4 vs 4 League

[Beer Hunter]

Recruit lock - rosters will be locked after last weekend of regular season is over.

You will have to change this a little. Say full recruit lock takes effect after last round but players cannot change
squads let's say 1 minute prior to the first game of last weekend.

Otherwise you allow let's say 16GMT'rs who didn't make it to play-offs switch to a squad that will get to play-offs.

Edit:
What about 0 points for 2-0 loss - 1 point for 2-1 loss. 3 points for 2-0 win - 2 points for 2-1 win?

This way you don't give out too many points. Babl scoring was a bit messed up because you could reward another
team on purpose the 0,5 extra point if you won 2-1.

True about the recruit lock, so the recruit lock starts on Saturday evening 23:59GMT, before the last games of regular season (Sunday).

About the scoring: 0 points for 2-0 loss does not encourage teams to "just showup and play", as some squads might do. I believe a carrot works better than a stick on this one.

[Tembest]

Recruit lock - rosters will be locked after last weekend of regular season is over.

You will have to change this a little. Say full recruit lock takes effect after last round but players cannot change
squads let's say 1 minute prior to the first game of last weekend.

Otherwise you allow let's say 16GMT'rs who didn't make it to play-offs switch to a squad that will get to play-offs.

Edit:
What about 0 points for 2-0 loss - 1 point for 2-1 loss. 3 points for 2-0 win - 2 points for 2-1 win?

This way you don't give out too many points. Babl scoring was a bit messed up because you could reward another
team on purpose the 0,5 extra point if you won 2-1.

True about the recruit lock, so the recruit lock starts on Saturday evening 23:59GMT, before the last games of regular season (Sunday).

About the scoring: 0 points for 2-0 loss does not encourage teams to "just showup and play", as some squads might do. I believe a carrot works better than a stick on this one.

Then reward all teams who show up and play with 1 extra point. I'm just saying giving 3 points for a win and 1,5 for overtime loss is against all rules of logic.
You give out too many points in total. That's the problem. You can of course give 2,5 for overtime win and 1,5 for overtime loss but half a points are a bit complicated.
I think the other option is just to use win/lose. 3 points for win, 1 for loss. 0 for forfeit loss. Simple as that. No exceptions or overtime rules.

[Beer Hunter]

Yup based on this discussion I'm leaning towards simple 3 for victory, 1 for loss, 0 for forfeit loss. The "overtime" as in achieving one round victory and getting reward from it was a good attempt of making discussion to see how people react, now I believe I've heard enough comments against.

[Tembest]

Ship restrictions? Max length of one round?

It might be fun to play all ships or what do you think?

Freq 0 would play 1 wb, 1 jav, 1 spid, 1 levi. etc.
Round 3 could just be mixed ships all allowed, or any freq ships but only one of kind per team. I don't care.

Would be fun because captains might have to actually consider who to recruit as they need sharks, wbs, terrs...

Oh btw... no antiwarp ok?

[Tembest]

I edited the original post. I hope you don't mind.

We can edit it as things are decided.

[Beer Hunter]

I wrote about ship constellation in the first post. In the past it has been 1 bomber and 1 emper allowed per freq, other than that there has been no limits or freq specified ships. I think this should stay as it is. This is more of a strategic duel rather than a long range bombing fest, I hope you're with me on this one.

In the previous 4vs4 league we limited the amount of specials as well as removed portals. Atm the ship settings in 4vs4 have only 1 rocket per ship, no portals, obviously repels and bursts are there too. Thoughts about this?

Antiwarp is available atm but it consumes energy, making your ship weaker which is why it has been mostly used at the end of the games when there is just 1 of the opposin team left so he can not warp away etc.

PS. Only 2 squads registered to league so far, get your lazy butts to DSB, get players and register your squad. Only 2 weeks before the league begins!

[Tembest]

I wrote about ship constellation in the first post. In the past it has been 1 bomber and 1 emper allowed per freq, other than that there has been no limits or freq specified ships. I think this should stay as it is. This is more of a strategic duel rather than a long range bombing fest, I hope you're with me on this one.

I would find one of each ship much more entertaining but that's just me. I was just offering a new idea. What do others say?

I heavily think it should be Freq 0 vs Freq 1. DSB ship settings have been designed for that, hence it's most enjoyable when you play freq vs freq.
Only the last round should be mixed. Again, my opinion, anyone else?

[kemi]

I think one of each ship is interesting, but it should be limited to max 1 bomber and 1 emper.

So you're proposing a freq 0 round a freq 1 round and a mixed round? This could be interesting

Not sure how it would work, since I prefer to play Jav both halves and not many people would want to play some of the in my opinion weaker ships for 4 vs 4 like Shark etc..

[Tembest]

Yea I agree, but then again, it would be same for all teams. And all of sudden Fly Swatter became a wanted player.

Edit: and of course the limit would be one bomber and emper if we played 0 vs 1 and one of each ship.

Edit 2: Why I like this idea is because it gives currently worse players a new perspective. Someone who is not that good
might master a certain ship very well, meaning he might get a chance to play for some of the better teams. The overall
skill difference might become smaller because a bad player sucks just as much on wb or jav, while a good player usually
is very good only on one or two ship types. This way the good players might not get to play exact ship they want, and
might actually 1. join worse squads to get to play what they want, or 2. play a different ship they don't master (in other
words, become weaker). Either way, both consequences seem good to me.

[kemi]

I can see many ways to exploit this though...