Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

TWL Season 13....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Burnt
    replied
    Originally posted by Reaver View Post
    Actually no, we were 10-0, we lost to stray in semi's.



    Also, my point remains that the past couple seasons we've had numerous people drop out or not win a single game, does that sound like a competitive league to you? The only counterargument I've seen is merely guesswork, neither you or I know entirely whether new players would just give up or try harder, I saw at least one person say above they were in this situation and they tried harder.
    Nope, you lost a game: http://web.archive.org/web/200801030...nSubLeagueID=1

    If the format of the regular season is that every squad plays every other squad once, you could have 12, 8, 6, 4 or even 2 squads...still gonna have one squad with 0 or 1 win...Who cares if some squads drop out? Some other squad replaces them and gets some TWL experience, I don't see a problem with that.

    You need the same amount of squads in each league, that tournament in TWLJ and TWLB was pretty stupid with some squads having to wait a month to play their next game. 10 squads for all leagues sounds good to me, any more than that and the season becomes too long.

    If you're going to reset TWD before selecting TWL squads, it should be done soon.

    Oh and update the maps please I will make them myself if someone sends me the rosters that should be there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Reaver
    replied
    Originally posted by ignite ignite View Post
    \

    get your facts straight, style wasn't 10-0, they lost to stray in regular season.
    Actually no, we were 10-0, we lost to stray in semi's.



    Also, my point remains that the past couple seasons we've had numerous people drop out or not win a single game, does that sound like a competitive league to you? The only counterargument I've seen is merely guesswork, neither you or I know entirely whether new players would just give up or try harder, I saw at least one person say above they were in this situation and they tried harder.

    Leave a comment:


  • ignite ignite
    replied
    Originally posted by paradise! View Post
    Why is it one op's decision whether delectable can return or not? Shouldn't the people vote on whether they want an ex-cheater to return to playing?

    Kinda stupid, the twl op can be his friend for all we know, too much power in the position of head twl op, imo.
    I completely agree with this. The decision to let delectable in should be a staff wide decision, not the decision of one man.

    Leave a comment:


  • pascone
    replied
    Originally posted by Stayon View Post
    ronaldo > donovan or whoever
    portual

    Leave a comment:


  • Stayon
    replied
    ronaldo > donovan or whoever

    Leave a comment:


  • pascone
    replied
    Originally posted by Stayon View Post
    read it again

    "might be wrong in one or two, and I also might have forgot one or two."
    stayon come on you know how good stray was. no need to act stupid. just cause u mad at ronaldo

    there's no reason to have 10 squads. 8 is still probably too many anyway.

    and as for sake, our roster was top 3. unfortunately, roster doesn't equate in results

    Leave a comment:


  • ignite ignite
    replied
    We already have roster limits anyway. It's called you can only tick a certain amount of people to play. Leave it at that. It's fine. No limits to prevent us squads from training in TWD we work hard to recruit the players we do and we deserve them from the hard work we put in. Stop implementing MORE RULES. More rules will not make TWL a more enjoyable experience.

    Leave a comment:


  • paradise!
    replied
    Why is it one op's decision whether delectable can return or not? Shouldn't the people vote on whether they want an ex-cheater to return to playing?

    Kinda stupid, the twl op can be his friend for all we know, too much power in the position of head twl op, imo.

    Leave a comment:


  • death row
    replied
    I think it's good to have more squads in TWL. Theres always a likely chance that a struggling squad could go haywire and dissolve mid-season, reduced teams or whatever the case may be. Obviously thats where the replacement squads come in and infuse a bit more energy and intangibles. Which in my opinion, I don't see much of a problem with.

    Leave a comment:


  • Burnt
    replied
    Originally posted by veetee View Post
    a chance for them to support mid to low-tier squads and hence push them upwards? (you know, avoiding 0-x record)
    It's inevitable that one squad will be the worst and will end up with 0 or 1 wins because if you're the worst, it's hard to beat even the 2nd worst team unless you get lucky. At least the top 10 warbirds would still have a spot on quake's roster and if you weren't one of the top 10 warbirds on quake I don't think you're going to much help to even the lower tier squads anyway. Really I think the roster limit of 35 is fine and lowering with it will just piss people off and have no positive effect on the competition level.

    Leave a comment:


  • veetee
    replied
    Originally posted by Burnt View Post
    What's the point of Quake axing there inactive/not good enough for twl players and then having those players be on no roster at all?
    a chance for them to support mid to low-tier squads and hence push them upwards? (you know, avoiding 0-x record)

    Leave a comment:


  • Burnt
    replied
    Originally posted by veetee View Post
    What was the point of quake rostering 35 people for twl if only about 15 people were in rotation for the LD/LJ.
    What's the point of Quake axing there inactive/not good enough for twl players and then having those players be on no roster at all?

    Leave a comment:


  • veetee
    replied
    Originally posted by Reaver View Post
    This is somewhat offtopic but if you're concerned about squad stacking then one solution would be to put a cap on the # of players allowed per roster based on how many leagues they're competing in. For example, a one league TWLD squad could have a roster limit of 10 or 15 (obviously it should be a bit more for a one league basing squad than a one league dueling squad). Also, reward squads that stick around for long periods of time (but still qualify for TWL) to have a slightly larger TWL roster.
    This is a key idea imo. Let me try to exemplfy.

    Set the initial capacity at 10 players (core). Now

    *attendance in TWLD: +5 to capacity
    *attendance in TWLJ: +5 to capacity
    *attendance in TWLB: +8 to capacity

    A squad participating in TWLJ only gets 15 roster cap. A squad participating in TWLD and TWLB gets 23 roster cap. Squad participating in all the leagues gets 28 roster cap and so on.

    This is, imo, key idea to split the stacked and big squads into smaller ones and hence promote bigger twl attendance. What was the point of quake rostering 35 people for twl if only about 15 people were in rotation for the LD/LJ.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jones
    replied
    ok this is going off-topic, i merely pointed out my views on more squads being allowed to enter twl and proposed something for the low-tier squads if we go by inviting 8 squads to twl.

    while i sounded egoistical in my reply to you mega noob i still respected Stray and thought they were in fact a very good squad. you ended up winning twld because everyone predicted it would be stray, style, thunder as the top dogs. it was nothing new. you losing in regular was an upset. I can write an essay about the not caring part but i doubt it would be of much use. the better squad always wins.

    oh and stayon's logic is pretty flawed. Siege was undefeated for 3 seasons and still won. there are just more squads at the same skill level now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stayon
    replied
    read it again

    "might be wrong in one or two, and I also might have forgot one or two."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X