Warrior General Games

I believe that this can probably never happen, but just spit balling an idea here. There would have to be several things that would have to change, but I think it could be a nice development. My guess is though that there would have to be too much change and there may not be enough return on the time invested for Bort to go through this.

League Structure
For a price a user can purchase a league [The commish]. (all leagues should be run by a human other than D-Leagues, all D-Leagues should have the same settings).
When purchasing the league the commish chooses several settings for the league. Some settings may be: acceptance of team applications, trade options, salary capped or not, lolcasual vs regular, among other rule options.
The league commission is good for 1 season at a time. The nice thing about this is that there is no lock in period, but since there is an accepting option people can maintain a league that has rivals if you so choose. Also a team can be in multiple leagues.
GLB is getting extra flex from the leagues although this could be a small amount or whatever is decided by Bort of course.

Team Structure
The team itself might cost less but could end up being as inexpensive or expensive as the owner would like it.
A person buys a team [The owner], the team is in a certain age bracket but there are an unlimited number of teams available in each age bracket.
The owner then fills the roster with players in the age range however he sees fit.
The owner of the team applies for leagues that he would like to join. Each league costs a set amount.
Since each league has its own set of rules every rule must be accepted so that the owner knows what he is agreeing to.
This gives the owner the ability to determine how much time he spends playing GLB. If he wants to spend considerable time during a particular season he could play in 3 leagues but the following season perhaps he only wants 1 season. Also, players could lobby for leagues in the team forum. Perhaps increasing the activity in forums slightly.

I know I have included some things here that can't possibly work in the current structure, and it would be a major paradigm shift, but just some thoughts (probably mostly terrible and not very well thought out as I was just typing randomly mostly).

I like where your thoughts are on this. This needs to be fine tuned, but damn, this has great potential IMO.

I don't see the payoff?

What about this proposal would make me want to own a team (more than I would already) or build a new player (more than I would already)?

i dont get why this would be better than what we have now.

The idea is interesting but I would have a few questions...

1) Aside from setting the basic rules for the league, what other responsibilities would a commissioner have?
2) How do you ensure there are enough leagues for everyone who wants to be a commissioner?
3) How do you ensure users (commissioner and owner) don't get together to exploit a league?
4) How do you ensure there are enough leagues for teams in a specific age bracket?

Basically I see this as doing nothing more than splintering the current userbase and, thus, will be deemed NGTH.

I do like the basic idea though. I just feel it wouldn't be successful today (but may have been 25 seasons ago.

Originally posted by AirMcMVP
The idea is interesting but I would have a few questions...

1) Aside from setting the basic rules for the league, what other responsibilities would a commissioner have?
2) How do you ensure there are enough leagues for everyone who wants to be a commissioner?
3) How do you ensure users (commissioner and owner) don't get together to exploit a league?
4) How do you ensure there are enough leagues for teams in a specific age bracket?

Basically I see this as doing nothing more than splintering the current userbase and, thus, will be deemed NGTH.

I do like the basic idea though. I just feel it wouldn't be successful today (but may have been 25 seasons ago.

1. There could be many things provided, this was just meant to be a conversation starter really, I developed the idea as I typed.
2. I don't believe the strength of any game is based on allowing anyone to do everything they would like to do. However, As many leagues can be created as people would like to create. Filling those leagues and making them desireable would be something the commissioner would have to think about.
3. What is there to exploit? Each team could actually be involved in 1 specific league for the true season, and extra leagues could be commissioner driven perhaps. I am not certain. Just some ideas to start with. As POTO mentioned there is definitely some need for fine tuning if even this is a remote possibility. Which I am not certain there is.
4. I have alot of unanswered questions here clearly.

It could perhaps splinter, but if done well it could have the exact opposite effect. The problem is as I have stated I have many questions I can't answer here..

I agree with your assessment that it would likely have more potential earlier in the game process. This may be to much of a shift at this stage for the bulk of users to come on board.

Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
I don't see the payoff?

What about this proposal would make me want to own a team (more than I would already) or build a new player (more than I would already)?
I think the additions would be in the potential to create your own rivals. The ability to maintain your own rivals. It may add some buzz. However, you are could definitely be right, there may not be enough to gain from a change this severe to justify the change. I don't think this has to remove the current system completely though,

Originally posted by ProfessionalKop
i dont get why this would be better than what we have now.
I am not certain here, but it would add great flexibility to the game, which isn't an undesirable trait for successful games to have.

You all are probably right, I am not sure if all the details could be worked out, especially this late into a game.

Definitely like the thought behind it, though I agree most likely NGTH or more aptly NGTHATT (as Phantom suggested in his suggestion). With that said, this should definitely get some discussion as it is a different way to look at the game's league structure and if can't be used here, maybe it could be in future games.

------

Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
I don't see the payoff?

What about this proposal would make me want to own a team (more than I would already) or build a new player (more than I would already)?

Originally posted by ProfessionalKop
i dont get why this would be better than what we have now.

I think those are the areas that need to be fleshed out a bit more. I'd assume some of the custom settings for the leagues would provide that motivation.

-------

I'd add that this may be something in addition to the current league structure. Like you said have multiple leagues your team can be in. Though I would say a for sure limit would be if your team is casual or regular, you would be stuck to that type of league

+1

-1. Current system is plagued with too many CPU teams, but this is not the answer.

I like the idea myself... but Phil D. Badger might be right about it coming too late. Lotsa old folks round here kinda stuck in their ways. But seriously, the worst part would be cost, I'm thinking. To "Own a league" should cost much more than owning a team. And only so many leagues could be available (as there are a limit to how many teams are available)... so the cost of owning a league would probably be kinda high so to keep from having too many people trying to own one. Which sounds a bit of a nasty way to be... but some kind of heavy financial structure would surely happen. IMO.

I am not sure this topic warrants any further discussion. I think it would be too time costly to make the changes now. For future games being built from the ground up it would actually be fairly simple and straight forward to develop something that started with principles similar to this, but after the fact would be far to difficult.