Announcement

**Tsunami** · 08-09-2014, 10:24 PM

First and foremost, thanks for your input. I can address your points individually to give you an idea of where we are:

Home arena:

As of right now this is still going to be a part of the upcoming TWL Season; there have been no map submissions. Squads who are interested in having a home map are encouraged to submit their maps to twlstaff@yahoo.com ASAP. The requirements for these maps are stickied in a thread started by Turban in these forums. Further, there are no designated staff members who would help construct a map for individual squads. From what I can gather, map submissions are done unilaterally by those players who wish to see a map implemented in the zone (I could be wrong).

Roster Size:

We have had a recent vote and have decided to reduce the roster limits to 15 / 20 / 25. Squads are encouraged to plan accordingly. We feel this fosters more competition and starts to address the stacking issue. There are plenty of players (at least from my brief perusal of the TWD site) to adequately and competitively fill rosters.

TWL Soft Lock:

It is funny you bring this up because a majority of the TWL ops were in favor of getting rid of the soft lock altogether. However, with the current setup, the site NEEDS a date for a soft lock in order for everything to run properly. In other words, a soft lock date cannot be excluded due to a technical issue. As such we did the best we could and decided to move it back a week.

Minimum Games Played:

Along with the new roster limits, our hope is that players will reassess their place within squads. Absent making drastic changes, we felt this would be a good initial attempt at trying to disperse the competition in an equitable manner. The main problem we face when addressing the stacking/hoarding issue is that players have formed relationships throughout their time here on Trench Wars and it is only natural for players to want to stick together. As always we are open to suggestions on how we can address the stacking issue to increase TWL competition.

I am happy to see constructive ideas being thrown around by the player base and encourage all who read to follow suit.

**Wax** · 08-09-2014, 10:48 PM

So the TWL roster limit will be 15 / 20 / 25. Good to know. What about TWD? With TWL being so close perhaps now would be a good time to implement a 30 person roster limit or something of the sort. This will allow for activity/decision making on personnel but also start to force changes to begin in even the slightest at least.

As for the TWL Soft Lock website issue, couldn't you make the date week one then? Or even the week of pre season? I am certain there are ways around this functionality issue.

Just to clarify, there will be guidelines such as TWL games played/gametime in order to qualify for a medal?

**Tsunami** · 08-09-2014, 11:25 PM

With respect to TWD, the TWDOps have authority over roster limits. Having brought it up, I will make sure I stay in contact with TWDOps to try and implement a limit with the above mentioned considerations in mind. As for the Soft Lock issue, I have been told that it is possible to set the Soft Lock and Hard Lock date to an arbitrary point in time (say 5 years from now) thus effectively allowing us to get rid of the Soft Lock if we so choose. If this is true, I will be sure to bring the issue of getting rid of the Soft Lock altogether with the other TWL-Ops. Be on the lookout for specific guidelines, including medal qualifications, as we approach September.

**Rule** · 08-09-2014, 11:43 PM

Home Arena

Has there actually been any submissions? I highly doubt that the majority of squads have someone willing to/or that is capable of constructing one. Is there anyone in staff generous enough to possibly take requests (such as color scheme, simple image ideas, etc) and have this be their position? TWL "Map Master" or something of the sort.

I like the idea as well as it gives squad exposure and helps them have a brand. Branding is attractive to the TW playerbase, and could lead to squads that have more long-term life.
Agreed it’s unlikely that each or even most squads would have anyone who is able to do it. One idea if the resources and staff were available would be to create a generic map for each squad. An example would be taking Fierce's logo (with consent) and applying it to the map. Simple as that. If caps and squad members want something extra - specific color they could contribute their ideas to mapmaker. If they don’t create a map that simply has some limited unique attributes to it. A lot of squad's have a basic layout and set up on twd site already. Cobra for example has its distinct purple logo.

Roster size limits:

17/22/27- works

15/20/25 - works

The key issue is that squad's have enough active's to contribute throughout the TWL season and throughout TWD (separate roster limit works). Its easy to login and see no games going on for hours now across the board - DD, JD, BD - this really needs to be worked on, if the leagues are to have a long term future.

The TWL Soft Lock:

This idea more than likely won't be popular, but I think it should at least be considered. And heavily so. Eliminate the TWL Soft Lock all together. By this I mean make it so that once a player is on a TWL squad, they are stuck there. Force the populations hands. Make it so communication on who is going to be a starter come league time is discussed among teams NOW. I believe this could have many positive ripple effects, such as more squads forming and greater/more even competition because players know beforehand if they are going to be riding the pine all season. You can keep the hard lock in the event inactives decide to pop in once the season is already under way, bolstering the overall activity of the zone.

Agreed. Players should know prior to TWL who they are going to squad with and stick with those choices.

It is funny you bring this up because a majority of the TWL ops were in favor of getting rid of the soft lock altogether. However, with the current setup, the site NEEDS a date for a soft lock in order for everything to run properly. In other words, a soft lock date cannot be excluded due to a technical issue. As such we did the best we could and decided to move it back a week.

Looks like its settled for this season

Minimum Games Played:

I think this point needs to be hammered home. It was mentioned briefly before, but I think it should certainly be made more well known. I definitely like the idea. That someone must play in a certain amount of games for your team in order to qualify for medals should your team win a league. This eliminates the problem of people benching their way to a title and could also tie in to what I have touched on before - more squads forming. Because if you gain nothing from being on a squad, whether it be a medal next to your name or play time, players are more likely to go somewhere else or start something else.

Many of these things can fall under the butterfly effect. One thing ripples into another. I think if any of these things are done properly the zone, league and player base could certainly benefit

Agreed here too. TWL needs more leaders and less followers. The same squads are jam packed with the same groups year after year. No growth. After TWL we see the establishment of multiple squads that come and go quickly - the brutal's, dragonguard, novice etc but they all come go fast. Not enough strong leadership in the game.

Regarding Medaling I think everyone that contributes to the squad significantly deserves one. It doesn't have to be strictly starters. The thing is if you have smaller squads to begin with the caps need to rely more on players and squads either - 1. Become more active and benefit as a tight bonded group 2. Fold because not enough people step up. Up for debate but I think caps should have right to decide who’s contributed. What makes a squad goes far beyond the 5-8 players who play on Sunday for 3 months a year.

And as long as we have retards trolling and acting like having a TWL medal makes them better then any other TWL player we have a problem. We need more genuine competition; game based/play based rivarly less sitting in spec mouthing off and pming opponents and spectators.

Along with the new roster limits, our hope is that players will reassess their place within squads. Absent making drastic changes, we felt this would be a good initial attempt at trying to disperse the competition in an equitable manner. The main problem we face when addressing the stacking/hoarding issue is that players have formed relationships throughout their time here on Trench Wars and it is only natural for players to want to stick together. As always we are open to suggestions on how we can address the stacking issue to increase TWL competition.

I am happy to see constructive ideas being thrown around by the player base and encourage all who read to follow suit.

Step 1. Start by looking at your squad - which is basically a remake of Pandora. Thunder/Pandora is the biggest example of a stacking/hoarding squad out atm and has been for seasons.
Fierce's ability to go undefeated 60-0 in dd shows that is another one in relation to LD. Rather than blame these squad's though we need to find a better way to make stronger squads, where different groups of players play together, so that come twl qualification time - squad's dont make it simply because there are only x amount in the league - with the same 2-3 strong ones. This imbalance is more noticeable now than ever as the TWD player base is miniscule example: - 300 have a game played, 116 have more than ten played - in last month since reset.

Squads needs activity if squad A is a dominating force but has 5-10 benchers who could be starters on another squad it doesn't help the zone. As already mentioned players deserve right to play where they want, so there is no quick solution to fix this. What I see now though is a player base which is getting smaller and smaller, while remaining just as cliquey. This is a long term project, one that won't be established in time for the upcoming TWL and unless significant work is put towards it won’t change period.

Personally I would like to see players sticking with squads longer in TWD and in TWL. The rapid player movement that exists, the continuous folding and coming and going of squads helps with the already natural decline of the game.

I am not fan of aliasing as is it makes players faceless. I don't expect aliasing to change though. If I was running an active squad in TWL and staff made a no aliasing policy I would be a strong advocate of it. Regarding TWD player movement if a player could only play on a max of 3-5 squads per year, and one TWL squad per season that would not be severely limiting anyone in my opinion. And in turn if a cap could only run 1-2 TWD squads in a given year we might have longer lasting squads. Currently the same groups of players start and dissolve squads on a consistent basis.

If we had even two or three year long TWD squads like Play and Novice, that never dissolve, that existed simply as a place for new players or squadless players to play in the leagues that it would be a start. These might have to be run by staff, would play each frequently and would be separate of TWL - they don't work at the moment as most of the people who launch them fold them prior to TWL and rejoin squads. This is your entry point for players coming up. Throw in some vets there, and have the squads play each other lots on a balanced scale instead of being slaughtered by more established squads full of vets etc and you have a place for newbies to grow. There is definitely a steep learning curve that exists for newer players (it takes years for most players to develop) in the game, and without the opportunity to play TWD's competitively players do not develop. A 27 player roster lock might work for them, or it could be expanded to 35-40 depending on the need. They should be marked on the TWD website as training squads, and tutorials should be available on trenchwars.org website/twdivisions directing new players towards them.

- Rule

**Jerome Scuggs** · 08-10-2014, 04:22 AM

wwhere the fukl do you even get the map editor besides like, a harddrive in a box in an attic somewhere

LF · 08-10-2014, 07:44 AM

Wanted to toss in my 2 cents about medals....

I will use my squad from last year for an example (Fierce). Given the amount of wb's stacked on this squad I think its pretty obvious that I would not ever get to play an LD game again unless it was a blowout and maybe for 1-2 kills if I was lucky. However I did show up to every single game in my respective division. I think making the medal qualifications based on OVERALL games played based on how many leagues the squad is in makes more sense than games played in each individual league. Example: 3 games for 1 league squad, 5 games for 2 league, 6 games for 3 league or something like that. Meeting the minimum OVERALL game requirement would make each player eligible for any medals that squad earns that particular season. This way you dont have to be a 3 league superstar (1 of only maybe 3 people left in the zone) to earn your medals.

From my perspective the overall goal here is to limit the stacking that is happening by splitting up the talent. I personally have done exactly that the last 2 seasons by playing lb for Fierce and Sweet when I could have just as easily helped stack one of the 100 versions of dicE and split time with other people and cruised blindfolded and backwards to 2 more lb titles. I intended to do the same this season with just slightly more help from my baser friends from dice only to find out that we wouldn't be eligible for anything OTHER than lb titles under the new rules, and I think its safe to assume that a squad like fierce has no shot in LB against the stacked lines of Enemy and Pandora. This new rule didn't help the cause by splitting up the talent, it caused everyone in the basing division to leave the squad since we didn't have anything worth playing for and all head back "home" to where a ring will come easier. Don't get me wrong, I think medal requirements are a good thing. I just think it needs to be tweeked to stroke the ego of our playerbase while still accomplishing the overall goal of spreading the talent. If this happens and enemy/pandora cut themselves in half, I will go back to Fierce and we can have easily 8 LB squads again. Granted it will likely still come down to the same 2 teams but at least the rest of us can battle with each other for bragging rights, increase the activity of the zone and still have something to play for (medals). I personally would love to see how some of the players we have left perform without being surrounded by people leaps and bounds better than they are (ogron, zidane, beam, oder, war, whoever else that will likely be benched for the year and could otherwise form a new squad and play every game)

**but...why...per...** · 08-10-2014, 08:43 AM

There is talk of minimum TWL games played for a TWL medal, how about a minimum TWD games played in order to be able to be on a TWL roster?
Each season people squad hop or enter TWL squads late and expect to be played, whilst contributing very little to actually getting the squad through qualifications.

If say the minimum TWD games played to be on a TWL roster were 8 for DD/JD and 5 BD, I think this would go a long way to:
Increasing TWD activity (during the regular season too)
Be fairer to those who actually got their squads through qualifications
Reduce squad hopping
Reduce squad benching
Increase competitiveness (squads don't just play their best lines all the time)
Favours those keeping TW/TWD active

It may go some way to reducing squad stacking too, but I guess it could be argued either way.

Drawbacks:
Each player would have to be manually checked before they can be moved onto TWL roster, but using TWD website this probably would not take too long.
Grey areas would need working out: i.e. would a player with only 8 dds played be able to represent the squad in TWLJ/TWLB? (The rule could be altered slightly to minimum 10 TWD games played including a game in each division the squad qualifie(s/d) for - or this could tie in with medal qualification too)

**Geio** · 08-10-2014, 10:50 AM

I like this a lot. Lets all be honest though, this stage in the game you have your set friends and people you enjoy playing hanging out with. Like drake most the older players have "No New Friends" so it is a little hard to get thunder/fierce players to really split up.

**Turban** · 08-10-2014, 11:07 AM

i will try to find out whether it could be possible for captain(s) to outsource the map making project to another player (e.g. a member of staff) if they are not capable of making a map by themselves. currently the most popular map making program is called DCME, it is quite easy to use.

**Turban** · 08-10-2014, 11:47 AM

.. as in if we have anyone available that has the time and skill to help out. i would do it, but i won't have much free time starting this Monday and would rather spend it finishing bigger projects.

**Tsunami** · 08-10-2014, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by LF View Post

Wanted to toss in my 2 cents about medals....

I will use my squad from last year for an example (Fierce). Given the amount of wb's stacked on this squad I think its pretty obvious that I would not ever get to play an LD game again unless it was a blowout and maybe for 1-2 kills if I was lucky. However I did show up to every single game in my respective division. I think making the medal qualifications based on OVERALL games played based on how many leagues the squad is in makes more sense than games played in each individual league. Example: 3 games for 1 league squad, 5 games for 2 league, 6 games for 3 league or something like that. Meeting the minimum OVERALL game requirement would make each player eligible for any medals that squad earns that particular season. This way you dont have to be a 3 league superstar (1 of only maybe 3 people left in the zone) to earn your medals.

From my perspective the overall goal here is to limit the stacking that is happening by splitting up the talent. I personally have done exactly that the last 2 seasons by playing lb for Fierce and Sweet when I could have just as easily helped stack one of the 100 versions of dicE and split time with other people and cruised blindfolded and backwards to 2 more lb titles. I intended to do the same this season with just slightly more help from my baser friends from dice only to find out that we wouldn't be eligible for anything OTHER than lb titles under the new rules, and I think its safe to assume that a squad like fierce has no shot in LB against the stacked lines of Enemy and Pandora. This new rule didn't help the cause by splitting up the talent, it caused everyone in the basing division to leave the squad since we didn't have anything worth playing for and all head back "home" to where a ring will come easier. Don't get me wrong, I think medal requirements are a good thing. I just think it needs to be tweeked to stroke the ego of our playerbase while still accomplishing the overall goal of spreading the talent. If this happens and enemy/pandora cut themselves in half, I will go back to Fierce and we can have easily 8 LB squads again. Granted it will likely still come down to the same 2 teams but at least the rest of us can battle with each other for bragging rights, increase the activity of the zone and still have something to play for (medals). I personally would love to see how some of the players we have left perform without being surrounded by people leaps and bounds better than they are (ogron, zidane, beam, oder, war, whoever else that will likely be benched for the year and could otherwise form a new squad and play every game)

We haven't formalized medal requirements yet, but you bring up some good points; we'll be sure to take them into consideration.

**but...why...per...** · 08-10-2014, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by LF View Post

Wanted to toss in my 2 cents about medals....

I will use my squad from last year for an example (Fierce). Given the amount of wb's stacked on this squad I think its pretty obvious that I would not ever get to play an LD game again unless it was a blowout and maybe for 1-2 kills if I was lucky. However I did show up to every single game in my respective division. I think making the medal qualifications based on OVERALL games played based on how many leagues the squad is in makes more sense than games played in each individual league. Example: 3 games for 1 league squad, 5 games for 2 league, 6 games for 3 league or something like that. Meeting the minimum OVERALL game requirement would make each player eligible for any medals that squad earns that particular season. This way you dont have to be a 3 league superstar (1 of only maybe 3 people left in the zone) to earn your medals.

From my perspective the overall goal here is to limit the stacking that is happening by splitting up the talent. I personally have done exactly that the last 2 seasons by playing lb for Fierce and Sweet when I could have just as easily helped stack one of the 100 versions of dicE and split time with other people and cruised blindfolded and backwards to 2 more lb titles. I intended to do the same this season with just slightly more help from my baser friends from dice only to find out that we wouldn't be eligible for anything OTHER than lb titles under the new rules, and I think its safe to assume that a squad like fierce has no shot in LB against the stacked lines of Enemy and Pandora. This new rule didn't help the cause by splitting up the talent, it caused everyone in the basing division to leave the squad since we didn't have anything worth playing for and all head back "home" to where a ring will come easier. Don't get me wrong, I think medal requirements are a good thing. I just think it needs to be tweeked to stroke the ego of our playerbase while still accomplishing the overall goal of spreading the talent. If this happens and enemy/pandora cut themselves in half, I will go back to Fierce and we can have easily 8 LB squads again. Granted it will likely still come down to the same 2 teams but at least the rest of us can battle with each other for bragging rights, increase the activity of the zone and still have something to play for (medals). I personally would love to see how some of the players we have left perform without being surrounded by people leaps and bounds better than they are (ogron, zidane, beam, oder, war, whoever else that will likely be benched for the year and could otherwise form a new squad and play every game)

So you have basically abandoned your squad because you can no longer bench your way to another LD title?
You have then gone against your intentions of not further stacking squads by stacking another basing squad?
It doesn't really seem like you have ever really had the intention of breaking up talent.

**Turban** · 08-11-2014, 08:21 AM

@ LF: your proposal is actually almost identical to what i was thinking of doing this season with the requirements should your squad win a title. we want to reward squad commitment, it is good to show up every weekend and participate in at least one of the leagues, but at the same time we do not want to see 17 talented warbirds or javelins on one squad. spread out the talent.

thus, with this change we are discouraging squad stacking (to some degree, especially when dealing with one league squads) and forcing squads to add players if they want to give them a medal. we don't want to see people benching for a full season then brag about having TWL medals, that shit is utterly ridiculous and cheapens the value of the medals.

if you are not getting any play time on the squad, which basically nullifies your chance of getting a medal should your team win, you can and should join another squad where you actually get to play games. we might lift the soft lock altogether and move the hard lock to week 5, think that might be the better option per se.

anyhow, let us do some basic number crunching.

one league squads that make it to the finals are going to be playing at least a minimum of 19 games (14 in the regular season and another 4 if they win all their matches in the playoffs) and thus the bare minimum for a one league squad player to actually receive medals should be three (3) full games played on the squad, in my opinion, or at the very least substitute in for six different games and play for long enough to "make an impact" (subsituting players in at 49-32 mark then winning the game would not count, substituted players would need to score at least one kill and play a certain amount of time to be considered a true substitute). naturally one could mix and match these numbers, e.g. a player could play two full matches and substitute in for another four and be eligible. as for pure basing squads, players would be required to play X minutes to be eligible for a medal should their team win; 31 minutes seems like a good number for a one league team.

then moving on to the two league squads. players would need to play a bare minimum of 5 full games to be eligible for a title or at least 46 minutes of play time in TWLB. once again, you can mix and match these numbers, we will have to decide the final numbers eventually and stick to those.

last, but not least, three league squads. there's more games available to play and thus the number will increace once again by a small amount. how about the players needing a minimum of 6 full games or 61 minutes of playing time in TWLB to be eligible? idk, looks like a good number, but that might be due to my rather sleepy state.

once again, let me remind you that these numbers are not final. they are simple proposals and nothing more.

edit: sleepy post, and editing in an even more tired state. woop woop.

**Turban** · 08-11-2014, 12:09 PM

i will make that post clearer when i get home. not sleeping at all then working for 12hr => dead.

Announcement

TWL Brainstorming

TWL Brainstorming

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Channels