Using the current Global Ranking here's an idea (obviously not exact) of how teams would have spread through the in-season divisional realignment system I'm proposing:
https://imgur.com/CsDb6j3.jpg
https://imgur.com/CsDb6j3.jpg
Forum > Suggestions > Restructuring idea and I'd like your feedback...
Ace of Spades 7
offline
offline
Originally posted by Corndog
It's been made abundantly clear that people would rather go 30-0 with an average win margin of 80 points than going 20-10 with an average margin of 20 against better opponents.
Better to be the JV superstar than play on the varsity team, I guess.
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
It's been made abundantly clear that people would rather go 30-0 with an average win margin of 80 points than going 20-10 with an average margin of 20 against better opponents.
Better to be the JV superstar than play on the varsity team, I guess.
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
vipermaw82
offline
offline
Originally posted by Ace of Spades 7
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
fact
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
fact
Ace of Spades 7
offline
offline
Originally posted by BoDiddley
Sorry, but even the best Rookie teams would be manhandled by average Sophomore teams.
It would be an interesting experiment to run through the 3 playoff rounds (using the playoff tree I posted) in each of the divisions I laid out above just to see how all the teams would finish in their respective divisions.
Sorry, but even the best Rookie teams would be manhandled by average Sophomore teams.
It would be an interesting experiment to run through the 3 playoff rounds (using the playoff tree I posted) in each of the divisions I laid out above just to see how all the teams would finish in their respective divisions.
BoDiddley
offline
offline
Originally posted by Ace of Spades 7
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
I'm not sure what blowouts we're talking about though. Both Rook & Soph (human vs human)have been very competitive. Blowouts...happen in ladder games far more than anywhere else.
You've come to GLB2 recently, we had competitive leagues in every tier when we had a higher user base in the past. Teams don't drop out because they can't play teams one or two tiers higher, they drop because they have no way to fill roster spots if agents go inactive. It's been brought up for 20 seasons now in the forums. Rookie starts with around 3 leagues, and by Pro they're lucky to have 3 quality teams. The #2 ranked Pro team can't go to vet right now because they can't fill roster spots for an inactive agent.
Competitiveness comes from more teams, more players, more agents within a tier, not mismatches which will make the long journey to vet far less enjoyable. Not even sure how you gauge how if your team is progressing with this system. Only people who will get satisfaction are those in Div 1,so how does this help newbies? GLB1 is a lot like this, and it's god awful.
Originally posted by Ace of Spades 7
It would be an interesting experiment to run through the 3 playoff rounds (using the playoff tree I posted) in each of the divisions I laid out above just to see how all the teams would finish in their respective divisions.
Div 1 would be what we have now. Div 2 is also what we have now....except it really screws over the Bulls. Div 3 is a cake walk for the Tigers. You have mostly blowouts in those playoff games instead of the competitive ones we have right now in the tiers. Every title game in tiers below Pro was close.
I'm just trying to see the appeal. Good teams get penalized for success, and bad teams get rewarded. Why should the Tigers walk to a Div 3 Bronze, while the Bulls get worked in Div 2? How does this help keep users? Seems it would just cause more apathy.
I was thinking about this last night and wondering. Since there are blow-out winning teams there are, obviously, teams being blown-out.
I wonder how many teams would stop playing if they no longer had as many blow-out wins and their games were more competitive?
Compare that to how many teams have stopped playing because they weren't competitive and kept getting blown out?
I'd guess we've lost many more due to the latter then we would to the former.
I'm not sure what blowouts we're talking about though. Both Rook & Soph (human vs human)have been very competitive. Blowouts...happen in ladder games far more than anywhere else.
You've come to GLB2 recently, we had competitive leagues in every tier when we had a higher user base in the past. Teams don't drop out because they can't play teams one or two tiers higher, they drop because they have no way to fill roster spots if agents go inactive. It's been brought up for 20 seasons now in the forums. Rookie starts with around 3 leagues, and by Pro they're lucky to have 3 quality teams. The #2 ranked Pro team can't go to vet right now because they can't fill roster spots for an inactive agent.
Competitiveness comes from more teams, more players, more agents within a tier, not mismatches which will make the long journey to vet far less enjoyable. Not even sure how you gauge how if your team is progressing with this system. Only people who will get satisfaction are those in Div 1,so how does this help newbies? GLB1 is a lot like this, and it's god awful.
Originally posted by Ace of Spades 7
It would be an interesting experiment to run through the 3 playoff rounds (using the playoff tree I posted) in each of the divisions I laid out above just to see how all the teams would finish in their respective divisions.
Div 1 would be what we have now. Div 2 is also what we have now....except it really screws over the Bulls. Div 3 is a cake walk for the Tigers. You have mostly blowouts in those playoff games instead of the competitive ones we have right now in the tiers. Every title game in tiers below Pro was close.
I'm just trying to see the appeal. Good teams get penalized for success, and bad teams get rewarded. Why should the Tigers walk to a Div 3 Bronze, while the Bulls get worked in Div 2? How does this help keep users? Seems it would just cause more apathy.
TyDavis315
offline
offline
Push come to shove we can just do something completely different for season 50 (half a century & lucky number 7 years) and if the feedback is more negative early on/midway then the devs can say it was just fanfare and return to our regularly scheduled program?
Ace of Spades 7
offline
offline
Originally posted by BoDiddley
Teams don't drop out because they can't play teams one or two tiers higher, they drop because they have no way to fill roster spots if agents go inactive. It's been brought up for 20 seasons now in the forums. Rookie starts with around 3 leagues, and by Pro they're lucky to have 3 quality teams. The #2 ranked Pro team can't go to vet right now because they can't fill roster spots for an inactive agent.
Here's where the divisional system would help. Teams drop out because they can't fill roster spots with players at the team's Tier level. So, they can't compete against the good teams that have all players at the highest possible Tier.
However, if they were able sign players of a lower Tier level to fill the roster and still remain competitive, albeit in a lower division against lower Tier teams, then they probably wouldn't drop out.
I can't disagree that a fully Sophomore team with mostly human players would beat the best Rookie teams. But what about the Sophomore teams with mostly CPU players? Or, the Sophomore teams with some Rookie players on it?
Divisions allow the fluid blending of teams at different Tier levels throughout the season. So, as some teams start outpacing or falling back from the rest of the division they'll move up or down a division to still maintain a competitive balance.
However, if they move and then find the new division is too hard or too easy then they'll move back. Again, this is to allow teams to find their high water mark based on their skill level not Tier level.
Teams don't drop out because they can't play teams one or two tiers higher, they drop because they have no way to fill roster spots if agents go inactive. It's been brought up for 20 seasons now in the forums. Rookie starts with around 3 leagues, and by Pro they're lucky to have 3 quality teams. The #2 ranked Pro team can't go to vet right now because they can't fill roster spots for an inactive agent.
Here's where the divisional system would help. Teams drop out because they can't fill roster spots with players at the team's Tier level. So, they can't compete against the good teams that have all players at the highest possible Tier.
However, if they were able sign players of a lower Tier level to fill the roster and still remain competitive, albeit in a lower division against lower Tier teams, then they probably wouldn't drop out.
I can't disagree that a fully Sophomore team with mostly human players would beat the best Rookie teams. But what about the Sophomore teams with mostly CPU players? Or, the Sophomore teams with some Rookie players on it?
Divisions allow the fluid blending of teams at different Tier levels throughout the season. So, as some teams start outpacing or falling back from the rest of the division they'll move up or down a division to still maintain a competitive balance.
However, if they move and then find the new division is too hard or too easy then they'll move back. Again, this is to allow teams to find their high water mark based on their skill level not Tier level.
BoDiddley
offline
offline
Originally posted by Ace of Spades 7
Here's where the divisional system would help. Teams drop out because they can't fill roster spots with players at the team's Tier level. So, they can't compete against the good teams that have all players at the highest possible Tier.
However, if they were able sign players of a lower Tier level to fill the roster and still remain competitive, albeit in a lower division against lower Tier teams, then they probably wouldn't drop out.
I can't disagree that a fully Sophomore team with mostly human players would beat the best Rookie teams. But what about the Sophomore teams with mostly CPU players? Or, the Sophomore teams with some Rookie players on it?
Divisions allow the fluid blending of teams at different Tier levels throughout the season. So, as some teams start outpacing or falling back from the rest of the division they'll move up or down a division to still maintain a competitive balance.
However, if they move and then find the new division is too hard or too easy then they'll move back. Again, this is to allow teams to find their high water mark based on their skill level not Tier level.
Players have tier caps to the teams they can go to. So this would make things impossible to fill a roster with competitive free agents. Signing players of a lower tier can already be done...teams don't do it because it's rather pointless. GLB2 doesn't have fluid blending of players, it has hard caps.
At least now some teams in the same tier can merge here and there, that would be nearly impossible with the system you're proposing. Quite literally, the top agents will sit in Vet and won't even bother to reset, they'll just take the better players in free agency. GLB2 will became like GLB1 is with the World League.
Here's where the divisional system would help. Teams drop out because they can't fill roster spots with players at the team's Tier level. So, they can't compete against the good teams that have all players at the highest possible Tier.
However, if they were able sign players of a lower Tier level to fill the roster and still remain competitive, albeit in a lower division against lower Tier teams, then they probably wouldn't drop out.
I can't disagree that a fully Sophomore team with mostly human players would beat the best Rookie teams. But what about the Sophomore teams with mostly CPU players? Or, the Sophomore teams with some Rookie players on it?
Divisions allow the fluid blending of teams at different Tier levels throughout the season. So, as some teams start outpacing or falling back from the rest of the division they'll move up or down a division to still maintain a competitive balance.
However, if they move and then find the new division is too hard or too easy then they'll move back. Again, this is to allow teams to find their high water mark based on their skill level not Tier level.
Players have tier caps to the teams they can go to. So this would make things impossible to fill a roster with competitive free agents. Signing players of a lower tier can already be done...teams don't do it because it's rather pointless. GLB2 doesn't have fluid blending of players, it has hard caps.
At least now some teams in the same tier can merge here and there, that would be nearly impossible with the system you're proposing. Quite literally, the top agents will sit in Vet and won't even bother to reset, they'll just take the better players in free agency. GLB2 will became like GLB1 is with the World League.
Ace of Spades 7
offline
offline
Originally posted by BoDiddley
Not even sure how you gauge how if your team is progressing with this system.
With the 8-team playoffs (I posted link to the picture) over the final three weeks not only do you determine the division winner but also 2nd to 8th place as well. So, every season your team would have a rank like: S49 - 3rd place, Div.7 (for instance)
Originally posted by BoDiddley
Div 1 would be what we have now. Div 2 is also what we have now....except it really screws over the Bulls. Div 3 is a cake walk for the Tigers. You have mostly blowouts in those playoff games instead of the competitive ones we have right now in the tiers. Every title game in tiers below Pro was close.
I'm just trying to see the appeal. Good teams get penalized for success, and bad teams get rewarded. Why should the Tigers walk to a Div 3 Bronze, while the Bulls get worked in Div 2? How does this help keep users? Seems it would just cause more apathy.
Remember, the picture of the divisions was just to give an idea of what things could look like. If the Bulls were over-matched or the Tigers under-matched then their records would reflect it and they would move up / down accordingly to a division that more suits their level.
You're right, maybe the Gold, Silver, and Bronze cups should only be for the 1st, 2nd & 3rd place finishers in Div.1. So, the incentive is to keep climbing, show how quickly you were able to move up divisions, and how long you've been able to maintain your standing in the upper divisions without getting knocked down.
We need to focus on making the experience as fun as possible at every division level so people want to renew their teams season to season and that's not happening enough currently.
Not even sure how you gauge how if your team is progressing with this system.
With the 8-team playoffs (I posted link to the picture) over the final three weeks not only do you determine the division winner but also 2nd to 8th place as well. So, every season your team would have a rank like: S49 - 3rd place, Div.7 (for instance)
Originally posted by BoDiddley
Div 1 would be what we have now. Div 2 is also what we have now....except it really screws over the Bulls. Div 3 is a cake walk for the Tigers. You have mostly blowouts in those playoff games instead of the competitive ones we have right now in the tiers. Every title game in tiers below Pro was close.
I'm just trying to see the appeal. Good teams get penalized for success, and bad teams get rewarded. Why should the Tigers walk to a Div 3 Bronze, while the Bulls get worked in Div 2? How does this help keep users? Seems it would just cause more apathy.
Remember, the picture of the divisions was just to give an idea of what things could look like. If the Bulls were over-matched or the Tigers under-matched then their records would reflect it and they would move up / down accordingly to a division that more suits their level.
You're right, maybe the Gold, Silver, and Bronze cups should only be for the 1st, 2nd & 3rd place finishers in Div.1. So, the incentive is to keep climbing, show how quickly you were able to move up divisions, and how long you've been able to maintain your standing in the upper divisions without getting knocked down.
We need to focus on making the experience as fun as possible at every division level so people want to renew their teams season to season and that's not happening enough currently.
Myrik_Justiciar
offline
offline
I'd be happy if J-Man was moved to another Vet Tier, giving us 4 there, and then take the last remaining 3 and make them each protected tiers that do not play outside of their level (maybe add in a cpu league to give them more ladder opponents if there is only one 1 human league in the tier to prevent constantly playing the same human controlled teams). This way you have 3 tiers to to learn before you get thrown in with the rest and it shouldn't make resetting so harsh or take so long to get back to Vet for those of us that like it there.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
