Possible TWL(B) Structure Next Season

[Escalate]

cool, F.O.R, trust me it wont be hard. gl

[Fit of Rage]

Originally whined by Escalate
yeah tyson, this is a joke, we dont give 2 shits about twlb, only newb squads like WA waste their time focusing on this skilless bullshit. all it looks like to me is a bunch of ships crammed in a 2x2 box for half an hour with lots of bullets flying and reps going off...the fact that your squad exists specifically for twlb...now thats a joke...the fact that you make fun of our squad name when your fucking name is Tyson Bitbeast...now thats a joke.

I just think that you couldn't hack it if push came to shove.

[Escalate]

youre absolutely correct. lets not start another one of these back and forth things. to everyone who bases, i apologize for the retarded comment i made that FOR has just quoted...tysonUNDERSCOREbitbeast just brings out the worst in me when he starts talking shit randomly. but lets not ruin the thread. leagues needs the kind of changes that we are discussing in here.

[Cig Smoke]

i agree w/ having a roster limit but i say 30-35 bc some squads just need them extra players

and i disagree w/ the after week 4 thing..make it like week 6..2 weeks b4 playoffz, as u seen 2 seasons ago A-S racked up players rite b4 playoffs and it did them no help in playoffs..the teamwork of Diso/pallies will always override the overall skill of 1 or 2 ppl stepping into a team.

i also think that it shouldnt matter if its a NONTWL guy or a TWL guy joining ur squad the limit should be the same..all ppl wiould havta do it change names to say they werent on TWL..but i agree make it like 6 day waiting or something so they cant play in 2 squads the same weekend maybe 5 days

i have no opinion in conferences or not u guy sdo that :x

[Facetious]

Originally posted by Sufficient
Right now the system is similar bc we play the ppl in our conference and 3 teams from the other conference. I don't see a problem in this scheduling system. The pt of NOT having 2 conferences is to avoid this unevenness btwn the conferences by combining the teams into 1 large conference. It is fairly easy then to see that the top 8 teams play postseason games.


Think about the way your scheduling works. It doesn't solve any of the problems about conferences at all, it's merely the same as just choosing the top eight teams overall from the combined pool of conferences this year. Imagine if teams 2, 6, and 8 (say they were pretty decent at basing) all dissolved and got replaced by shitty basing squads. ALL of the odd teams would get an easier ride, making it unfair for the even teams, who would all get a tougher schedule.

The purpose of the roster limit is to force ppl to different squads. If we could, I would force it down to 25 or even 20. But the players are just not active enough. Roster limits force talent to be more evenly distributed. Once you reach 30 members, new talent must look elsewhere to teams (usually newer) with more roster space.

It's hard enough to keep teams stable as it is. Can you imagine if players were constantly having to get kicked off of squads? It would make everything even more unstable, because people's friends would be getting kicked more often, even if they were popular members of the squad that just happened to be inactive for some reason. I think squads regulate their size enough as it is. I could obviously see 50-person squads being a problem, but that doesn't really seem to be happening.



Face, are you an aliased player on Pallies?

I used to be Blast, and before that I was Face. If by "aliased" you mean "a double squadder", definitely not. I don't really have consistent access to internet right now, though, unfortunately, so I don't have an opportunity to play much.

I've never seen you base.

http://www.twleagues.org/?module=twl...nMatchID=14004

...see, I'm awesome.


I'd like active basers to comment on this (instead of duelers and javvers) ...

I think even my girlfriend is active enough at Subspace to tell you that your idea is flawed. The matches should be random.

[Sufficient]

Think about the way your scheduling works. It doesn't solve any of the problems about conferences at all, it's merely the same as just choosing the top eight teams overall from the combined pool of conferences this year. Imagine if teams 2, 6, and 8 (say they were pretty decent at basing) all dissolved and got replaced by shitty basing squads. ALL of the odd teams would get an easier ride, making it unfair for the even teams, who would all get a tougher schedule.

It does solve the unevenness problem we have in our current 2 conference structure. The problem with dissolving teams cannot be avoided in either structure.

It's hard enough to keep teams stable as it is. Can you imagine if players were constantly having to get kicked off of squads? It would make everything even more unstable, because people's friends would be getting kicked more often, even if they were popular members of the squad that just happened to be inactive for some reason. I think squads regulate their size enough as it is. I could obviously see 50-person squads being a problem, but that doesn't really seem to be happening.

I don't see the proposed 30 roster limit to be a problem. In most cases, if you are inactive in a squad ... you should not be playing TWL ... you're just taking up space for prospective ACTIVE players. 8 x 3 = 24. You basically have 3 different lineups PLUS 6 extra players. Sry, but that is more than fair in my humble opinion. The responsibility of showing 8 to a game is SOLELY on the shoulders of the squad itself.

I used to be Blast, and before that I was Face. If by "aliased" you mean "a double squadder", definitely not. I don't really have consistent access to internet right now, though, unfortunately, so I don't have an opportunity to play much.

I did not intend "aliased" to "doublesquadding" ... I just wanted to know if you had a different name on Pallies.

I think even my girlfriend is active enough at Subspace to tell you that your idea is flawed. The matches should be random.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. What I meant was that so many nonbasers (or at least nonactive/nonserious/ nonconstructive) are commenting on these threads that these ideas are not being thoroughly discussed. Your pt of view is probably different from a more active player (ex. PJ or Hellz or Sleepy).

[Sufficient]

Originally posted by Escalate
why not reduce the number of teams so that true TWLB squads dont have to suffer through several weeks of non-competetive play? As of right now, i dont even think there are 16 squads total that taking basing seriously....we dont, and we still ended up in TWLB, that shows that there is a problem imo. make it 12, this would also help spice up twbd a bit because there would be a few squads actually playing it, and being in TWLB would actually mean something...because as of now anyone who's even the slightest bit active will wind up in it.

Many ppl believe that there are in fact enough basers to fill up the full 16 squad structure. Allowing for 16 squads will:

1) Streamline TWL among TWLD and TWLJ, all will have 16 teams.
2) Give room for basing squads to join TWLB in a competitive environment.
3) Easier to show that top 8 teams out of top 16 (exactly half) will play in playoffs. With 14 or 12 teams, we would still have to take 8 squads into playoffs ... in some aspects the lower squads would be undeserving of these spots.

Saying all this ... I am still open to the idea of 14 squads with 7 games played and top 8 squads going to playoffs.

[Facetious]

Originally posted by Sufficient
It does solve the unevenness problem we have in our current 2 conference structure. The problem with dissolving teams cannot be avoided in either structure.

Your structure is EXACTLY the same as having two conferences, but combining the two conferences for the playoffs, as far as effectiveness is concerned. The only difference between your solution and that solution is that yours would be a lot more confusing to look at. The fact that dissolving squads can't be addressed cannot be avoided in either structure, you're right. And that is why I am saying that neither your structure nor the current one is a good solution.

I don't see the proposed 30 roster limit to be a problem. In most cases, if you are inactive in a squad ... you should not be playing TWL ... you're just taking up space for prospective ACTIVE players. 8 x 3 = 24. You basically have 3 different lineups PLUS 6 extra players. Sry, but that is more than fair in my humble opinion. The responsibility of showing 8 to a game is SOLELY on the shoulders of the squad itself.

I'm just asking for an example of where a roster limit was actually causing a problem, eg a squad with way too many active members that was dominating the league.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. What I meant was that so many nonbasers (or at least nonactive/nonserious/ nonconstructive) are commenting on these threads that these ideas are not being thoroughly discussed. Your pt of view is probably different from a more active player (ex. PJ or Hellz or Sleepy).

My point is that the flaw with your solution isn't basing-specific. It's a flaw in logic, and I don't need to be a baser to tell you that. Alls I am saying is that while I agree that there should be no conferences, randomizing the schedules would be a lot more fair than your method of assigning matches. The fact that you aren't addressing my concern with your solution just because I am not an active baser is stupid.

[Luckily Yours]

if u get a committee to tell who is seed 1 2 3 4 5 etc... then its the exact same thing that happened this season except they put seeds onto conferences , uor idea is the same that happnenned this season but u prefer it more confusing than it actually is ...

and conferences are just fine .... they are uneven like in every sport cause u cant predict if one team is gonna disapoint u or not ... like shriek and light did in twld for instance ....

take NBA for ex ... its always a team from west conference that wins it but it doesnt make the league less competitive

[Epinephrine]

Face, could you enlighten me as to why a random schedule would be better?

Who would produce this "random" schedule? How will the community react if that person or his friend's squads ended with an "easy" schedule?

How does this address the fact that some squads will still have harder schedules than others? The purpose of ranking first and then assigning was to help achieve the overall goal of making it so that better squads have harder schedules, and worse squads have easier schedules so there would be less blowouts, and more seasonal fun by all (with the caveat that the best squads should still win in the end, it's just that everyone else who doesn't win has more fun cause it's not a blowout every weekend).

Sure dropouts and so on affect the scheduling now, but it is inherently better than a random schedule where absolutely nothing is guaranteed except that probability will have it that some squads will be very screwed over and others will have extremely easy seasons.

-Epi

[Luckily Yours]

the current system is fine, just needs some tweaking that will come with the league ops experience once theyve done a couple of leagues ...

i still think the Upper tier Lower tier was the best system ever tho

[Bosshawk]

as for the uneveness in the conferences....

it is easily resolved by having cross conference playoffs....

and perhaps allowing more teams into the playoffs...

if you wanted to keep the weeks the same... give the 1st place in each division a bye week or something like that....to go 6 teams...or if you wanted an extra week run an 8 team playoff

[Facetious]

I didn't mean neccessarily assigning a completely random schedule, although I still think it would be better for some teams to get a easier schedules completely at random than half the teams getting a really easy schedule, and half the teams getting a harder schedule.

Also, how did the ranking mean that the better squads got harder schedules and the worse squads got easier schedules? Elusive, by not having to play against themselves, have an easier schedule against the shitty squads in their conference, who do have to play them.

I don't know if it would be possible without some effort, but it certainly seems at least conceivable that you could have schedules that were random (in the sense that there are no conferences or simple patterns to them), but also fair, in the sense that every squad gets approximately equal schedule strengths (assuming that was the end-goal, as you could also stagger it so that better/easier squads got harder schedules). Let me think about the best way of doing that, and get back to you. I haven't done math in years.

[Fit of Rage]

Face, just because you're pitted against a certain set of teams doesn't make your season that much easier or harder. Upsets happen (Just look at whiterabbits!).

Basing especially, we'll have to see what squads are active and running for next leagues, which I HOPE will be this winter, a whole year is too long to wait.

[Facetious]

I'm now realizing that mathematically fair obviously isn't realistically fair... I am an idiot. Still, I swear I will come up with something decent at some point.