Roster Limits -- Is it time?

[Zeebu]

yeah i was unaware that rapid ran the zone

hot damn

[the_paul]

Who are Rapid's staff members? I'm on Rapid and I can't even answer this question

[Grasps]

Wanted to say "Thanks" for everyone who participated in this thread! Meant a lot to me to see the amount of involvement and input on both sides of the argument. Seriously, thanks if you left a vote or your feedback here!


As of a couple days ago I was made known that Rapid, it's staff and select players have single-handedly shut down the idea of limiting rosters and the changes planned afterwards (limiting or removing borrows, making dueling games 4v4 or 5v5 removing 3v3's) among numerous other tweaks planned to increase the value in TWD games. Rapid, it's staff and players know what's best for this zone, not you, not I, not anyone else. It saddens me a single squad is allowed so much political pull but that's the case here especially with the large amount of staffers on it lobbying to keep Rapid and its massive sized roster intact.

So as of today, your vote will no longer be needed (or counted) as I was told that no matter the votes it will not be passed because people on Rapid don't agree with the idea of making changes to TWD but I did want to thank you for taking the time if you did vote or speak up on this thread as it showed you care about this game. I've said this before but I love this game and its always a pleasure to be able to talk with others like I was able to here on ways we can improve it.

I apologize if I wasted your time and hope that maybe someday down the road we can comeback to the table on limiting rosters among the other needed changes to make TWD games mean something, we'll have to see. Appreciate it. Have a great week. Cheers.





-Your friend,
Ix

[Zeebu]

i really dont get this thread. paul hit it squarely on the head, its a population problem.

i'll log in 2 or 3 days in a row and play and then i'll log off for a week or two. with that kind of activity, it would be silly to take a limited twd roster spot. a whole lot of people fall under this semi active category. i personally dont overly care what squad im playing for (sry vio) i just want to find a game as easily as possible when i do log in. i dont want to put forth much effort to do it either. i want to show up and play a twd from time to time whenever that is.

[viop11]

mayb make your squidrin more appealink and a gr8 squidrin 2 b on and more ppl cud b joinir. ripitish only has a handful of actif playirs and efery1 on team luv each othir and wants 2 b teamm8s so why should ther b a rostir limit 2 fuk us?

no1 wants 2 play 4 sum girpige squidrins so lowiring rostir cip to 20-30 ppl won't do anything when ciptins like ursilf haf 0 athleticism and no1 wants 2 b joinir. no offince but fk ursilf

[the_paul]

Edit: Last night was a prime example of why some of us think having big squads are bad for activity. Rapid had over 10 people on whereas my squad had 2, Best's squad had 2, Ravage's squad had 1, Lulumelon 1, ect. and the end result? No games got played and activity died super early being one of the slowest night I've seen in recent memory.

Being online is not the same as actively looking for a game and wanting to play. But, I'll bite. So if you enact roster limits, what is this miraculous activity difference that occurs? Rapid goes from 10 people online to 5, your squad goes to 3, ravage to 2, lululemon to 2, and the other 2 from Rapid can go to your etc. squads. Great. What did you accomplish? I almost never see 3v3 dds or jds anymore, so in your redistribution scenario no squad ended up with enough to do a 4v4 or 5v5 (except by utilizing the !borrow system, which has been the answer all along), and an 8v8 bd is certainly out of the question. Again, I'm still waiting to hear how redistributing which squad tag the players have will somehow increase activity. In your scenario last night, there were ~16-20 people online. Switch all the squad tags around and put those 20 people on 4 squads of 5 people each, and you still have the same 20 players. Without even getting into the specific leagues people play, you're not going to accomplish anything with this strategy except pushing infrequent and casual people further away from any kind of TWD activity. The !borrow system solved the issue you're bringing up. The issue you're actually having is with the number of players online and looking for games at the same time. That's a population problem, not a TWD problem.

[Grasps]

As for me listing other games and sports with roster limits--I was simply giving an example of other games, sports, that use roster limits. I am well aware TWD is not the same as CSGO, Overwatch, ect. which are hyper competitive and hugely popular. It IS apples to oranges. Some people in this thread were acting like the idea of proposing limiting rosters was so outlandish and uncommon to video gaming that I felt it necessary to remind them that the idea is not and is in fact universally used for just about everything that's competitive. That's it.

Limiting rosters is progressive. It's been voiced here several times that "TWD is without purpose" and that's exactly why some of us believe changes like this are needed. The whole "it's been broken for years, no point in doing it now" is defeatist mindsets that we'd like to change. It's that mentality that got us here with the "we know its broken, no point to fix it". We can fix TWD, we can improve the quality of the games played and we can give more incentive for activity during non-leagues play. Essentially making TWD worthwhile again but it will take time.

Am just going to reiterate what I said previously in that little by little certain people in this game have been trying to rebuild TWD for the last couple years. Qan reinstated seasons with bi-yearly resets. Roster limits is the next natural hurtle. There's still more things that need to be tweaked. I don't think any of us that are for limits just want to cut rosters and be done. However, it's a process with many steps to get to the end-goal. There's going to be growing pains involved and some things will and won't work. If TWD is as pointless as some claim, then what's the hurt in trying to improve it? Nothing changed is permanent and EVERYTHING will need proper testing to ensure that whatever has been done is producing the results we wanted to achieve and if it doesn't we scrap it and move on. It's a collective of people behind this--no one is too big to not admit fault if something doesn't work and all changes will be transparent and done with the support of the community.

Wanted to quickly say here in closing that despite what you think of me, I really do appreciate everyone here leaving their feedback and mostly staying on topic. This game means a lot to me and obviously you too and I think it's pretty awesome that we are here in 2020 on these forums discussing ways to improve it. Thank you.


Edit: Last night was a prime example of why some of us think having big squads are bad for activity. Rapid had over 10 people on whereas my squad had 2, Best's squad had 2, Ravage's squad had 1, Lulumelon 1, ect. and the end result? No games got played and activity died super early being one of the slowest night I've seen in recent memory.

[viop11]

"Subspace - no roster limits
CSGO - 5 players + coach
Overwatch League - 12 players
League of Legends - 7 players
Rocket League - 3 players + 1 reserve + 1 optional manager
Fortnite - 3 players + 2 reserve players
Starcraft II - 2 to 10 players
Rainbow Six Siege - 5 to 12 players
World of Tanks - 5 players
DOTA II - 5 to 12 players
Smite - 30 players
NBA - 15 players
MLB - 40 players
NFL - 53 players
Guild Wars 2 - 50 players/10 players (raid)
F1 - 4 drivers"

i cinnit belief this pissint jus quote the rostir limits of every video game 2 efir exist. allow ursilf 2 vs a long hard look in the mirrir n punch ursilf in the vigini n then applegize 2 your fimily 4 disgricink them 4efir

[menomena]

Still haven't heard how this idea will increase activity in a way that !borrow hasn't. Just saying it's going to happen doesn't make it true.

Also TWD isn't the competitive league in the zone, so I'm not sure what you're going for here.

paul u cudnt hear something if it hit u with the broad side of a barn

[the_paul]

Subspace - no roster limits
CSGO - 5 players + coach
Overwatch League - 12 players
League of Legends - 7 players
Rocket League - 3 players + 1 reserve + 1 optional manager
Fortnite - 3 players + 2 reserve players
Starcraft II - 2 to 10 players
Rainbow Six Siege - 5 to 12 players
World of Tanks - 5 players
DOTA II - 5 to 12 players
Smite - 30 players
NBA - 15 players
MLB - 40 players
NFL - 53 players
Guild Wars 2 - 50 players/10 players (raid)
F1 - 4 drivers

Going to stop, you get the point. Just about EVERY single competitive game, sport, w/e has roster limits. It's not like what's being proposed here is outrageous. Limiting rosters is a positive thing for competition. More competition = More activity. I think 20 is more than generous, frankly though 12 would make a lot more sense (8 for base games + 4 reserve). If people can't play this game without riding on a stacked team, that's pretty sad. Not sure how anyone could call themselves competitive yet be unwilling to not being on super stacked teams.

Still haven't heard how this idea will increase activity in a way that !borrow hasn't. Just saying it's going to happen doesn't make it true.

Also TWD isn't the competitive league in the zone, so I'm not sure what you're going for here.

[Jessup]

Let's try to stay on topic and be constructive instead of taking every opportunity to be immature and harass players with constant instigating. If you have something to contribute to the thread, I'm sure everybody will be happy to hear it.

I already did contribute.. for 21 years. I explained earlier what needed to be done to save this game in a meaningful way here and now I'm explaining why the game is failing and so lame.. and YOU are a big reason. Due to your constant obnoxious dick trolling of 1/2 the zone you are a bad candidate to hold ANY power here. That is my opinion of you. Don't like it? Tough cookies. You earned that opinion by me by being such a douche.

This whole thread is a joke. We are talking about TWD roster limits when we have just allowed squads to borrow their own players. Go double speak your way into making this thread valid .. rofl.. ok ya right. This is the foolishness that is going on now. SQUADS ARE USELESS NOW BECAUSE OF THIS RULE. TWD IS USELESS NOW BECAUSE OF THIS RULE. THERE ARE BETTER OPTIONS FOR GOOD DAILY COMPETITIONS THAN THIS SHORT SIGHTED RIDICULOUSNESS.

Focus on individual ladders with stats or make twd valid again and make squads valid again.. lol.. TWDT is NOT the answer to improving this zone. It honestly is doing more harm than good I think. I'm happy to explain why too if need be.

[Grasps]

You're comparing a casual practice environment to multiple hyper competitive leagues that people participate in as a career. It's apples and oranges. For the idea of a roster cap to have any of the desired effects, borrows would need to be removed as it's completely pointless to cap teams when you can just borrow the same people every game. Squads used to matter back when twd fed into twl but now that anybody can just sign up and enter there's simply no competitive aspect to it. Implementing a roster cap wouldn't accomplish anything besides pissing people off.

Little by little certain people in this game have been trying to rebuild TWD. Qan reinstated seasons with bi-yearly resets. Roster limits is the next hurtle. There's still more things that need to be tweaked obviously. I don't think any of us that are for limits just want to cut rosters and be done. Borrows amounts should be decreased back down--something like 1-2 like we had when it was implemented. Dueling games should also go back up to 4v4/5v5 for dueling and 7v7/8v8 for basing. Main thing is there's still more work to be done, more adjustments to be made with an end goal of having TWD become not only more active but more competitive.

And pissing people off? Try being on a squad that isn't Rapid, Dice or Spastic. It's an uphill battle to secure any decent players and most small squads just end up dissolving at the end of it. Seldom do any small squads last because of the fact the player pool is so concentrated to a select few. As it stands right now, the ladders are looking pretty sad with really only 10 squads (1 of which is a 1 man squad--Lolzers). That pisses me off to be honest. If people could just control themselves and understand stacking is negative we wouldn't even be here but people can't. They just want to get on the same squads with the same groups of dudes like theyve been doing for 20 years with little to no disregard to the health of the zone. If nothing is done, all the little squads will dry up and then there will be no competition left.

[Jessup]

People have been saying SS is in its last days for probably 15 years now and have yet to be correct. But in fairness, all online games are necessarily "doomed" (as are we all). I think we've got plenty of life left in us, though.

Sure .. limp along with no growth and only downward trends many more years. This has been the case for 15 years... 15 years ago the game was one year after its peak and still doing well. The contrast from then to now is stark. I'm really turned off by whats been happening here personally. If you think it is all fine and dandy that is your opinion but I totally disagree. I have almost nothing good to say about it anymore.

[beam]

LOOOOOL this guy talking about not wanting to piss people off.. comedy gold from one of the zones worst trolls who constantly harasses any1 not in his dick click squad. Literally had to perm ignore you cause u pm squads and teamates and myself rudely EVERY game every day.. thx for the laugh. You are a clear example of how LOW this game has become.

Let's try to stay on topic and be constructive instead of taking every opportunity to be immature and harass players with constant instigating. If you have something to contribute to the thread, I'm sure everybody will be happy to hear it.

[Jessup]

You're comparing a casual practice environment to multiple hyper competitive leagues that people participate in as a career. It's apples and oranges. For the idea of a roster cap to have any of the desired effects, borrows would need to be removed as it's completely pointless to cap teams when you can just borrow the same people every game. Squads used to matter back when twd fed into twl but now that anybody can just sign up and enter there's simply no competitive aspect to it. Implementing a roster cap wouldn't accomplish anything besides pissing people off.

LOOOOOL this guy talking about not wanting to piss people off.. comedy gold from one of the zones worst trolls who constantly harasses any1 not in his dick click squad. Literally had to perm ignore you cause u pm squads and teamates and myself rudely EVERY game every day.. thx for the laugh. You are a clear example of how LOW this game has become.