Asunto: Questions & Answers

If everything was completely fair, across the board, every single team would be .500 and tied. There has to be unfairness in the system, we are simulating the real world after all.

I guess what you are describing is a completely other topic. I also think that in actual economic necomers do have a big disadvantage and it's impossible to rise into top 10% teams for a newcomer in let's say 10-12 seasons. and I guess it should be possible within this time. but it's not for sure for a team starting today.

If PPM wants to be fair, it should calculate strength of league in which some team is playing (for sponsor offers), not number of leagues.
Simple as that.

calculate strenght? what will be criteries? team strenght? team otr or maybe top20 players average otr?

Overall TS of all 20 clubs of course. OTR can be misleading.

overall team strenght also can be misleading

To be fair, the league pyramids have to be of comparable sizes, so that it is about as hard to advance to the 1st division, and so roughly the same percentage of teams are in the 1st division.

If they want to continue to organize based on country, then the largest countries need to be split among multiple league pyramids. Instead of 20 Czech 1st division teams there might be 140. Meanwhile smaller and medium-sized countries, some of which have their own pyramid now would share a league pyramid. So it would be about as hard to get to the top of one of the Slovak pyramids, as it would be to get to the top of a Norway-Denmark-Estonia-Lithuania pyramid.

Having smaller pyramids would permit steeper pyramids so that new teams could start at the bottom and have a possibility to advance, instead of starting in DII, and getting beat 20:0. See TennisDuels where it is real easy to advance in the lowest divisions. If someone lost all their matches 6-0, 6-0 they wouldn't stick around long.

There could still be national cups, and national teams under such a structure. A national team is not an all-league team.

Maybe misleading if one ore more strong clubs play almost whole season in full, but at the end when calculation should take place - he/they decide to sell those players.
Other than that, it's most reliable way to determine strength of some league. In theory, if II league from Slovakia have stronger teams overall than I, maybe they should have slightly bigger GS offer. It could happen. With current system that situation would be impossible and also unfair for those from II league.

@Jimrtex Interesting thought, and it seems fair. If they wouldn't have problem having 7 champions - why should other worry.

these pyraminds will never be balanced... for example I.1 will be tougher than I.12 as it is in lower tier leagues. they need to make before season start league balancing.

well, then change current promotion system. teams could be promoted/relegated to random leagues, as long as it is same league level...

or rank them by team strength, whatever

I agree

I think the bigest problem is that upgrading takes wayyy too long time and money. Oldest teams that started 3 years ago stil upgrade facilities. For newcomers that means you need to wait 3-4 years to compete even if you are the best manager and have a lot of luck.

oldest teams still upgrading facilities becosue now they have spare money to waste... IMO there are a lot of arena facilities that arent that good to waste money on when you still climbing the ladder of league tiers

New teams get more money than oldest team when they started, because nowdays when new teams sell talented player they´ll get better price of him (a lot better).

and they already have otr