Team System Discussion and Ideas

[Ace Trainer Liam]

Octopus Babies was a joke team that partook purely in the competitive battling sections and won a War. Kind of recent, actually. That's considered a fiasco.

A joke team is considered a team that has zero substance or is just a War-related thread that is completely random. There was a team about animated gifs in the same War. Also a joke team. It's about as bad as titling your thread [WAR] My Team and for the opening post saying this is a War team, join please. I'd be like, why? Your team is about nothing. A joke team is pretty much defined as a team that has no semblance of what it's about and equates to this is a team, join.

Oh well that makes sense. To my knowledge, at least what I've seen so far, there haven't been any joke teams yet.

I'm still a fan on soft caps and what Homura said last page.

[bronislav84]

Oh well that makes sense. To my knowledge, at least what I've seen so far, there haven't been any joke teams yet.

I'm still a fan on soft caps and what Homura said last page.

Yoga is as close as we're getting to a joke team this year, but at least they're dedicated. Just look up Octopus Babies thread.

[Saraibre Ryu]

Yoga is as close as we're getting to a joke team this year, but at least they're dedicated. Just look up Octopus Babies thread.

You might not be able to find it as last I checked, PE2K is the dead. If anyone does, let me know.

[Elysia]

Yoga is as close as we're getting to a joke team this year, but at least they're dedicated. Just look up Octopus Babies thread.

Yoooooo, we just need a good graphic designer for the awesome banners and the four five seven of us are gonna rock your world with our killer yoga moves.
...yeah, no, we're definitely a joke team, but we're trying really hard not to be, honest!

You might not be able to find it as last I checked, PE2K is the dead. If anyone does, let me know.

I know we used to be able to find it with the Wayback Machine, but 1) I don't know if it saved individual threads such as WAR team chats, and 2) for some reason, clicking on that tries to take me to Twitter now.

I'm kinda against the limiting of submissions/only letting one team place per category for the following reasons:
=Even with a point gap limiter like Felly suggested (ie, if there's a 10-point gap between first/second place and a potential third place submission from a different team, if I understand correctly), this seems horribly arbitrary: it'd be really easy for judges to create a 10-point gap in their scoring anyway. Heck, if I were a judge and I thought that two submissions from the same team deserved second place, this would be my first instinct in order to let the most deserving submissions get the most points for their teams this is also why I'm not a judge probably
=There's a fine line between making WAR more competitively viable (ie levelling the playing field for big and small teams, like we're trying to do here), and completely nuking the competitive aspect. I think that by preventing teams from scoring multiple places, even if they *do* present work that merits 1st/2nd place, starts to fall in the latter. We're trying to balance the competition, not nip it in the bud.
=If anything, I think it might discourage members from large teams from placing because they might get absolutely no points for their work. If I'm on a team with someone who's really good at category [X] and I figure that they're gonna place higher than I will, then there's basically no point for me to enter my own work, because I won't get any points anyway. This is sad. :(

That being said, I'm going to throw my hat in with the soft cap crowd because no one wants random drafts I promise they're great guys, really ;-;. There's some general fear about people just waiting until the teams they want to open up, but doesn't this solve both the problem of people not getting on the teams they want as well as large/small teams in one shot? Also, I'm asking this not as a rhetorical question but as a legitimate query: is there anyone who would choose not to compete in WAR at all simply because their first-choice team is full? That seems to be another major concern here, but I'm not sure if I'm understanding it correctly.

Also also, could we maybe set up a poll (perhaps after the dust has settled more on each individual system) with all of the potential options suggested (perhaps including a "keep things the way they are; I see no problem at all" option, because that's still surprisingly popular) and ask people to mark all of the theoretical systems that they would be okay with participating under should they be implemented in WAR? Ie a lot of people are saying in this thread that "system [X] is going to be super unpopular and no one is going to like it," so it'd be great to weed those out early on.

[VeloJello]

Personally, if we're going to alter the system (which I don't believe should happen, I believe we should just let people pick whatever team they want and let things go how they go) I think that allowing each team to only place once in any given category is the best system. Having caps would just pressure people to get things done nownownow without waiting to see if any good new teams emerge, and a draft sucks the fun out of things because it doesn't allow people to pick what team they want to be on. just my two cents bye

[bronislav84]

https://web.archive.org/web/20140903...d.php?t=113763 This be the thread. I found it. It's a team about nothing, and look at the random stuff they post in the thread. Even Yoga has more substance than this and as Elysia said, is trying not to be a joke team.

Letting you know @Saraibre Ryu :)

[Neo Emolga]

I thought of an idea with the whole competitive teams versus casual teams. It's extremely simple.

Competitive teams will have a member cap.

Casual teams have no member cap and could have a million members if they want, but they do not play for points.

And bingo, I couldn't help thinking of how easy this would be to implement. People on casual teams can take part in any section and their submissions and performance would be judged totally as normal, but when it comes to scoring, they're simply passed over. This allows newbies to get a feel for the WAR without pressure, and if a team would rather just take it casually and not care about winning or losing, the option's there.

[brandon_g]

Sounds like a great idea Neo, does anyone else agree?

[SassySnivy]

I actually am in favor of this idea, too. Now to just see how many people oppose of it...which may go to show how casual some "casual" players really are.

One thing that's bugged me about this recent debate is that a quite a few people don't like the fact that others are focusing more on the competitive aspect than the fun aspect, suggesting changes to WAR based on this need to compete.

We had a split between two parties: casual players and competitive players. I think that if we ever focus on making changes, we need to find a way to cater to both parties in some way. This suggestion of Neo's may need a little polishing, but it definitely fits the needs of both types of players.

Thing is, without competition, there's really no motivation. It's possible to BOTH have fun AND be competitive.

Another thing that's kinda bugged me is how someone will make a good suggestion--and if you work with it some, it could change into something better--but a lot of ideas tended to be dismissed if there were really any problems with them whatsoever. Which isn't good; ANY method you try is going to have problems that you just CAN'T work around. You have to make sacrifices.

But yeah, I know that everything has been settled for the most part, but those are just some...grievances of mine.

[brandon_g]

Glad you agree. Yeah sometimes people need to be able to make a comprise. Cant please everyone, but you can please most of what the majority of the people want :).