[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />Lots of stuff<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I think that almost all of these are great ideas, there&#039;s a couple I want to talk about though.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Teams with worst record given priority on selecting players from the reserves<br />[/quote]<br /><br />There are like 5 things you might be talking about, but just to avoid confusion:<br /><br />[list]<br />[li]LordBritish was not formally part of the IDL, so no one could have pulled him out of free agency[/li]<br />[li]Cha0tix wasn&#039;t formally part of the franchising period, so no one could have franchised him[/li]<br />[li]Currently, trades are first-come, first-serve (I beat Nero for GaX last season, for instance)[/li]<br />[/list]<br /><br />I&#039;m not saying you said these things, but I am saying I&#039;m confused by what you mean.&nbsp; At first I thought you meant like a more flexible MSD, where players who join after the deadline can just enter free agency whenever and we have like a running mini-draft throughout the season (up until what week?&nbsp; IDK).&nbsp; There&#039;s a lot of gaming that can go on with this type of system though ;) .&nbsp; And finally, we did away with MSD because it led to game throwing.&nbsp; Yeah we can punish it (and do), but it&#039;s better for everyone if it doesn&#039;t happen in the first place.<br /><br />Do you mean that EBL should have had first crack at LB?&nbsp; I think their record was pretty similar to DMR when we put LB on DMR (DMR might&#039;ve been a 1/2 game ahead).&nbsp; IDK I guess I agree in any case.&nbsp; It&#039;s probably better to have a rule about it so we can avoid favoritism and politics accusations.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Remove player bans in the future unless someone cheats or does other major disruptive behavior<br />[/quote]<br /><br />This is the current policy, unless you think some of our suspendable/ejectable offenses don&#039;t warrant it (3rd demo infraction, cheating, etc.).&nbsp; Really we rarely enforce demo infractions anyway, so I don&#039;t know if those count or not.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Six week regular season with no BYE week<br />-Six teams make playoffs, three from each division<br />[/quote]<br /><br />So only 6 games?&nbsp; I think that between this and 10-12 teams, the math works out so that we have to have some pretty shitty tiebreaking rules to decide who makes it into playoffs or not.&nbsp; I&#039;m generally in favor of a shorter season, and personally don&#039;t mind playing multiple games in a week, but I also want to play everyone at least once.&nbsp; I&#039;ve no idea if that&#039;s possible but I&#039;m pretty interested in figuring something out.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Schedule is broken up into two week chunks with two specific matches due by the end of each two weeks<br />-Teams can play matches earlier than the schedule if they want<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I also get upset by scheduling rigidity, but I&#039;ve been on both sides of it and after I&#039;m done being pissed, I think I want close-to-set-in-stone scheduling.&nbsp; I think that playing earlier is no problem, I mean there&#039;s rarely any problem with anything as long as teams agree :D .&nbsp; IDK scheduling is one of the gayer aspects of IDL, and even though the system we have now is 100000x better than the one we used to have, there&#039;s still some gayness.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Player voted map list before the season starts.&nbsp; People would post suggestions on the forum and we&#039;d all get together and play test maps.&nbsp; After that goes on a for a while we hold a big vote and the top 32 make it in the IDL wad.&nbsp; Top five vote getting maps are used in playoffs.&nbsp; If people don&#039;t want to participate then their loss.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />This could be a lot of fun, especially playtesting.&nbsp; But it&#039;s an enormous amount of organization and work, especially for Ralphis (or whoever compiles the WAD).&nbsp; It&#039;s actually so much work that Ralphis only does it once a year, and hates it the whole time.&nbsp; IDK about anything mapping-wise, but unless someone volunteers to do the work I don&#039;t see it happening.&nbsp; It could also lead to a big bitchfest about what maps are chosen.&nbsp; Like let&#039;s assume the following:<br /><br />[list]<br />[li]Nostar has friends[/li]<br />[li]Nostar gets those friends to all vote only for maps that he is great at[/li]<br />[li]3/5 maps used for the season are maps that Nostar is great at (call it THIRTY431, MAP08 and MAP07)[/li]<br />[/list]<br /><br />What I guess I mean is it opens IDL up to the same kind of criticisms that ZDDL gets every year:<br /><br />[quote]ZDDL is just a bunch of the maps that JKist3 can beat everybody else&#039;s ass at.[/quote]<br /><br />Nevermind that the duel maps chosen are basically staples from 1973, and the community even picks one each year.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Teams must pick a different map each week, so once you use a map it&#039;s gone for your team.&nbsp; Playoff maps can be used in the regular season<br />[/quote]<br /><br />You&#039;re probably trying to avoid letting players like Nostar pick MAP08 all the time, but I still think it&#039;s too extreme.&nbsp; I&#039;d rather put a limit on how many times you can pick a given map, say 3 or 4.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-No 1v1, 2v1, 2v2, 3v2, 4v3, etc.&nbsp; All matches played 3v3 or 4v4, 4v4 only if both teams agree.&nbsp; If you can&#039;t get three to a scheduled match your team forfeits<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I&#039;m against implementing 4v4 this way for a couple reasons.&nbsp; One, I&#039;m against mixing formats; IDL is either all 3v3 or all 4v4 IMO, mixing things like that is too SICL-like (synonym for unprofessional :) ).&nbsp; It also makes captains who have weak 4ths they never want to play look like douchebags, because they&#039;re not just preventing 1 player from playing, they&#039;re preventing 2.&nbsp; Captains rarely want to look like douchebags, so this will end up switching IDL to 4v4 more often than not, or in captains telling their 4th to go AFK... which is gay anyway.&nbsp; I know it&#039;s not like IDL has been hardcore &quot;3v3 do or die!&quot; because we&#039;ve had 1v1, 2v1, 2v2 and 3v2 for so long, but I think those games blow also.&nbsp; Also, practicing for either 3v3 or 4v4 is shitty.&nbsp; At least in 2v2 the &quot;do whatever it takes to win&quot; strategy works, doing that in a 4v4 will get you rolled.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Captains selected by player vote, if you sign up you agree to captain should the players vote you into that role<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I miss signing up and volunteering to be a captain (ah, the days when my beloved Goatface was stepping to the plate).&nbsp; I like captain sign-ups and I don&#039;t hate them being selected by player vote.&nbsp; I mean I think we&#039;ve done a remarkably good job getting solid and skilled captains to sign up as such, but even so we&#039;ve had a number of them quit, some due to circumstances beyond anyone&#039;s control, so I guess I&#039;m resigned to the fact that we&#039;ll have a certain amount of captain attrition anyway, and player voting wouldn&#039;t make that worse.&nbsp; It would also help to ensure that captains are reasonably popular, which is sometimes an issue (Ladna comes to mind...).<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />-Multiple servers selection teams/players submit their average pings at the start of the season and these are used in general for selection.&nbsp; Only in cases where there is a drop in connection quality to a certain server would they be ignored.&nbsp; Teams should not be arguing or jumping back and forth between servers.&nbsp; When the schedule is set the server should be select as well.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />This is an entire debate in and of itself.&nbsp; I agree server jumping is gay, and don&#039;t want to allow it.&nbsp; I also don&#039;t hate average pings determining what server is played, but I think that:<br /><br />[b][color=red][size=5]PING != CONNECTION QUALITY[/size][/color][/b]<br /><br />will be screamed at us in the administration several thousand times.&nbsp; Like Mantis-X pings a 60 to TT, but he&#039;d rather play on Horizon (so I hear anyway heh :) ).&nbsp; Plus if we&#039;re going to start making exceptions for &quot;I&#039;m pinging real shitty to TT, but I&#039;m fine on RN&quot;, then we&#039;re just opening ourselves up for gaming.&nbsp; Right now there&#039;s no such thing as a server dispute; TT is the default unless captains both agree otherwise, and there&#039;s no allowance for a player pinging out.&nbsp; I agree that this is EXTREMELY GAY.&nbsp; But I am adamant that there&#039;s nothing we can do about it that doesn&#039;t allow more ridiculous gaming.&nbsp; If I never want to play on (a theoretical) RN, I&#039;ll just load uTorrent and start it up whenever I join RN, EZ.&nbsp; Basically what I&#039;m saying is that I don&#039;t want to open a huge can of server wars, and I think the current rules are the best we can do.<br /><br />[quote author=Fastidious link=topic=178.msg1629#msg1629 date=1267905153]<br />Somethings I didn&#039;t touch on were:<br /><br />-How to schedule.&nbsp; I&#039;d like it to be an automated web form if teams or the league are having difficulty with it but who knows if that is possible.&nbsp; With a two week window and the possibility of playing matches early there should be a lot more flexibility<br />[/quote]<br /><br />A web form is certainly possible and really easy.&nbsp; What I was thinking of doing (pending board approval of course, like all things) would be to setup a week view where you can set specific times you&#039;re unavailable.&nbsp; I think setting the default to &quot;available&quot;, and having players poke times out of the week (like I personally hate playing on Fridays, or whatever) is the best way to do it.&nbsp; This form would reset at the end of every week.&nbsp; This way, it&#039;s totally the players&#039; fault if they don&#039;t black out their unavailable times, and it might save captains and the administration some nagging.<br /><br />Awesome ideas though.&nbsp; Maybe we should make the board bigger or something!<br />