Player cap

[Raveen]

QUOTE (TakingArms @ Apr 23 2010, 06:04 PM) Perhaps the best way to accomplish something like this is to have a different kind of tourney, call it an intramural allegiance tourney, wherein a draft is held and teams are formed solely for purposes of the tourney. It might be interesting and who knows, people may come to like it.

If you want to try and organise it I'd be happy to support and help you. But there's some stuff to think about before you get started.

Your problem is this: Sundays are SG days. Sundays are not available for your tournament. Sundays are the days when people will make an effort to play out of loyalty to their squad.

Put a game on a day when people have more trouble making the game and less motivation to do so (because it's a team of random folks not squaddies they've chosen to associate with) and you'll have low turnouts to the point where people just stop bothering. Look at Alleg Nationals, look at AW5.

[Jimen]

Spreading around the skilled people alone isn't going to make a squad good. The secret to squad play is coordination and teamwork, not collective AS or some equally dumb crap. And that's something that has to be handled internally by the squad as a whole figuring out how to not suck and putting it into practice - shuffling around players won't change it.

[Orion]

I would support some sort of intramural tournament where we invent something other than squads which form a cohesive (but ultimately the teams are controlled by the FAO event staff) group, maybe they could play on Saturdays or something.

Maybe have 4 or 6 teams, with a 40 player cap, have a pool where people can sign up (website), and then the team gets to queue up/vote (somehow) on who they want on their team. Just a vague idea, but it could be kind of fun/competitive.

[Broodwich]

the only way this would conceivably work is if you destroyed all the current squads and reformed everything else from thte ground up, which i cant say i'm a fan of. A draft or somethingorother like people have hinted at sounds fun, but will still suffer the exact same problems that current squads face today. That is if they aren't competitive or dont like each other, there is a high possibility that they wont show up, and you will have dead teams, and maybe 2 or possibly 3 teams that dominate/bother to show at least 10 (they will be commanded of course by the same highly visible, respected, and social coms of the current top squads: spidey, aarm, vir, grav). So every other squad will consider the game against one of these as a probable loss, and because they dont care about the random people they are stuck with they wont show.

It's essentially the same thing as a pick pool, zone game, or autobalance. Its a nice theory, but in practice it falls flat on its face

[SpaceJunk]

3 vs 3

2 teams on each side are pure squads.

3rd teams are mercs and keep the total AS balanced.

The winning squads get points, the mercs don't.

[TheBored]

QUOTE (Bard @ Apr 23 2010, 09:47 AM) I strongly dislike this idea mostly because it's been done to RT once before.

Pook specifically told us that we were no longer allowed to recruit new pilots because we were "too big".

To be fair, you guys were HUGE. Not just oversized, you guys had a roster that was 30-40% larger than #2. To make matters worse, you had a complete stranglehold on the Cadet program, taking several from each class. It may have hurt you, but it certainly helped others in the long term.

TB

[HSharp]

QUOTE (Broodwich @ Apr 23 2010, 08:24 PM) It's essentially the same thing as a pick pool, zone game, or autobalance. Its a nice theory, but in practice it falls flat on its face

I have never known of a pick pool game which was not fun!

[Deathrender]

40 sounds good to me, but long-term inactives should be removed from squads if this is going to be implemented.

[Drizzo]

See the thing is, people are viewing talent as something that can be spread around like butter on toast, and they see Allegiance as a piece of toast with a concentration of butter in the middle, and if it were spread out evenly then the toast would be much better. However this analogy could not be further from the truth.

Skill in this game requires nurturing. You can learn by two ways. You have someone to tell you what to do and how you can improve, and can coach your squad, or you can learn via osmosis from a good group of players. Of course when your good group of players moves on, you will have no one to provide knowledge for your squad to absorb and become stronger from.

90% of this community stands behind the cadet program's ability to create a decent player and a player ready to enter squad play. I completely reject this idea. Cadet does not teach you no where near the amount you need to know to even be my wingman in a SG. So I subjected XT to my own training program to bring them up to the level I want them to be at. It's still in progress, but I have seen massive amounts of improvement from the rag-tag voobs I tagged when I was SL becoming once again, an elite fighting force.

The reason why the talent always seems to gravitate towards 2-3 squads is because of the training those squads have internally, and the lack of training that is apparent from the rest. The same thing would happen with this "idea" if it were to take shape. The teams that have an organized and committed training program will outstrip those that do not.


Edit- Here's another tidbit. The SysX that Vipur raped and destroyed and the SysX now. You'll notice when spidey came back from being MIA and took over a squad that was at a low point and then subjected his squad to whinetraining™, you see how much they've improved now?

[Orion]

QUOTE (Drizzo @ Apr 23 2010, 03:58 PM) The reason why the talent always seems to gravitate towards 2-3 squads is because of the training those squads have internally