If you're on a squad that's in TWL and it dissolves and now you can't play TWL, you either subscribe to: 1) tough luck, rules are rules no TWL for those players or 2)you can look at TWL and say, rules are rules, but we're not a corporation and we can make changes and adapt to situations, and it makes sense to let these people play in TWL. I'm not here to make a poll or try and get the majority of the people to agree with #2, I'd rather just say that #2 makes far more sense for this game and its situation.
Those players couldn't foresee their squad dissolving, maybe they could foresee their squad not doing well in TWL but plenty of squads have taken a thrashing and stuck through TWL.
Those players are active and were planning on playing in TWL in some capacity, by essentially removing them from TWL you're removing their interest in TWL, or at least a portion of their interest. Do we really need to discourage people from playing?
I could go on but I hope our TWL ops subscribe to the philosophy that changing rules where it very much makes sense to do so, even on the fly, is perfectly fine...I know when PH ran TWL he did what was logical and that's far more powerful than creating 100 pages of rules.
Those players couldn't foresee their squad dissolving, maybe they could foresee their squad not doing well in TWL but plenty of squads have taken a thrashing and stuck through TWL.
Those players are active and were planning on playing in TWL in some capacity, by essentially removing them from TWL you're removing their interest in TWL, or at least a portion of their interest. Do we really need to discourage people from playing?
I could go on but I hope our TWL ops subscribe to the philosophy that changing rules where it very much makes sense to do so, even on the fly, is perfectly fine...I know when PH ran TWL he did what was logical and that's far more powerful than creating 100 pages of rules.
Comment