1911 Beta

It's a community problem, there aren't enough people playing the game to make up for skill gaps. There is literally nothing a league can do to fix that. There simply are not enough active teams.

I guess we're going to agree to disagree. I think that, even if you are playing close matches, if you are winning every match you should be moved up. If you aren't ready for upper you just take your licks and try to improve. When I was with MVPz our first season in upper we won one match I believe (against dpk which didn't even count as a real team at that time). Lost all the others.

Sears wrote:It's a community problem, there aren't enough people playing the game to make up for skill gaps. There is literally nothing a league can do to fix that. There simply are not enough active teams.

You don't think we could get 6-8 teams?

juliowinnfredo wrote:I guess we're going to agree to disagree. I think that, even if you are playing close matches, if you are winning every match you should be moved up. If you aren't ready for upper you just take your licks and try to improve. When I was with MVPz our first season in upper we won one match I believe (against dpk which didn't even count as a real team at that time). Lost all the others.

Wasn't MVPz moved down this season? How come? The roster changed dramatically? Oh, that's right.

MVPz was in upper for multiple seasons. We played in lower finals, moved up to upper and stayed there and slowly improved as a team, even though we got wrecked our first season in upper. Yes, they did move down this season because of roster changes, but literally 5 people from last season's starting roster were leaving. And as you can see MVPz isn't winning every match in lower.

Airnick15 wrote:You don't think we could get 6-8 teams?

There is a common misconception that something can be done to simply "get 6-8 teams'"

Unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. To add another 6-8 teams to a league, you are talking about adding adding at least 60 ACTIVE players who were previously not playing.

The size of the community is totally organic, you can't artificially influence it in anyway. TPG can't do anything, GotFrag can't do anything, 1911 can't do anything, etc.

DoD is an old game on an incredibly old and outdated engine. It's still fun to play, especially for people who have played for a long time, but it's not going to support a growing community, only a small niche.

I'm not talking about adding 6-8 teams, I'm talking about moving 2 down from upper, 4-5 up from lower, and bank on Stamp making a new team. Thus, lower would serve as the pub clan division, and upper wouldn't have the bottom teams just getting shitstomped weekly.

i have no problem with fM being in lower. Someone has to win. We were beating them until 2 minutes left and blew it. I never really felt like they were some over powering force that we didn't belong in the same server with. (except when airnick was sniping from bridge to spawn ramp for 10 minutes) Someone is going to go undefeated/one loss and win it. Might as well be them.

You're not going to magically have people appear without a few changes to accommodate a true "pub" or open division. As someone who played competitively for years, and then became actively involved in leading a pub community, there are a few reasons why these people don't play matches/scrims. A) They don't want to have to deal with demos, screenshots, rates, etc. or especially an anti-cheat client that they have to figure out. They just want to show up, have fun and play. B) When a competitive player, come into a server filled with pubbers with your nose in the air and treat them like crap, you are giving a negative image to competitive play. Time and time again, we've tried to get people to play and they say "I don't want to play with those assholes." We have a huge number of people in our avalanche community. Enough to fill multiple teams, but every time we ask to play, i've got the above responses.

juliowinnfredo wrote:MVPz was in upper for multiple seasons. We played in lower finals, moved up to upper and stayed there and slowly improved as a team, even though we got wrecked our first season in upper. Yes, they did move down this season because of roster changes, but literally 5 people from last season's starting roster were leaving. And as you can see MVPz isn't winning every match in lower.

4 starters from last season's SuaP haven't been playing for fM, and I don't understand why you think ignoring score differentials makes sense

i don't know why you feel so strongly about this, but the teams that have played fM probably don't feel the same way, since they competed/almost won

Well, technically you could make it work if you have 8 solid/active teams in each division. Currently, things would look something like this:

Invite: (teams that are good/try)
winnfield
THUNDER
LcM '
risK |
dpk
dgf
{GSR}
99

Main: (teams that are decent/washedup)
FLATout //
WR ::
|o/
fM.
|MVPz|
.BtH
nGG
1080p|

Open: (pub clans and what not)
-=VMF=-
:MM:
TeamLess
[475th]
{HK}
BAW
[505th PIR]
MORE PUB CLANS PLZ

So, if you can pick up a couple open teams, and everyone actually stays active and plays their matches every week, it could work.

STA had this problem when we were first getting started in 2001. Invite was locked down to the top 8 teams and Open was left to everyone else. It was rough on the bottom tier pub clans because they got rolled every week, but it also put a lot of pressure on them de-pubclan themselves and get used to competitive play.

Sears wrote:Well, technically you could make it work if you have 8 solid/active teams in each division. Currently, things would look something like this:

Invite: (teams that are good/try)
winnfield
THUNDER
LcM '
risK |
dpk
dgf
{GSR}
99

Main: (teams that are decent/washedup)
FLATout //
WR ::
|o/
fM.
|MVPz|
.BtH
nGG
1080p|

Open: (pub clans and what not)
-=VMF=-
:MM:
TeamLess
[475th]
{HK}
BAW
[505th PIR]
MORE PUB CLANS PLZ

good post they should try that

Expunge wrote:
4 starters from last season's SuaP haven't been playing for fM, and I don't understand why you think ignoring score differentials makes sense

i don't know why you feel so strongly about this, but the teams that have played fM probably don't feel the same way, since they competed/almost won

I really don't feel THAT strongly about it. I just think a team should move up and down depending on their performance. That will be the last I say about it.

we disagree on how a team's performance should be determined, not whether performance should determine a team's movement.

ok this conversation is just stupid.

Swiss wrote:ok this conversation is just stupid.

I like the 3 division part.

Swiss wrote:all you gotta do is replace wr with fm. rwc get on it!

Swiss wrote:ok this conversation is just stupid.

then don't participate

Hey mvpz isnt washed up most of the roster was never good in the first place LOL!!!

If you can't handle the heat get out of the kitchen. I don't follow this game, nor am i going to try(which is why some, or most of my information may be wrong). To say a team is "too good" to be in lower when they're undefeated so far is bullshit. Figure out a way to win, somebody give a shit if you don't like it.

We're all fucking god awful at this game compared to what it used to be, who gives a shit. Show up and play. IF you like to win, do something to improve your chances that doesn't involve cheating i.e. get better.

This community doesn't have the size to satisfy 3 divisions. Nor does it have the size to be competitive on a level that some of us would like(myself included) but take what you're given.

No idea what you morons were arguing about in the first place, but you're all fucking god awful anyways. pz.

Wint0 wrote:If you can't handle the heat get out of the kitchen. I don't follow this game, nor am i going to try(which is why some, or most of my information may be wrong). To say a team is "too good" to be in lower when they're undefeated so far is bullshit. Figure out a way to win, somebody give a shit if you don't like it.

We're all fucking god awful at this game compared to what it used to be, who gives a shit. Show up and play. IF you like to win, do something to improve your chances that doesn't involve cheating i.e. get better.

This community doesn't have the size to satisfy 3 divisions. Nor does it have the size to be competitive on a level that some of us would like(myself included) but take what you're given.

No idea what you morons were arguing about in the first place, but you're all fucking god awful anyways. pz.

fa sho dude.

Personally, I think you lock the upper division down to just the top 8 teams next season, and throw everyone else into an open division. If pub clans get rolled then they either de-pubclan themselves or peace out. There is really no way around that issue and there simply are not enough teams to actively support 3 divisions long term.

Roster limits would create a team or two. Granted some are on rosters just to be on a roster, but some are active enough to justify another team. There are teams that have 15 or so players. I think it's possible myself.

CharlieGiteau wrote:Roster limits would create a team or two. Granted some are on rosters just to be on a roster, but some are active enough to justify another team. There are teams that have 15 or so players. I think it's possible myself.

Sigh, roster limits do nothing but kill teams.

This is not an actively competitive community. I know that's hard for some people to understand, but it just isn't.

Community growth has to be organic. If there are players that want to play and aren't getting to on their current roster, they will leave. That is clearly not the case for a lot of people on TPG rosters.

You can't force players to care about playing a game. It just doesn't work that way.

Sears wrote:

CharlieGiteau wrote:Roster limits would create a team or two. Granted some are on rosters just to be on a roster, but some are active enough to justify another team. There are teams that have 15 or so players. I think it's possible myself.

Sigh, roster limits do nothing but kill teams.

This is not an actively competitive community. I know that's hard for some people to understand, but it just isn't.

Community growth has to be organic. If there are players that want to play and aren't getting to on their current roster, they will leave. That is clearly not the case for a lot of people on TPG rosters.

You can't force players to care about playing a game. It just doesn't work that way.

Very valid points. It could be enough to make the community even smaller than it is now. I know it caused some general pissyness when CAL incorporated it; I didn't take into account how things have changed since I've been gone. Too bad the sheer amount of teams aren't what they used to be.

I think CAL did that when clan.nme decided to get 100 people on the roster. Good stuff.

I don't see what the problem with having three divisions of eight teams is.

Airnick15 wrote:I don't see what the problem with having three divisions of eight teams is.

The problem is that you don't have any teams to back them up. If you lose one team in the higher divisions, we don't have enough teams to pull from lower to replace them. That's why you can't do it unless you have a big group of lower teams to start with. That's the problem we are having in the community now, in that we don't have enough bottom tier teams to balance things out.

Remove the south american division, and you have 6 teams more. That would give you 3 divisions with 10 teams each.

edit: 2 divsions with 10 teams each and one divison with 9 teams. Oh well.

edit 2; Put the best SA and NA teams in upper, decent from SA and NA in middle, and the rest in lower.

Sears wrote:Well, technically you could make it work if you have 8 solid/active teams in each division. Currently, things would look something like this:

Invite: (teams that are good/try)
winnfield
THUNDER
LcM '
risK |
dpk
dgf
{GSR}
99

Main: (teams that are decent/washedup)
FLATout //
WR ::
|o/
fM.
|MVPz|
.BtH
nGG
1080p|

Open: (pub clans and what not)
-=VMF=-
:MM:
TeamLess
[475th]
{HK}
BAW
[505th PIR]
MORE PUB CLANS PLZ

So, if you can pick up a couple open teams, and everyone actually stays active and plays their matches every week, it could work.

STA had this problem when we were first getting started in 2001. Invite was locked down to the top 8 teams and Open was left to everyone else. It was rough on the bottom tier pub clans because they got rolled every week, but it also put a lot of pressure on them de-pubclan themselves and get used to competitive play.

Like it more if teamless and GSR were in the middle division

fuck that, keep the SA's in there own league. you must not remember how shitty it is to play those teams.

unpro wrote:fuck that, keep the SA's in there own league. you must not remember how shitty it is to play those teams.

Agree with that, I'd rather suck a 10' dick than play SA teams...

Nothing is harder than killing a SA sniper in Axis loft on donner.

WR > GSR

ryanemo wrote:Jetty > GSR

Had to fix that for you!

Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

Black Hawk wrote:Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

Have you taken an Engrish crass b4?

Black Hawk wrote:Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

Please stop saying we, until you drop double digits and avoid the 1:3 ratios, you can't be counted as being part of a victory.

Black Hawk wrote:Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

Not even I´m that bad at English, and that´s my second language. Please go back to school.

Airnick15 wrote:

Black Hawk wrote:Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

Please stop saying we, until you drop double digits and avoid the 1:3 ratios, you can't be counted as being part of a victory.

I havent played in a match with you since lower so just back off.

Black Hawk wrote: I havent played in a match with you since lower so just back off.

Does this mean you are better now or just want me to be nice?

linuslolz wrote:

Black Hawk wrote:Noooo Ryan and Jared played thats 2, if Dan and Sandoval wouldve played then instead of Sandovals I have a date problem we probably wouldve won by less, but won

WTF Blackhawk?! WTF!?

Lay off the kid brother please. I'll try to tell him to english better.