Tronpions League!

[.pRu|Nani]

For this to work you're probably going to have to give up a lot of your own free time, and it probably won't work either. I know Concord's already pointed that out, but I just want to reiterate: the problem is that teams which sign up for the league need to stay together for the duration of the league. Looking at the last x ladles, you will see how quickly new teams form and die, and even older, established ones sometimes take backseats when they have low activity.

Not to mention people switching between clans.

Perhaps the best way to do this would be integrate it in with ladle but I dunno

Yo sylla! o/

Firstly, yes it'll require a lot of my time, but it's time I'm prepared to give.

Secondly, I would hope this this tournament promotes activity within the teams, and with a roster of 11 with three changes permitted halfway through, I would anticipate that this addresses those concerns.

however if a team did become inactive, they lose. Simple.

[dariv]

2 different things going on here, first the league which sounds good and I'd like more regular fort tournaments.

Second is the changes from regular ladle. Why are you making it time-based? Teams will time-waste. Why only 3 subs, only at half time?

[.pRu|Nani]

2 different things going on here, first the league which sounds good and I'd like more regular fort tournaments.

Second is the changes from regular ladle. Why are you making it time-based? Teams will time-waste. Why only 3 subs, only at half time?

I'm not making it anything, at this stage, it's open to suggestion as to what will work best.

Also, the the three roster changes (not subs) are nothing to do with in-match action, you'll have 11 players to pick from, and changes are unlimited during matches.

The roster change is half way through the season, to cater for any inactivity the roster may have 5 or 6 months into the season.

[Word]

Why are you making it time-based?

Go back to page 1. Read my previous post.

[vov]

I like the idea of a league, maybe a not that serious one...

I am open for any idea, but it sounds too similar to ladle. How about including random dz, and all is played with random teams (no clans). So we would have a ladle like it is, almost a clanwar... and something really really different and difficult. If you know the map on ct, than you know how difficult i mean. That map played by (pros) will end in a beautiful disaster.

...like that

Why are you making it time-based?

Go back to page 1. Read my previous post.

I think he did, sir. And is probably not convinced. Because

Teams will time-waste.

[Kijutsu]

My thoughts: use ladle settings, no time limit, first to 3. No random teams because then you might as well start up Fortress Brawl which is happening soon (random teams tournament), allow clans and organized teams. That's all I have to say about this, good luck.

[Concord]

The time limit failed because it prevented come backs and turned a lot of the games into foregone conclusions. With the current defenses, the first round may be the only one with interesting play; the leading team hunkering down after that, the losing playing faster than they'd like. The game would jump from the first goal to injury time all at once.


Not sure league is the right format, just doesn't seem to be the interest.

[Word]

I think he did, sir. And is probably not convinced. Because

Teams will time-waste.

why should they? one team always needs points. You make no sense (again). If there's a clear winner it's the losing team's fault.

[.pRu|Nani]

My thoughts: use ladle settings, no time limit, first to 3. No random teams because then you might as well start up Fortress Brawl which is happening soon (random teams tournament), allow clans and organized teams. That's all I have to say about this, good luck.

I agree with all except the best of 3. I want it to use Ladle setting, but not to be Ladle. Best of 5 goes some way to establishing that it's a different competition in its entirety, best of 4 is unheard of.

The time limit failed because it prevented come backs and turned a lot of the games into foregone conclusions. With the current defenses, the first round may be the only one with interesting play; the leading team hunkering down after that, the losing playing faster than they'd like. The game would jump from the first goal to injury time all at once.


Not sure league is the right format, just doesn't seem to be the interest.

Looks like I might be putting the setting to a vote. I don't agree with your league analysis, but with the league stage only being hlf the competition leading to the play-off finals, I wouldn't see the motivational factor loss you describe.

[.pRu|Nani]

Poll added.

Your message contains 11 characters. The minimum number of characters you need to enter is 21.

[Jip]

You also could play 2 matches. If it ends 1-1 each team gets 1 point. If it ends 1-0 the winning team gets 3 points.

[.pRu|Nani]

I assume Jip your post favours time-limited matches?

[Jip]

It works either way. I like score based matches more though.

[.pRu|Nani]

If I wait for this thread to come to fruition before I start, this'll never work. I've decide that I'm going to set it up, and I'll need help (if there are any volunteers) to get it done by the end of the week, work starts tomorrow.

Sign ups will start on Saturday, organisational stage has officially started, so get talking to your teams, see if you can be ready for when the brackets open.

[Kijutsu]

My thoughts: use ladle settings, no time limit, first to 3. No random teams because then you might as well start up Fortress Brawl which is happening soon (random teams tournament), allow clans and organized teams. That's all I have to say about this, good luck.

I agree with all except the best of 3. I want it to use Ladle setting, but not to be Ladle. Best of 5 goes some way to establishing that it's a different competition in its entirety, best of 4 is unheard of.

I said first to 3, that's something different than best of 3. : ))