Ladle 72
Moderator: Light
- DaGarBBaGeMAN
- Core Dumper
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:22 pm
Re: Ladle 72
Well we just hit a really big low. Last time there were 6 bye's and less than 10 teams was Ladle 27
-made by az95
Re: Ladle 72
Yeah, really low turnout I wonder if it has anything to do with AFL?DaGarBBaGeMAN wrote:Well we just hit a really big low. Last time there were 6 bye's and less than 10 teams was Ladle 27
Re: Ladle 72
Everything to do with AFL.Soul wrote:Yeah, really low turnout I wonder if it has anything to do with AFL?DaGarBBaGeMAN wrote:Well we just hit a really big low. Last time there were 6 bye's and less than 10 teams was Ladle 27
Re: Ladle 72
With such a low turnout, it almost tempts me to see if the four teams that are in the opening round would like to try and get their matches done by the normal start time of ladles (if these players show up in time and what not), so that a lot of people aren't waiting so long to play. I don't know about anyone else, but if the opening round teams were to start 45 minutes earlier we would be able to, hopefully, get the matches out quicker and have it feel less drawn out.
Maybe that's just me, but I feel it sucks that two matches holds up the entire tournament another 45 minutes.
Maybe that's just me, but I feel it sucks that two matches holds up the entire tournament another 45 minutes.
BRAWL dead. RIP.
Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.
Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.
Re: Ladle 72
Yeah, Would make it faster thats for sure.Overrated wrote:With such a low turnout, it almost tempts me to see if the four teams that are in the opening round would like to try and get their matches done by the normal start time of ladles (if these players show up in time and what not), so that a lot of people aren't waiting so long to play. I don't know about anyone else, but if the opening round teams were to start 45 minutes earlier we would be able to, hopefully, get the matches out quicker and have it feel less drawn out.
Maybe that's just me, but I feel it sucks that two matches holds up the entire tournament another 45 minutes.
Re: Ladle 72
Just so everyone doesn't freak out, the low turnout is probably due to minor Fort burnout. Ladle 27 had 11 teams and Ladle 28 had 9. This was only a few months after Bowl 1 and the major push before hand, and immediately after the creation of the FPL. There was a lot of Fortress going on back then, just split over different Tournaments -- including a 4-Team Fort event. I would say the AFL definitely affected Ladle, predictably. Regarding general participation, summer in the Northern Hemisphere is an unpredictable time in Arma and that is why the Bowl's off-season takes place then. Speaking of which, this Ladle starts the Bowl season. The turnout is exactly as I expect it.
Good luck and have fun everyone! I won't be able to watch, I have a date on Sunday afternoon.
Good luck and have fun everyone! I won't be able to watch, I have a date on Sunday afternoon.
Re: Ladle 72
gl hfsinewav wrote:I have a date on Sunday afternoon.
Re: Ladle 72
I know for us it's just a bad time with lots of absences and demanding life events. Many people are transitioning back into school over the next two months as well. I doubt having more fortress events available is the pure result of such dramatic decline in players' availability.
We'll be back to 15 teams before you know it
We'll be back to 15 teams before you know it
"Dream as if you'll live forever,
Live as if you'll die today." -James Dean
Re: Ladle 72
I agree with everybody proposing we start early..that would be awesome and I could probably play then
Re: Ladle 72
This. I can't make tournaments this month because I went home and my Sundays are occupied with family stuff. Glhf though.Ratchet wrote:I know for us it's just a bad time with lots of absences and demanding life events. Many people are transitioning back into school over the next two months as well. I doubt having more fortress events available is the pure result of such dramatic decline in players' availability.
We'll be back to 15 teams before you know it
-
- Match Winner
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 5:36 am
Re: Ladle 72
If we're doing this time change business, I suggest we take a poll right away in which each team only has 1 vote. I don't know what the standard percentage in this community is to pass something, but 67% sounds like it'd be good off the top of my head. Abstaining votes should count as no votes (as in, keeping the current time schedule), and the poll should end at least 24 hours before the earliest possible start of the ladle (so, 24 hours before the proposed new time) so that there is time to notify all teams of the time change, should any of them not have been aware of the vote.
Re: Ladle 72
Maybe someone can take a moment to contact all the Team Leaders immediately and call them to a vote here?
Re: Ladle 72
Yo I got no team, hit me up if you want some ogopower