Emnet: Suggestions?

the seeding is based on the league level first and then OTR. Moreover, we have reduced the OTR bonus for promoted teams and now every team can only get it the first time they promote to some league. If they relegate and promote again, they will no longer be eligible for the bonus. Gradually the OTR will become more and more indicative of the real strength of the team.

Moreover, in theory, team strength is just the potential the team has whereas OTR is more like the sum of the team's results. In the world of sports, teams are ranked according to their results and not their potential to achieve them.

For instance San Jose Sharks have been very good on paper for years, but they never made the SCF. Should they be ranked according to the names on the roster or based on what they achieved?

Why aren't the rankings simply based on the teams performance in the previous NC? I totally agree that much will have changed between when a team got knocked out one season to their team the next but isn't that how the IIHF handles things?

IIHF doesn't have competitions like the National Cup at all. Previous season's performance may be affected by one bad day at the office in the early rounds. OTR is much more stable than that.

The San Jose Sharks are a competitive hockey team and have been for years. They usually finish atop the division standings and make the playoffs. Ranked by OTR or OTS, they'd be high in the standings.

Also, until the day comes when every team that promotes from division III does not rank ahead of me on day one of the new season, I'm not going to believe that OTR is a fair indicator.

Almost midway through the season with a 12-2 record, after finishing the past three seasons of division II.3 in 8th, 4th, 2nd (regular) and 4th, 4th, and 3rd (playoffs), I still rank behind [hockey_team=39345],[hockey_team=12943], and [hockey_team=37668], all of whom promoted from division III and none of whom are within 50 points of OTS.

This current system of OTR still ranks the Toronto Marlies ahead of the Toronto Maple Leafs (or even a team like the San Jose Sharks) for OTR purposes. That simply doesn't make sense.

You present a good argument for results-based ranking; however, it is invalid since that would be based on competition amongst a single peer group (e.g. NHL.) This cannot apply to ranking across several independent sets of heterogeneous peer groups.

Take my team for example. We've done poorly in the rankings against known better teams within my division, but I'm sure my team can win a series against the majority of teams in the rung below that currently have a higher OTR.

Even with the reduction of promotion/relegation effects on OTR, it still will not show relative team strengths well across rungs.

As a direct result of the OTR system, my team missed pot 1 and now faces the second ranked team in Canada because there is no subsequent balancing system.

Kicesie, [hockey_team=12825], and [hockey_team=41987] are new promotees who, quite unjustly, rank ahead in OTR.

I bow out without having played a real competitive game.

I like the way the national cup is set up curently. It's a lot of random games just like every big tournament has... If it was to switch, I would like the option of every team has the chance to play any team at any point in the tournament. The. You can end up with a road of death to the finals, kinda like how the World Cup has a group of death... If it was 1 vs last all tournament long there would be no cance of a team getting to the finals unless they rank in the top 3.... This way at least keeps it interesting. In your case you got a difficult road this year, maybe next season, or the one after you might be the lucky team that get an inactive team, or one of these newly promoted teams that you can beat easily and advance. If you do the whole tournament based on OTS what is the point in the tournament... Ppm can just update the bottom half of teams that got knocked out each week without playing... Not quite due to the randomness of games, but I don't think just because you have a high OTS you should get everything handed to you.

That's BS. You still have to play the games and win the games.

Nothing is being handed to anybody. To win this tournament, you still have to beat the best teams.

I am also not proposing 1st vs last. I am proposing a weighted system so that if you're at the top of pool 2, you are more likely to face the bottom of pool 1 than the top of pool 1. It is a continuation of the element of separating into pools while still maintaining the excitement and anticipation that comes with a draw.

I just want to ask why we can't use fourth line forwards for PK. My forwards with the highest defense attribute are on the fourth line and it's a shame that I can't use them for what they are good at.

Been like that since day 1. To include it would mean complete re-programming of the GE.

Having an option to turn the tennis duel pop ups off when I go to a new page. annoying to say the least. maybe if I didn't have pro, but with pro, that shouldn't exist.

have to agree, and like the example of SJ sharks, it fit's, old adage of buying a championship... one thing comes to mind, though, where AQ & experience become more apparent to us, another intangalable remains, call it heart, call it hard work ethic, or whatever... but in any game, any series, one or two players will elevate their game to the extreme of their capabilities... For instance Paul Henderson... God Bless Him ! ...
in a nutshell, it works now, can work better, and yes u have to work for it ...

lol.thought i had spyware , kinda a buzzkill but i guess its to keep moochers like me playing with outpaying...too bad for propack holders though.

The log in bonus is a terrible idea which detracts from the integrity of the game and takes team management one step closer to caring for a tamagochi.

Money, until now, has resulted from your team's performance and how you've managed your team's resources. This is the core of the game! Getting it for signing in is akin to getting 10% for writing your name on a test. Credit for no merit.

Further, this disproportionately penalizes PPM patrons with lives and jobs; i.e. the kind of people who pay for pro-packs and actually fund the game.

The pro-pack features are all geared towards assisting people who don't necessarily have time to log in daily: scheduling friendlies in advance, setting line-ups and tactics in advance, and setting your practice ratios.

This sign in bonus amounts to more than 10% per week on your sponsorship money -- no small potatoes and a significant disadvantage for those not logging in daily.

The sign in bonus is clearly designed to incentivize site traffic, which theoretically will lead to more ad clicks and more money for PPM. I sincerely hope that PPM cancels this poorly thought out feature, which also features an annoying pop-up, or that pro-pack owners refuse to buy more credits to renew their subscriptions, causing this poorly thought out cash grab to completely backfire.

Cancel the sign in bonus and stop with the pop-ups!