a shot at gold, but to me it's more fun when there's a clear favorite everyone else is trying to knock off.