Warrior General Games

Good stuff Stobie.

Compare league average scores - to ladder average scores and I bet the difference is crazy (way more blow outs in league play due to garbage teams).

Those stats do prove that the ladder is creating 'close' match ups.

but they don't address the concerns of the guys who say the 'ladder winner' isn't truly the 'ladder winner' since there is often little ladder play among teams of the same tier.

Of course - league play does affect ladder rankings as well - so that is something.


I do kind of wish there could be a tier playoff structure at the end of a season. But I also kind of wish not -- as game planning for an additional few games right during playoffs / ladder finale would be tough.

Originally posted by TxSteve
Good stuff Stobie.

Compare league average scores - to ladder average scores and I bet the difference is crazy (way more blow outs in league play due to garbage teams).

Those stats do prove that the ladder is creating 'close' match ups.

but they don't address the concerns of the guys who say the 'ladder winner' isn't truly the 'ladder winner' since there is often little ladder play among teams of the same tier.

Of course - league play does affect ladder rankings as well - so that is something.


I do kind of wish there could be a tier playoff structure at the end of a season. But I also kind of wish not -- as game planning for an additional few games right during playoffs / ladder finale would be tough.

Yes league play would do that but in a true tier ladder you would face the top team's from the other leagues.

Not overall not advocating a change to ladder in itself from me. I actually only jumped in because of the comment in regards to crowning tier champs. On a tier level the "champ" is false because they are higher on the global tier only. They didn't really win their tier against their tier.

Originally posted by Corndog
They have played against a journeyman team literally every single league game, though.

And they have beat them all.

Handedly.

Well. Yeah?

Bottom line, the ladder's purpose - giving 16 relatively quality games to the schedule regardless of what league you're stuck in or how good or how bad you are - is really important to me, and it's working very well at it, so I am strongly against changing it to some other purpose.

The .gifs awarded at the end of the season I see mostly as for fun, and not very important to me. Clearly others have different priorities, and I can accept that.

Realize the ladder is cumulative across all seasons, so it's already terrible for determining "best season" or "best team in tier this season". For example, you could easily argue that #3 Ronin is having a better season than #1 Queen City (in fact it's probably not that long an argument, Ronin's been amazing this season). So to really serve the purpose you'd have to give a lot of upheaval to the ladder, not just tweak opponents. The ladder also has no "championship game" - all games count equally. So beating a team in week 16 wouldn't hold more weight than losing to them in week 2 in the ladder formula, although most people would prefer a "winner take all" sort of game at the end rather than a cumulative weight of all games in the season.

Tournaments are probably the best way to handle "best team in tier for season X". We don't have them yet. You could probably arrange them with private scrims, although from what I've seen private tournaments have not been very popular in GLB2 so far. At the very least, #1 vs #2 ladder could scrim for bragging rights. At some point, people may want to reconcile the #1 Stunners and #2 Cornhuskers, but fortunately they're in the same league and it's pretty easy to just say "league trophy >> ladder trophy" and be done with it.

I'd say for now, none of the systems really award a proper "national champion", so pretend it's the 1980s in college football and set up a poll at the end of the season and see who comes out on top (also was popular in GLB1 in the pre-WL days).

Originally posted by Corndog
They have played against a journeyman team literally every single league game, though.

And they have beat them all.

Handedly.

No.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/98896

If any other journeymen teams had a chance to beat the Stunners they probably would be within 30 spots of them on the overall ladder...

Originally posted by mrm708

3) A tier-wide cup style tourney similar to what you see for soccer leagues or even march madness. A simple one and done tourney where all non-cpu teams in the tier are entered, so you end up with a single champion at the end of the season.



I really like this suggestion tbh! run it just like how the FA cup is run in England for football(soccer). Teams are randomly paired off with another team in their tier and the winner advances to the next round, rinse and repeat until only two teams remain for the cup final! Any need for a bye could be decided by ladder rank? Would add another dimension to the game and allow for further rivalries as well as upsets!

Originally posted by pottsman
Ok, that's fine - in situations like the Stunners, teams that are CLEARLY above and beyond their tier, they should be playing whoever is closest to their competitive level.

But in situations closer to the norm, it'll make ladder matchups with teams one to five ranks around you - ladder matchups that are going to be close and competitive. When you're playing a team that's about 15 ranks away, which happens sometimes, the game is much less likely to be tight. Slimming the range, late season, makes for some better games.

we actually beat the stunners this year (cornhuskers) so i resent the clearly above line

Originally posted by rob4121983
No.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/98896

Lets show more of these

Let's just line it up and play some football, just because Steve can win them all without trying O_o. I dont mind losing really to the upper teams, if you want to be the best you got to beat the best. I play the Stunners every season (usually twice a season) and we have some damn good football games. I'm sure Steve and i are willing to accept any journeyman challenges if someone wants to feel like the champions of the tier. Other than that we just need to play with cards we are dealt, the suggestions have been marked for corndog and lets gear up for some playoff Toonball!

This is an interesting draw, 77th vs 58th. http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/compare_teams/362/768

So if MMArmy (somehow) beats the Cornhuskers, chances are no one changes in tier position simply because it's global that matters.

I know most of you don't see the problem, but, what about lost opportunity to add quality to this game? Didn't TT post a thread on how it's about the journey, not the plateau. There should be an emphasis on ladder competition. I think it's a dis-service teams play out of tier. Especially when there's actual feedback a lot of agents hate it, win or lose. This lackadaisical system is bad for business.

Originally posted by Mezirah
This is an interesting draw, 77th vs 58th. http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/compare_teams/362/768

So if MMArmy (somehow) beats the Cornhuskers, chances are no one changes in tier position simply because it's global that matters.

I know most of you don't see the problem, but, what about lost opportunity to add quality to this game? Didn't TT post a thread on how it's about the journey, not the plateau. There should be an emphasis on ladder competition. I think it's a dis-service teams play out of tier. Especially when there's actual feedback a lot of agents hate it, win or lose. This lackadaisical system is bad for business.

So you think if MMA wins they should automatically jump ahead of the Cornhuskers in tier rankings? If so, I don't agree at all.

No, but Alpine should take their place if Alpine wins.

And if Hellraisers lost, MMA should take 4th. Not due to global position, but it should be a true tier ladder.

I just want the ladders to come off 1 system and have their own. That's all this suggestion thread is for. Guys like Steve who have raped their way up to a high global ranking, before the great agent purge of QB Roll Out season 5, are lucky enough to just chill into trophies will oppose this suggestion, but nearly every team and network i've been a part of for the majority had dozens of people who flat out hate the system as it stands today. I'd say 90% of those people are gone, but still, I think it was a contributing factor to many departures.

Who knows, maybe I should just suggestion an exit survey so we can find out why everyone's leaving.

Originally posted by Mezirah
No, but Alpine should take their place if Alpine wins.

And if Hellraisers lost, MMA should take 4th. Not due to global position, but it should be a true tier ladder.

I just want the ladders to come off 1 system and have their own. That's all this suggestion thread is for. Guys like Steve who have raped their way up to a high global ranking, before the great agent purge of QB Roll Out season 5, are lucky enough to just chill into trophies will oppose this suggestion, but nearly every team and network i've been a part of for the majority had dozens of people who flat out hate the system as it stands today. I'd say 90% of those people are gone, but still, I think it was a contributing factor to many departures.

Who knows, maybe I should just suggestion an exit survey so we can find out why everyone's leaving.

We survived the qb rollout purge (Steve and i were both in a massive qb rollout league) we just found a way to beat it. I'm looking forward to our matchup tomorrow, Rob and i have had this rivalry amongst our teams for many seasons. You have a great balanced attack that may be very frustrating for me. Hopefully our new found balance works in this game, either way good luck!