.
froyotech benched from playing as a team in RGL
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
sacJORDYyour argument is retarded, becuase it implies if you play in his league you can't suddenly play in another league. What kind of tard logic is that tbh. Point out one player who quit playing 6s because rgl.gg became a thing who else would have kept playing 6s.sacyeehaw you don't even play in the league he made the rule for, so you are just being toxic under the guise of indignation out of malice, why would he consider your opinion in the decision making if the only reason you react is to flame someone who actually contributes to the community with money and a league he organised.why tf would u play in a league that makes these type of decisions? i don't think sigafoo is contributing ANYTHING with RGL, it's not only pointlessly splitting the comp community but also supports anything but 6's which the majority has accepted as the main competetive format for tf2. let alone banning a team because they are beating the competition in a competition.
my main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.
[quote=sac][quote=JORDY][quote=sac]yeehaw you don't even play in the league he made the rule for, so you are just being toxic under the guise of indignation out of malice, why would he consider your opinion in the decision making if the only reason you react is to flame someone who actually contributes to the community with money and a league he organised.[/quote]
why tf would u play in a league that makes these type of decisions? i don't think sigafoo is contributing ANYTHING with RGL, it's not only pointlessly splitting the comp community but also supports anything but 6's which the majority has accepted as the main competetive format for tf2. let alone banning a team because they are beating the competition in a competition.[/quote]
your argument is retarded, becuase it implies if you play in his league you can't suddenly play in another league. What kind of tard logic is that tbh. Point out one player who quit playing 6s because rgl.gg became a thing who else would have kept playing 6s.
[/quote]
my main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.
why tf would u play in a league that makes these type of decisions? i don't think sigafoo is contributing ANYTHING with RGL, it's not only pointlessly splitting the comp community but also supports anything but 6's which the majority has accepted as the main competetive format for tf2. let alone banning a team because they are beating the competition in a competition.[/quote]
your argument is retarded, becuase it implies if you play in his league you can't suddenly play in another league. What kind of tard logic is that tbh. Point out one player who quit playing 6s because rgl.gg became a thing who else would have kept playing 6s.
[/quote]
my main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.
GrapeJuiceIIIsnip
i was under the impression most hl players preferred 7s tho no? or acknowledged it as just a better HL.
[quote=GrapeJuiceIII]snip[/quote]
i was under the impression most hl players preferred 7s tho no? or acknowledged it as just a better HL.
i was under the impression most hl players preferred 7s tho no? or acknowledged it as just a better HL.
JORDYmy main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.
Its his money, he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it, can't he? Never stopped to consider all these people who got into hl first (and don't forget the MASSIVE influx of players trying out comp for the first time cuz valve introduced the medal for the first hl tourney) and then moved on to 6s. Stop scapegoating other gamemodes for tf2 being a small scene, blame valve instead for not supporting the 6s scene with an official tourney + pricepool + exposure. you could rant about ready steady pan or ultiduo tourneys with the same logic and claim they hurt the 6s scene somehow.
[quote=JORDY]
my main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.[/quote]
Its his money, he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it, can't he? Never stopped to consider all these people who got into hl first (and don't forget the MASSIVE influx of players trying out comp for the first time cuz valve introduced the medal for the first hl tourney) and then moved on to 6s. Stop scapegoating other gamemodes for tf2 being a small scene, blame valve instead for not supporting the 6s scene with an official tourney + pricepool + exposure. you could rant about ready steady pan or ultiduo tourneys with the same logic and claim they hurt the 6s scene somehow.
my main issue is the amount of money invested into an irrelevant format and all the pubbers getting into scene thinking 7's is representative of comp tf2. it's splitting the scene the same way highlander did but way less succesful yet somehow has way more money put into it. if highlander didn't get so pushed as ''the way the game was meant to be played'' by hl mains i imagine the 6s scene would've been way bigger.[/quote]
Its his money, he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it, can't he? Never stopped to consider all these people who got into hl first (and don't forget the MASSIVE influx of players trying out comp for the first time cuz valve introduced the medal for the first hl tourney) and then moved on to 6s. Stop scapegoating other gamemodes for tf2 being a small scene, blame valve instead for not supporting the 6s scene with an official tourney + pricepool + exposure. you could rant about ready steady pan or ultiduo tourneys with the same logic and claim they hurt the 6s scene somehow.
sigafooSo then the question is how do we do this? Which is why I'm open that I don't think our implementation is correct. To target one team and why I've called this a temporary measure, as it's not sustainable nor should it be repeated. And once this season is done, we can talk about whether or not it was the correct decision, did it help as intended. etc... And adapt, grow or abandon it based on the results.
What about anything twiggy suggested:
Twiggy- Enforcing a salary cap using a system similar to fantasy tf2, where a team can not exceed a certain combined cost?
- Being less extreme with the rule of "1 froyo player/team" and go for something like "no more than 3 esea invite players/team"
- Using a handicap system; for example stating that any team that wins the season, or back to back seasons, receives some kind of round deficit for each match, etc
- Allow a team to bypass your rules but applying a round penalty to their results eg. give current froyo -2 (for example) to each of their round results
Or even just a retroactively applied "if a group of players wins 3 or so seasons together, they can't play on the same team" ruling that effectively does the exact same as you currently have.
And why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.
It's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.
I don't know how it is on other forums, but we have no clue what's happening behind the scenes beyond what you tell us. And we haven't been told anything assuring beyond "trust me to do the right thing next season", which considering RGL's reputation here isn't a good fit. I don't mean this to start arguments or anything (if you want to focus on anything in this post please focus on twiggy's suggestions), just to say that we'll both agree your approach isn't working.
[quote=sigafoo]So then the question is how do we do this? Which is why I'm open that I don't think our implementation is correct. To target one team and why I've called this a temporary measure, as it's not sustainable nor should it be repeated. And once this season is done, we can talk about whether or not it was the correct decision, did it help as intended. etc... And adapt, grow or abandon it based on the results.[/quote]
What about anything twiggy suggested:
[quote=Twiggy]- Enforcing a salary cap using a system similar to fantasy tf2, where a team can not exceed a certain combined cost?
- Being less extreme with the rule of "1 froyo player/team" and go for something like "no more than 3 esea invite players/team"
- Using a handicap system; for example stating that any team that wins the season, or back to back seasons, receives some kind of round deficit for each match, etc
- Allow a team to bypass your rules but applying a round penalty to their results eg. give current froyo -2 (for example) to each of their round results[/quote]
Or even just a retroactively applied "if a group of players wins 3 or so seasons together, they can't play on the same team" ruling that effectively does the exact same as you currently have.
And why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.
It's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.
I don't know how it is on other forums, but we have no clue what's happening behind the scenes beyond what you tell us. And we haven't been told anything assuring beyond "trust me to do the right thing next season", which considering RGL's reputation here isn't a good fit. I don't mean this to start arguments or anything (if you want to focus on anything in this post please focus on twiggy's suggestions), just to say that we'll both agree your approach isn't working.
What about anything twiggy suggested:
[quote=Twiggy]- Enforcing a salary cap using a system similar to fantasy tf2, where a team can not exceed a certain combined cost?
- Being less extreme with the rule of "1 froyo player/team" and go for something like "no more than 3 esea invite players/team"
- Using a handicap system; for example stating that any team that wins the season, or back to back seasons, receives some kind of round deficit for each match, etc
- Allow a team to bypass your rules but applying a round penalty to their results eg. give current froyo -2 (for example) to each of their round results[/quote]
Or even just a retroactively applied "if a group of players wins 3 or so seasons together, they can't play on the same team" ruling that effectively does the exact same as you currently have.
And why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.
It's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.
I don't know how it is on other forums, but we have no clue what's happening behind the scenes beyond what you tell us. And we haven't been told anything assuring beyond "trust me to do the right thing next season", which considering RGL's reputation here isn't a good fit. I don't mean this to start arguments or anything (if you want to focus on anything in this post please focus on twiggy's suggestions), just to say that we'll both agree your approach isn't working.
Is the magnitude of hate directed towards Sigafoo unnecessary? Yes. But is the response from this decision unwarranted? Absolutely not.
If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards. The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.
I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. For example:
- What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?
- What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?
- What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?
Also I want to address some points that RGL have brought up in their updated post.
- What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.
- You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.
- You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.
- You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
Finally, I wish to address the responses to criticism. Whilst I understand that some of TFTVs users can be narrowly-minded about certain topics, having been on the side that is criticised, but Sigafoo's criticisms have been nothing short of dismissive. Rather than address the issue, it seems that he has adopted the method of debating their criticisms or straight up bringing up points to delegitimize their complaints (e.g. Pointing out when dominant teams in professional sports have had salary caps when that wasn't even the point being made.).
It definitely in no way shape or form damaging to RGL's reputation when you label an entire group of people as being on the wrong side of history by linking a thread discussing toxicity and sexual harassment when the vast majority of people were against the comments made by those individuals, as well as comparing that thread to this one.
It would be in RGL's best interests to abandon the rule, acknowledge that they made a bad choice, and work with the teams, players and perhaps even other leagues as to how best you should approach the issue of dominant teams like froyotech. Because I can say with absolute sincerity that this decision will be far more damaging to your League than having froyotech win another season.
Is the magnitude of hate directed towards Sigafoo unnecessary? Yes. But is the response from this decision unwarranted? Absolutely not.
If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards. The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.
I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. For example:
[list]
[*] What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?
[*] What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?
[*] What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?
[/list]
Also I want to address some points that RGL have brought up in their [i]updated[/i] post.
[list]
[*] What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.
[*] You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.
[*] You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.
[*] You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
[/list]
Finally, I wish to address the responses to criticism. Whilst I understand that some of TFTVs users can be narrowly-minded about certain topics, having been on the side that is criticised, but Sigafoo's criticisms have been nothing short of dismissive. Rather than address the issue, it seems that he has adopted the method of debating their criticisms or straight up bringing up points to delegitimize their complaints (e.g. Pointing out when dominant teams in professional sports have had salary caps when that wasn't even the point being made.).
It definitely in no way shape or form damaging to RGL's reputation when you label an entire group of people as being on the wrong side of history by linking a thread discussing toxicity and sexual harassment when the vast majority of people were against the comments made by those individuals, as well as comparing that thread to this one.
It would be in RGL's best interests to abandon the rule, acknowledge that they made a bad choice, and work with the teams, players and perhaps even other leagues as to how best you should approach the issue of dominant teams like froyotech. Because I can say with absolute sincerity that this decision will be far more damaging to your League than having froyotech win another season.
If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards. The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.
I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. For example:
[list]
[*] What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?
[*] What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?
[*] What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?
[/list]
Also I want to address some points that RGL have brought up in their [i]updated[/i] post.
[list]
[*] What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.
[*] You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.
[*] You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.
[*] You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
[/list]
Finally, I wish to address the responses to criticism. Whilst I understand that some of TFTVs users can be narrowly-minded about certain topics, having been on the side that is criticised, but Sigafoo's criticisms have been nothing short of dismissive. Rather than address the issue, it seems that he has adopted the method of debating their criticisms or straight up bringing up points to delegitimize their complaints (e.g. Pointing out when dominant teams in professional sports have had salary caps when that wasn't even the point being made.).
It definitely in no way shape or form damaging to RGL's reputation when you label an entire group of people as being on the wrong side of history by linking a thread discussing toxicity and sexual harassment when the vast majority of people were against the comments made by those individuals, as well as comparing that thread to this one.
It would be in RGL's best interests to abandon the rule, acknowledge that they made a bad choice, and work with the teams, players and perhaps even other leagues as to how best you should approach the issue of dominant teams like froyotech. Because I can say with absolute sincerity that this decision will be far more damaging to your League than having froyotech win another season.
JarateKingOr even just a retroactively applied "if a group of players wins 3 or so seasons together, they can't play on the same team" ruling that effectively does the exact same as you currently have.
Because I don't think that's a good rule. If you have a healthy competitive ecosystem, but one team has been clinical in playoffs, is different than one team has a large gap from 1st to 2nd place for multiple seasons in a row and it's not being overcome. Very different situations and a blanket rule wouldn't be nuanced enough to sort that out.
JarateKingAnd why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.
That's fair, mostly waiting because I want to do it more effectively and more thought out. We could try to do a quicker solution, but my worry is that if we do something like a true salary cap this moment. If we didn't do it correctly, it wouldn't be effective enough to do what we're trying to do. I have ideas on how I'd like to implement it, but I kind of want to see how this season plays out before we do that.
JarateKingIt's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.
Because most of the discussion isn't a discussion. A major of it is just people using hyperbole and hypotheticals that don't apply or are poorly thought out. There is a handful like the ones that you listed and we think about those, but again it goes to. Will this accomplish our goal? And I know the rule I have, more than likely will, but it's not a sustainable rule. And that's where the evolution comes in but to your points. We could try to do better now.
[quote=JarateKing]Or even just a retroactively applied "if a group of players wins 3 or so seasons together, they can't play on the same team" ruling that effectively does the exact same as you currently have.[/quote]
Because I don't think that's a good rule. If you have a healthy competitive ecosystem, but one team has been clinical in playoffs, is different than one team has a large gap from 1st to 2nd place for multiple seasons in a row and it's not being overcome. Very different situations and a blanket rule wouldn't be nuanced enough to sort that out.
[quote=JarateKing]
And why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.[/quote]
That's fair, mostly waiting because I want to do it more effectively and more thought out. We could try to do a quicker solution, but my worry is that if we do something like a true salary cap this moment. If we didn't do it correctly, it wouldn't be effective enough to do what we're trying to do. I have ideas on how I'd like to implement it, but I kind of want to see how this season plays out before we do that.
[quote=JarateKing]It's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.[/quote]
Because most of the discussion isn't a discussion. A major of it is just people using hyperbole and hypotheticals that don't apply or are poorly thought out. There is a handful like the ones that you listed and we think about those, but again it goes to. Will this accomplish our goal? And I know the rule I have, more than likely will, but it's not a sustainable rule. And that's where the evolution comes in but to your points. We could try to do better now.
Because I don't think that's a good rule. If you have a healthy competitive ecosystem, but one team has been clinical in playoffs, is different than one team has a large gap from 1st to 2nd place for multiple seasons in a row and it's not being overcome. Very different situations and a blanket rule wouldn't be nuanced enough to sort that out.
[quote=JarateKing]
And why wait until the future to do better? A lot of people have complaints with the core concept, but you already have direct advice and constructive feedback you can work with right now, that as far as I can see you've completely ignored. You don't need to get the ideal solution right off the bat, but even just setting a precedent for "these guys are too good, so seemingly on a whim here's a rule that only applies to them" is problematic.[/quote]
That's fair, mostly waiting because I want to do it more effectively and more thought out. We could try to do a quicker solution, but my worry is that if we do something like a true salary cap this moment. If we didn't do it correctly, it wouldn't be effective enough to do what we're trying to do. I have ideas on how I'd like to implement it, but I kind of want to see how this season plays out before we do that.
[quote=JarateKing]It's one thing to list off reasons why you don't listen to the community at all (even if I think it's missing the entire point of the "ban pred & degu" thread to bring it up here), but you can't complain about how you just run into arguments here when you yourself are only willing to argue. I want to say it's good that you recognize your decisions need improvement, but as it stands your posts are coming off more like "I'm going to go through with this no matter what, but I also don't want to hear any criticism of this rule that I admit is bad" rather than genuinely trying to discuss the best course of action.[/quote]
Because most of the discussion isn't a discussion. A major of it is just people using hyperbole and hypotheticals that don't apply or are poorly thought out. There is a handful like the ones that you listed and we think about those, but again it goes to. Will this accomplish our goal? And I know the rule I have, more than likely will, but it's not a sustainable rule. And that's where the evolution comes in but to your points. We could try to do better now.
DrHappinessIf RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards.
Again if we did this, Proland wouldn't exist. RGL wouldn't exist. Listening to others opinions outside of your own circle is important, but when those voices are very skewed, and you know that. You take it with a grain of salt. There are a few voices that stand out on the forums who are actually well reasoned and we listen to those moreso.
DrHappiness The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.
Fair.
DrHappinessI understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League.
Having hard rules is how you create loop holes. Having guidelines that you judge by allows context to weigh into decisions.
DrHappiness What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?
I don't think you could define that and have it always apply 100% of the time.
DrHappiness What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?
Roster changes would have to abide by our rules and a majority of teams won't have froyotech players this season.
DrHappinessWhat would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?
Again, it's about context, not just winning. Winning != super team, it's about how much, how to dominate and what are they doing in the market. Are they poaching the best players or are they building off of their own. How is good is the next teams to them, etc... As I've stated before, having a rule that just states "winning 3 times in a row causes a breakup" would not be a good rule.
DrHappinessWhat you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.
I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership.
DrHappinessYou have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.
I also listed a bunch of data showing how strong they are and how my goal is to create a healthy competitive ecosystem. It's not like I picked them out of the blue because they won a game one time.
DrHappinessYou use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.
See the first point. "I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership."
My point is that in ESEA when you had the top team choose to disband partially, that created a better competitive ecosystem and that's why people are excited over this season. Obviously, there's a difference in the way it's being accomplished, but the end goals are arguably a benefit to the league and viewership.
DrHappinessYou acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
Of the rules that we've played around with if we did make a more general rule. Which is our goal for the next season (depending on how this season goes,) though all teams would be affected. It still would have hit froyotech the hardest due the caliber of players they have on their team and how they've picked up players from other teams over the seasons. The end result would be very similar.
[quote=DrHappiness]
If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards.[/quote]
Again if we did this, Proland wouldn't exist. RGL wouldn't exist. Listening to others opinions outside of your own circle is important, but when those voices are very skewed, and you know that. You take it with a grain of salt. There are a few voices that stand out on the forums who are actually well reasoned and we listen to those moreso.
[quote=DrHappiness] The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.[/quote]
Fair.
[quote=DrHappiness]I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. [/quote]
Having hard rules is how you create loop holes. Having guidelines that you judge by allows context to weigh into decisions.
[quote=DrHappiness] What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?[/quote]
I don't think you could define that and have it always apply 100% of the time.
[quote=DrHappiness] What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?[/quote]
Roster changes would have to abide by our rules and a majority of teams won't have froyotech players this season.
[quote=DrHappiness]What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?[/quote]
Again, it's about context, not just winning. Winning != super team, it's about how much, how to dominate and what are they doing in the market. Are they poaching the best players or are they building off of their own. How is good is the next teams to them, etc... As I've stated before, having a rule that just states "winning 3 times in a row causes a breakup" would not be a good rule.
[quote=DrHappiness]What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.[/quote]
I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership.
[quote=DrHappiness]You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.[/quote]
I also listed a bunch of data showing how strong they are and how my goal is to create a healthy competitive ecosystem. It's not like I picked them out of the blue because they won a game one time.
[quote=DrHappiness]You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.[/quote]
See the first point. "I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership."
My point is that in ESEA when you had the top team choose to disband partially, that created a better competitive ecosystem and that's why people are excited over this season. Obviously, there's a difference in the way it's being accomplished, but the end goals are arguably a benefit to the league and viewership.
[quote=DrHappiness]You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
[/quote]
Of the rules that we've played around with if we did make a more general rule. Which is our goal for the next season (depending on how this season goes,) though all teams would be affected. It still would have hit froyotech the hardest due the caliber of players they have on their team and how they've picked up players from other teams over the seasons. The end result would be very similar.
If RGL wants productive feedback, then perhaps individuals shouldn't isolate the exact audience that RGL needs to cater towards.[/quote]
Again if we did this, Proland wouldn't exist. RGL wouldn't exist. Listening to others opinions outside of your own circle is important, but when those voices are very skewed, and you know that. You take it with a grain of salt. There are a few voices that stand out on the forums who are actually well reasoned and we listen to those moreso.
[quote=DrHappiness] The decision to separate players from playing in one team because they are dominant in recent history is the antithesis of what a competitive league should stand for. One thing I should point out is that RGL is completely within their right to do this as it is their league, but that does not mean we just have to accept it and go along with the decision. Earlier in the thread, Sigafoo debunked dominant teams not separating players in professional sports, pointing out the fact that they were under the effect of a Salary Cap.
What they have apparently failed to realize in avoiding to enforce an actual Salary Cap is the actual intention of what a salary cap is supposed to do. In the current method of roster changes and a player worth in the TF2 scene, no player has an attached value and players are free to transfer between teams in regards of their localized league's rules to prevent hijacking. Because players do not have a monetary value attached to them, the idea of a salary cap does not work with the rule that RGL have put forward. The rule's goal is similar to a salary cap, which is the prevention of a dominant team to encourage more competition but fails to realize that the method put forward prevents any team from establishing themselves.[/quote]
Fair.
[quote=DrHappiness]I understand that froyotech is a unique case because of their strength and dominance over the past 3 or so years if not more, with Se7en being the only team that can really challenge them. But I don't see that as an issue that requires breaking apart an established team because of that. RGL have shot themselves in the foot and have created a problem that, if they are not careful, will cause them more harm then good in the future. There are so many clauses and loopholes that would have to be addressed without the rule being seen as nothing more than an artificial handicap towards the other teams in the League. [/quote]
Having hard rules is how you create loop holes. Having guidelines that you judge by allows context to weigh into decisions.
[quote=DrHappiness] What defines someone as the best player in their respective class? Who determines that?[/quote]
I don't think you could define that and have it always apply 100% of the time.
[quote=DrHappiness] What about roster changes mid-season? What would happen if you don't have enough teams without more than one froyo member on each team?[/quote]
Roster changes would have to abide by our rules and a majority of teams won't have froyotech players this season.
[quote=DrHappiness]What would label a team in RGL only as a Super Team? Is this rule only for froyotech or is it for any team that establishes themselves as dominant? If Cat Noises win the next few seasons, would they be broken up as well?[/quote]
Again, it's about context, not just winning. Winning != super team, it's about how much, how to dominate and what are they doing in the market. Are they poaching the best players or are they building off of their own. How is good is the next teams to them, etc... As I've stated before, having a rule that just states "winning 3 times in a row causes a breakup" would not be a good rule.
[quote=DrHappiness]What you believe is 'more interesting' should not be a determining factor when making decisions for your League, but rather an objective view as to whether or not the decision would be a benefit to your league, both in viewership and participation.[/quote]
I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership.
[quote=DrHappiness]You have established this rule only to say you will never use it again most likely, making it seem like the rule is only being made since you don't like froyotech being as strong as they are, almost like reverse favoritism.[/quote]
I also listed a bunch of data showing how strong they are and how my goal is to create a healthy competitive ecosystem. It's not like I picked them out of the blue because they won a game one time.
[quote=DrHappiness]You use the latest ESEA season as an example, but forget that the teams distributed themselves naturally and through choice, not the League forcing them to do so.[/quote]
See the first point. "I believe that having a healthy competitive ecosystem is a benefit to viewership and participation. If a healthy portion of teams in the top level of play, regardless of format, feel they can contest the top team(s), that leads to better participation and viewership."
My point is that in ESEA when you had the top team choose to disband partially, that created a better competitive ecosystem and that's why people are excited over this season. Obviously, there's a difference in the way it's being accomplished, but the end goals are arguably a benefit to the league and viewership.
[quote=DrHappiness]You acknowledge that your rule is harsh but apparently made no effort to find a rule that would encourage (not force) a competitive atmosphere or be at all compromising to the players that it would affect the most.
[/quote]
Of the rules that we've played around with if we did make a more general rule. Which is our goal for the next season (depending on how this season goes,) though all teams would be affected. It still would have hit froyotech the hardest due the caliber of players they have on their team and how they've picked up players from other teams over the seasons. The end result would be very similar.
This is sad because my favorite player is banned from my favorite team fortress two competitive format! :( don’t ban b4nny please #b4ndit
This is sad because my favorite player is banned from my favorite team fortress two competitive format! :( don’t ban b4nny please #b4ndit
If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?
If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?
Tino_If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?
dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand
[quote=Tino_]If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?[/quote]
dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?[/quote]
dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand
henloimhalfThis is sad because my favorite player is banned from my favorite team fortress two competitive format! :( don’t ban b4nny please #b4ndit
its like you are begging to be banned
[quote=henloimhalf]This is sad because my favorite player is banned from my favorite team fortress two competitive format! :( don’t ban b4nny please #b4ndit[/quote]
its like you are begging to be banned
its like you are begging to be banned
directstar1Tino_If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?
It's an ego thing. It doesn't mean much to acknowledge criticism when the decision has already been made and it doesn't look he's changing his mind anytime soon at least for this upcoming season. You should be fielding thoughts after the season or at least before making the decision. Anything else is stroking his ego to make himself feel better so it looks like hes actually listening to people. On his website:
Your rule is overly harsh
Yes, it is. We know this. We were worried that a lighter rule wouldn't have the desired effect due to many reasons that would take longer to explain. It's possible we went too far and we can re-adjust after this coming season. If we didn't get the desired outcome.
We could be wrong
RGL is about experimenting and trying out new ideas and seeing what works. This season is looking very interesting with three teams who are going to be great, but who knows. Maybe we will get this completely wrong and competition will get worst. We're not afraid to admit our mistakes, but we're also not afraid to take a risk.
After the season is over we can re-evaluate and see if this was a good idea. Did we help balance out the competitive eco-system and see better matches? Etc...
Only time will tell if our decision is wrong. I like many of you, disagree with the idea and I don't think the way we went about it is 100% correct. However, we didn't have a better solution present. So we're going forward with this one for the time being. We'll either be right or wrong, but either way, we'll learn along the way about what effect distributing talent amongst the top teams in the league has as an effect on the league.
All sigfaoo really should have said at all is fuck u 6's players. my money, my rules. But he's already doing damage control. He gets off painting himself like this trail-blazing pioneer of league officiating when he's really just playing both sides. "it's a controversial decision but im doing this for tf2's own good." Too bad you can't paint yourself as a persecuted martyr if you hedge your own bets. Also any 6's invite player that is playing esea while also playing prolander on the side after this ruling is really only legitimizing his league and making yourself come across as a sellout.
[quote=directstar1][quote=Tino_]If you think that the majority of tftv posters are wrong and idiots why the fuck do you even come on here to try and justify yourself to them?
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?[/quote]
dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand[/quote]
It's an ego thing. It doesn't mean much to acknowledge criticism when the decision has already been made and it doesn't look he's changing his mind anytime soon at least for this upcoming season. You should be fielding thoughts after the season or at least before making the decision. Anything else is stroking his ego to make himself feel better so it looks like hes actually listening to people. On his website:
[i]Your rule is overly harsh[/i]
Yes, it is. We know this. We were worried that a lighter rule wouldn't have the desired effect due to many reasons that would take longer to explain. [b]It's possible we went too far and we can re-adjust after this coming season. If we didn't get the desired outcome.[/b]
[i]We could be wrong[/i]
RGL is about experimenting and trying out new ideas and seeing what works. This season is looking very interesting with three teams who are going to be great, but who knows. [b]Maybe we will get this completely wrong and competition will get worst. We're not afraid to admit our mistakes, but we're also not afraid to take a risk.[/b]
After the season is over we can re-evaluate and see if this was a good idea. Did we help balance out the competitive eco-system and see better matches? Etc...
Only time will tell if our decision is wrong. [b]I like many of you, disagree with the idea and I don't think the way we went about it is 100% correct.[/b] However, we didn't have a better solution present. So we're going forward with this one for the time being. We'll either be right or wrong, but either way, we'll learn along the way about what effect distributing talent amongst the top teams in the league has as an effect on the league.
All sigfaoo really should have said at all is fuck u 6's players. my money, my rules. But he's already doing damage control. He gets off painting himself like this trail-blazing pioneer of league officiating when he's really just playing both sides. "it's a controversial decision but im doing this for tf2's own good." Too bad you can't paint yourself as a persecuted martyr if you hedge your own bets. Also any 6's invite player that is playing esea while also playing prolander on the side after this ruling is really only legitimizing his league and making yourself come across as a sellout.
Like your best response in this situation was literally "Fuck you, my league, my rules." but instead you feel the need to preach about what you are doing to try and flip the people that you yourself admit are idiots. I just dont get it, is it an ego thing or what?[/quote]
dude, "Fuck you, my league, my rules." is literally the worst representation of what sigafoo is doing right now. He is acknowledging critisicm and offering his thoughts on it. Maybe if you took the time to read what he said, you would understand[/quote]
It's an ego thing. It doesn't mean much to acknowledge criticism when the decision has already been made and it doesn't look he's changing his mind anytime soon at least for this upcoming season. You should be fielding thoughts after the season or at least before making the decision. Anything else is stroking his ego to make himself feel better so it looks like hes actually listening to people. On his website:
[i]Your rule is overly harsh[/i]
Yes, it is. We know this. We were worried that a lighter rule wouldn't have the desired effect due to many reasons that would take longer to explain. [b]It's possible we went too far and we can re-adjust after this coming season. If we didn't get the desired outcome.[/b]
[i]We could be wrong[/i]
RGL is about experimenting and trying out new ideas and seeing what works. This season is looking very interesting with three teams who are going to be great, but who knows. [b]Maybe we will get this completely wrong and competition will get worst. We're not afraid to admit our mistakes, but we're also not afraid to take a risk.[/b]
After the season is over we can re-evaluate and see if this was a good idea. Did we help balance out the competitive eco-system and see better matches? Etc...
Only time will tell if our decision is wrong. [b]I like many of you, disagree with the idea and I don't think the way we went about it is 100% correct.[/b] However, we didn't have a better solution present. So we're going forward with this one for the time being. We'll either be right or wrong, but either way, we'll learn along the way about what effect distributing talent amongst the top teams in the league has as an effect on the league.
All sigfaoo really should have said at all is fuck u 6's players. my money, my rules. But he's already doing damage control. He gets off painting himself like this trail-blazing pioneer of league officiating when he's really just playing both sides. "it's a controversial decision but im doing this for tf2's own good." Too bad you can't paint yourself as a persecuted martyr if you hedge your own bets. Also any 6's invite player that is playing esea while also playing prolander on the side after this ruling is really only legitimizing his league and making yourself come across as a sellout.
sigafooNHL: Salary cap added in 2004.
NBA: Soft "salary" cap added in 1984.
MLB: Luxury tax added in 1997.
Soccer is the is the closer comparison since, to my knowledge, no European leagues have any sort of caps on spending. Which is why you also have fairly predictable local leagues. For instance in the NFL, the last 12 seasons have had 11 different teams win the championship. Whereas if you want to find the last 7 different winners of the English Premier League (since Premier is only 20 teams compared the NFL's 32 teams), you'd have to go back almost 30 years to find 7 different winners of the premier league.
But if you look at the UEFA Champions Cup, see it being broken up a bit more. A bit harder to maintain year after year winning success with teams who are able to spend similiar amounts money as you on talent. Plus, there is too much top-tier talent to contain onto one team.
These are interesting if slightly naive comparisons. Competitiveness is the headline PR reason for salary caps, but the far more influential reason is for owners to control costs. It's also worth nothing that dynasty type teams of the past like the 49ers also cheated on the financial rules of the day to assemble their teams, as PSG have done recently in European soccer. Although things like draft systems make it clear that there is a design in the sports to bring losing teams up to a competitive level, it's worth remembering that when it comes to money there are always other interests in play.
The comparison of NFL winners (for example) vs EPL winners has a number of causes. The length of the league in the EPL is far longer, 38 games vs 19-20 games for the Superbowl winner so the quality has more chances to even out random events. The NFL uses a playoff system - the EPL is won in league points accrued, knockout rounds make the tournament much less predictable. And also factors such as the draft, salary rules, etc, help to even out the teams quality, but they are far from the biggest part.
In terms of a given game soccer is an enormously random sport. If you look at the difference between rich and poor teams it's extraordinary that the top teams dominate as little as they do. As you've noted the Champions League tournament, dominated by a knockout format, is much less predictable. The headline EPL example that you've skirted around mentioning of course is that Leicester City won the league with a player budget less than 15% of Manchester City's.
As far as TF2 goes, it's a very predictable game. Players have gravitated towards 5cp that by design softens the impact that random events or unexpected spikes in skill can have. It rewards sustained consistent high level play. Unlocks that create random events are banned. Players prize always having the feeling of the potential to have counter-play. The games mechanics don't really allow for the snowballing of advantages in the same way as something like Counterstrike, and very high skill one shot kills are rare so it's hard for big swings in momentum to happen. Protecting the uber is basically all we have, and in 5cp that's often not even enough for a round by itself. Sometimes not even a point.
The alternative modes aren't much better. Payload has a slow moving cart and is probably worse than 5cp in this regard, nobody plays CTF (although this does have quite a high potential snowballing element but without the mechanics to back it up), AD has been shunned amongst other things because it's too random which probably makes it a pretty good candidate for these purposes, KOTH seems to have an endless dearth of acceptable maps, although the potential for snipers to run rampant has made it potentially more entertaining.
Use of weirdo unlocks obviously hasn't derailed Froyotech in 7s so they're probably not a game changer.
Which leaves us mostly with format changes. Fewer rounds, shorter matches, knockout games, unfamiliar maps, etc. Seeing as Froyo seem to be able to win games 5-0 at will messing with the structure might have negligible effect, and would other teams scrim oddball maps Froyo wouldn't? Maybe. As someone else has mentioned handicapping may be an option.
There are a lot of options to explore here if breaking up Froyotech's hegemony is the goal, and a structural solution is more likely to be of lasting benefit. Regardless, it's been a pretty effective way to generate free publicity and make the league a talked about subject even if it's mostly criticism.
[quote=sigafoo]NHL: Salary cap added in 2004.
NBA: Soft "salary" cap added in 1984.
MLB: Luxury tax added in 1997.
Soccer is the is the closer comparison since, to my knowledge, no European leagues have any sort of caps on spending. Which is why you also have fairly predictable local leagues. For instance in the NFL, the last 12 seasons have had 11 different teams win the championship. Whereas if you want to find the last 7 different winners of the English Premier League (since Premier is only 20 teams compared the NFL's 32 teams), you'd have to go back almost 30 years to find 7 different winners of the premier league.
But if you look at the UEFA Champions Cup, see it being broken up a bit more. A bit harder to maintain year after year winning success with teams who are able to spend similiar amounts money as you on talent. Plus, there is too much top-tier talent to contain onto one team. [/quote]
These are interesting if slightly naive comparisons. Competitiveness is the headline PR reason for salary caps, but the far more influential reason is for owners to control costs. It's also worth nothing that dynasty type teams of the past like the 49ers also cheated on the financial rules of the day to assemble their teams, as PSG have done recently in European soccer. Although things like draft systems make it clear that there is a design in the sports to bring losing teams up to a competitive level, it's worth remembering that when it comes to money there are always other interests in play.
The comparison of NFL winners (for example) vs EPL winners has a number of causes. The length of the league in the EPL is far longer, 38 games vs 19-20 games for the Superbowl winner so the quality has more chances to even out random events. The NFL uses a playoff system - the EPL is won in league points accrued, knockout rounds make the tournament much less predictable. And also factors such as the draft, salary rules, etc, help to even out the teams quality, but they are far from the biggest part.
In terms of a given game soccer is an enormously random sport. If you look at the difference between rich and poor teams it's extraordinary that the top teams dominate as little as they do. As you've noted the Champions League tournament, dominated by a knockout format, is much less predictable. The headline EPL example that you've skirted around mentioning of course is that Leicester City won the league with a player budget less than 15% of Manchester City's.
As far as TF2 goes, it's a very predictable game. Players have gravitated towards 5cp that by design softens the impact that random events or unexpected spikes in skill can have. It rewards sustained consistent high level play. Unlocks that create random events are banned. Players prize always having the feeling of the potential to have counter-play. The games mechanics don't really allow for the snowballing of advantages in the same way as something like Counterstrike, and very high skill one shot kills are rare so it's hard for big swings in momentum to happen. Protecting the uber is basically all we have, and in 5cp that's often not even enough for a round by itself. Sometimes not even a point.
The alternative modes aren't much better. Payload has a slow moving cart and is probably worse than 5cp in this regard, nobody plays CTF (although this does have quite a high potential snowballing element but without the mechanics to back it up), AD has been shunned amongst other things because it's too random which probably makes it a pretty good candidate for these purposes, KOTH seems to have an endless dearth of acceptable maps, although the potential for snipers to run rampant has made it potentially more entertaining.
Use of weirdo unlocks obviously hasn't derailed Froyotech in 7s so they're probably not a game changer.
Which leaves us mostly with format changes. Fewer rounds, shorter matches, knockout games, unfamiliar maps, etc. Seeing as Froyo seem to be able to win games 5-0 at will messing with the structure might have negligible effect, and would other teams scrim oddball maps Froyo wouldn't? Maybe. As someone else has mentioned handicapping may be an option.
There are a lot of options to explore here if breaking up Froyotech's hegemony is the goal, and a structural solution is more likely to be of lasting benefit. Regardless, it's been a pretty effective way to generate free publicity and make the league a talked about subject even if it's mostly criticism.
NBA: Soft "salary" cap added in 1984.
MLB: Luxury tax added in 1997.
Soccer is the is the closer comparison since, to my knowledge, no European leagues have any sort of caps on spending. Which is why you also have fairly predictable local leagues. For instance in the NFL, the last 12 seasons have had 11 different teams win the championship. Whereas if you want to find the last 7 different winners of the English Premier League (since Premier is only 20 teams compared the NFL's 32 teams), you'd have to go back almost 30 years to find 7 different winners of the premier league.
But if you look at the UEFA Champions Cup, see it being broken up a bit more. A bit harder to maintain year after year winning success with teams who are able to spend similiar amounts money as you on talent. Plus, there is too much top-tier talent to contain onto one team. [/quote]
These are interesting if slightly naive comparisons. Competitiveness is the headline PR reason for salary caps, but the far more influential reason is for owners to control costs. It's also worth nothing that dynasty type teams of the past like the 49ers also cheated on the financial rules of the day to assemble their teams, as PSG have done recently in European soccer. Although things like draft systems make it clear that there is a design in the sports to bring losing teams up to a competitive level, it's worth remembering that when it comes to money there are always other interests in play.
The comparison of NFL winners (for example) vs EPL winners has a number of causes. The length of the league in the EPL is far longer, 38 games vs 19-20 games for the Superbowl winner so the quality has more chances to even out random events. The NFL uses a playoff system - the EPL is won in league points accrued, knockout rounds make the tournament much less predictable. And also factors such as the draft, salary rules, etc, help to even out the teams quality, but they are far from the biggest part.
In terms of a given game soccer is an enormously random sport. If you look at the difference between rich and poor teams it's extraordinary that the top teams dominate as little as they do. As you've noted the Champions League tournament, dominated by a knockout format, is much less predictable. The headline EPL example that you've skirted around mentioning of course is that Leicester City won the league with a player budget less than 15% of Manchester City's.
As far as TF2 goes, it's a very predictable game. Players have gravitated towards 5cp that by design softens the impact that random events or unexpected spikes in skill can have. It rewards sustained consistent high level play. Unlocks that create random events are banned. Players prize always having the feeling of the potential to have counter-play. The games mechanics don't really allow for the snowballing of advantages in the same way as something like Counterstrike, and very high skill one shot kills are rare so it's hard for big swings in momentum to happen. Protecting the uber is basically all we have, and in 5cp that's often not even enough for a round by itself. Sometimes not even a point.
The alternative modes aren't much better. Payload has a slow moving cart and is probably worse than 5cp in this regard, nobody plays CTF (although this does have quite a high potential snowballing element but without the mechanics to back it up), AD has been shunned amongst other things because it's too random which probably makes it a pretty good candidate for these purposes, KOTH seems to have an endless dearth of acceptable maps, although the potential for snipers to run rampant has made it potentially more entertaining.
Use of weirdo unlocks obviously hasn't derailed Froyotech in 7s so they're probably not a game changer.
Which leaves us mostly with format changes. Fewer rounds, shorter matches, knockout games, unfamiliar maps, etc. Seeing as Froyo seem to be able to win games 5-0 at will messing with the structure might have negligible effect, and would other teams scrim oddball maps Froyo wouldn't? Maybe. As someone else has mentioned handicapping may be an option.
There are a lot of options to explore here if breaking up Froyotech's hegemony is the goal, and a structural solution is more likely to be of lasting benefit. Regardless, it's been a pretty effective way to generate free publicity and make the league a talked about subject even if it's mostly criticism.
BooopAlso any 6's invite player that is playing esea while also playing prolander on the side after this ruling is really only legitimizing his league and making yourself come across as a sellout.
I don't think anyone really cares. Its free $$ and the top players already know its a joke format. Its not going to kill 6s because its not where the best or most serious players play.
[quote=Booop]Also any 6's invite player that is playing esea while also playing prolander on the side after this ruling is really only legitimizing his league and making yourself come across as a sellout.[/quote]
I don't think anyone really cares. Its free $$ and the top players already know its a joke format. Its not going to kill 6s because its not where the best or most serious players play.
I don't think anyone really cares. Its free $$ and the top players already know its a joke format. Its not going to kill 6s because its not where the best or most serious players play.
Sigafoo, I Have an Issue To Report. B4nny and Habib Are Both Playing RGL HighLander Together.
Sigafoo, I Have an Issue To Report. B4nny and Habib Are Both Playing RGL HighLander Together.
I got cut for b4nny in prolander, really unfortunate!
I got cut for b4nny in prolander, really unfortunate!
SpuSigafoo, I Have an Issue To Report. B4nny and Habib Are Both Playing RGL HighLander Together.
dont worry, i think i know someone who can stop them
[quote=Spu]Sigafoo, I Have an Issue To Report. B4nny and Habib Are Both Playing RGL HighLander Together.[/quote]
dont worry, [url=https://clips.twitch.tv/CovertCourageousSwordPartyTime]i think i know someone who can stop them[/url]
dont worry, [url=https://clips.twitch.tv/CovertCourageousSwordPartyTime]i think i know someone who can stop them[/url]
It's an absolute shame that TF2Center, RGL, and HLPugs (these two are ran by nearly the same group of peple) could have actually made the community gain a small percentage of players instead of decreasing it if they simply just decided to run the services like human beings instead of banning players because of their "admin discretion" rules. Recently, an admin for one of these services were clipped on twitch, being racist, and they self-banned themselves for 5 minutes to avoid any punishment or backlash. It's one thing to ban players for dumb shit like Froyotech being "too good", but it's another thing when there are many examples of admins not enforcing the rules on each other or themselves.
I don't know where things went wrong. RGL and HLPugs started out strong. It just seems like the admins are suffering the same mental condition that Warpy on TF2Center has. We've reached a point in the competitive TF2 community where the main concern isn't the player-base getting smaller due to players moving on or playing another game, but it's the player-base getting smaller because of the way things are being run. It's not professional. It's completely childish.
It's an absolute shame that TF2Center, RGL, and HLPugs (these two are ran by nearly the same group of peple) could have actually made the community gain a small percentage of players instead of decreasing it if they simply just decided to run the services like human beings instead of banning players because of their "admin discretion" rules. Recently, an admin for one of these services were clipped on twitch, being racist, and they self-banned themselves for 5 minutes to avoid any punishment or backlash. It's one thing to ban players for dumb shit like Froyotech being "too good", but it's another thing when there are many examples of admins not enforcing the rules on each other or themselves.
I don't know where things went wrong. RGL and HLPugs started out strong. It just seems like the admins are suffering the same mental condition that Warpy on TF2Center has. We've reached a point in the competitive TF2 community where the main concern isn't the player-base getting smaller due to players moving on or playing another game, but it's the player-base getting smaller because of the way things are being run. It's not professional. It's completely childish.
I don't know where things went wrong. RGL and HLPugs started out strong. It just seems like the admins are suffering the same mental condition that Warpy on TF2Center has. We've reached a point in the competitive TF2 community where the main concern isn't the player-base getting smaller due to players moving on or playing another game, but it's the player-base getting smaller because of the way things are being run. It's not professional. It's completely childish.
I have two things to say on this.
firstly, to sigafoo
dear mr. foo,
please, for the love of god and all that is or is not holy in any religion or any non-religion,
let me proofread your article next time
the grammar gave me many aneurysms
SECONDLY, to everyone else
if you don't like his rules, stop taking his money
that is all
good day
I have two things to say on this.
firstly, to sigafoo
dear mr. foo,
please, for the love of god and all that is or is not holy in any religion or any non-religion,
let me proofread your article next time
the grammar gave me many aneurysms
SECONDLY, to everyone else
if you don't like his rules, stop taking his money
that is all
good day
firstly, to sigafoo
dear mr. foo,
please, for the love of god and all that is or is not holy in any religion or any non-religion,
let me proofread your article next time
the grammar gave me many aneurysms
SECONDLY, to everyone else
if you don't like his rules, stop taking his money
that is all
good day
Maklol who carees lol
Hey buddy, this is a real nice post you caused to stir up some shit. Bounced on my boys dick to this for hours because we thought it was reaaaaal hilarious seeing how stupid one individual could be. Can't want to see your IQ because it would probably be a number so low that it can compete with the amount of extra chromosomes you have. Yep you heard that right, because your IQ is so low you have an extra chromosome for how high your IQ is. Well anyway I'd love to see what else you can pull out of your ass because I can basically smell your shit all the way from the other side of the planet. Next time you post something try putting some actual thought into it and think about it again because it could just cause someone to have their intelligence drop as low as yours.
[quote=Mak]lol who carees lol[/quote]
Hey buddy, this is a real nice post you caused to stir up some shit. Bounced on my boys dick to this for hours because we thought it was reaaaaal hilarious seeing how stupid one individual could be. Can't want to see your IQ because it would probably be a number so low that it can compete with the amount of extra chromosomes you have. Yep you heard that right, because your IQ is so low you have an extra chromosome for how high your IQ is. Well anyway I'd love to see what else you can pull out of your ass because I can basically smell your shit all the way from the other side of the planet. Next time you post something try putting some actual thought into it and think about it again because it could just cause someone to have their intelligence drop as low as yours.
Hey buddy, this is a real nice post you caused to stir up some shit. Bounced on my boys dick to this for hours because we thought it was reaaaaal hilarious seeing how stupid one individual could be. Can't want to see your IQ because it would probably be a number so low that it can compete with the amount of extra chromosomes you have. Yep you heard that right, because your IQ is so low you have an extra chromosome for how high your IQ is. Well anyway I'd love to see what else you can pull out of your ass because I can basically smell your shit all the way from the other side of the planet. Next time you post something try putting some actual thought into it and think about it again because it could just cause someone to have their intelligence drop as low as yours.
the primary issue held against this implementation is that it isolates one individual team from competition, and grants the the title of "too good to compete with," in that sigafoo chose to state that no one has has been able to "improve"
instead of this being a policy change directed at the league to improve on competition and competitive play, the implication is sigafoo directing a policy change at certain people out of inability to evolve the league
the primary issue held against this implementation is that it isolates one individual team from competition, and grants the the title of "too good to compete with," in that sigafoo chose to state that no one has has been able to "improve"
instead of this being a policy change directed at the league to improve on competition and competitive play, the implication is sigafoo directing a policy change at certain people out of inability to evolve the league
instead of this being a policy change directed at the league to improve on competition and competitive play, the implication is sigafoo directing a policy change at certain people out of inability to evolve the league
Speaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."
Speaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i]
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i]
TurySpeaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you
[quote=Tury]Speaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i][/quote]
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i][/quote]
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you
FUNKeTurySpeaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you
in eu when a hl lobby rolls most people let them cap so everyone gets more of a game and most people on the losing team are fine with that. it's not trying to roll people it's just trying to play more than 5 mins for a game that takes 30 to start
[quote=FUNKe][quote=Tury]Speaking about sigafoo not liking stacked teams, he one time tried to get me and some other people banned from TF2center because of a stacked HL lobby.
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i][/quote]
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you[/quote]
in eu when a hl lobby rolls most people let them cap so everyone gets more of a game and most people on the losing team are fine with that. it's not trying to roll people it's just trying to play more than 5 mins for a game that takes 30 to start
https://forums.tf2center.com/topic/4282-honesty-steam-0152914633/#entry17742
I think the mod's response to his post sums up this whole thing pretty well
[i]"you cant ban people for wanting to play with friends."[/i][/quote]
thats a dumb reason to try and get people banned but honestly yall are a bunch of dicks if you're stalling out the game that much just to farm people clearly less experienced than you[/quote]
in eu when a hl lobby rolls most people let them cap so everyone gets more of a game and most people on the losing team are fine with that. it's not trying to roll people it's just trying to play more than 5 mins for a game that takes 30 to start
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.