Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
OK, well before we get into who's coming back next season and such, I'd like to hash out some ideas from you all on how to organise next season.
There are a few points of contention I can see from this season:
One thing I like about leagues, and one of my original ideas for starting LOBBA, is the continuity for teams. I like to see the same team, most likely with new players, appear season after season. It adds character and familiarity to the league. Something I am all for. However, last season forcing coaches to get 17 games played was silly and quite difficult, so it is something I would like to avoid doing. So, the question is, how do we make the league so that coaches can keep their veteran teams, but rookie teams are not seen basically as SPP chum?
One method is, everyone starts a fresh team. This I really don't want to do, for reasons outlined above. One other I can see is, we split the league into groups. These groups would consist of six or more teams, and would be more levelled with teams facing off against others of a similar strength. I was also considering allowing flow between groups (as in play six games, the top three from lower league go up, bottom three from top go down, then play final XX games of season - or something similar). The problem I have with this is that it breaks the league up and we would either require another cup for the lower group to win, or there stands little chance for any new team to win the league.
I am not sure on how that would work. Another option is, we just keep as is. New teams get thrown in the deep end against the veterans. I do not like this plan, as it is unfair on the new teams who will be relatively unskilled to go and play a highly skilled teams - such as, for example, the Khornate Elfeaters. This would be very bad for the new team.
So - suggestions on how to handle this.
Another topic I'd like to cover is the league structure. I personally have enjoyed the structured rounds, it allows forward planning and there is no chance of a bashy team cherrypicking a weakened 'soft' team etc. However, at the same time, I understand that the structured method can be hard on a team. Some might have three or more bashy teams in a row, making their recovery almost impossible. So that seems unfair. And we have seen how the absence of a single coach can affect the league as a whole - but this has been discussed elsewhere, so I shall not go into it here. Where as in an unstructured league you can pick and choose your opponents, which is helpful should you need/want a recovery game.
Which do you think is the better option for the league?
We have another seven rounds and the Kuffy Cup to play through, so we have plenty of time to cover this. I need feedback so I can make LOBBA into an enjoyable addition to the forum, and for you to have a fun time as well. All feedback is welcome, as well as suggestions.
I want to make LOBBA accessible for both returning veteran teams, and fresh rookie teams. Help me.
I would do it like English football - several leagues (initially based on points or maybe games played) with then some going up or down at the end of each season. Then a cup where the top league all get through the first round for free to let the lesser teams whittle themselves down a bit
Structured suits me fine, as long as it's random. Nobody should be able to complain too much about being stiffed by a random number generator, it happens to us all far too often
I have no control over it. I tell FUMBBL the teams involved and sets up a schedule automatically, and randomly I hope. So, no hassle there.
With regards to structure, I like the NPC's* system of having actual promotion-relegation matches. Make teams work for their promotions, I say.
*The NPC was the old format for provincial rugby in NZ. It had three divisions based on the strength of the teams. The winner of one division would play a game against the wooden spooner of the division above it for a spot in the higher division.
I am hald tempted to tell everyone to start fresh, but it wouldn't really solve the season after's problem. =/
Why not split the leagues by team rating rather than games played? 50-150 in one league, 150-250 in the other, with teams retired or kept for special matches when they hit the 251 mark.
Because if someone had a really poor 17 games, they'll lag below someone who only played 7 but kicked arse in all of them.
I just like to know I'm doing a good job. Being as this is my first time I've done this. I think its going well, its just finding the balance. I just find all the feedback helpful to see if I need to tidy/improve areas of the league.
I agree that getting 17 games in prior to starting was quite tough, maybe have people start a new team and get to 6 games? Not too unreasonable, and would allow some advancement and expansion but not so much as to break the system. I think splitting the League would make for a very small pool of opponents. I am happy with the current system tbh, if you get a few bashy teams in a row then its tough luck, you just have to ride it out (In Lobba 2 I played Dwarforce then Curry Flavoured Necrons, my teams a bit battered but ok). Its all part of a league.