Subject: I.1

Like I said, i won't try to change your mind, because how I enjoy the game is not the same as you or others do.

It just frustrates me like you said to see people belittling the little guys their wins. I think also it is frustrating when I enjoy the game and the reasons that I enjoy the game are what people want stamped out, so instead of arguing with them about why the things I like are right, i'm trying to understand why they don't like them. etc

I think one thing I still fail to understand is what defines "too many" upsets. I know it's still a young season, but looking at I.1 and "overall strength" the biggest ones that stand out to me is you (6 in strength, 11 standings) and Yetis (8 in strength, 15 in standings)

(Strength vs Standings below for clarity)
1 - 1
2 - 3
3 - 6
4 - 2
5 - 8
6 - 11
7 - 7
8 - 15
9 - 5

I haven't looked at schedules to see if some of the teams "jumping" the standings are playing easier teams right now vs you and yetis maybe playing a harder schedule, but otherwise the 7 of the top 9 are in the playoffs. But this is probably better looked at once the season is complete honestly.

And of course, i didn't take into account camps throwing off team strengths either, so, meh, probably not the best way to approach it there either.

This concept is a good idea and never thought to check that way, but it may be to early in the season to use this to tell if anyone is outside the norm.

Just to clarify I in no way mean to belittle of offend the "little guys" (taloncarde term not mine) their victory. Just like any competition you want to win & you want to win all the time if you dont feel that way what the point in playing a competitive game. I feel this is a competitive game where you seek to be the best so also understand that those you feel are already the best may not feel they are the best.

Just like any game that uses a RNG anything probable will eventually happen. In Dungeons and Dragons even epic characters fail when the 1 comes up on the D20.


I wont quit the game as other seem inclined to do because I am not frustrated by not knowing exactly why things happen

It's a game. You win, you lose.

yeah, I do see your point, and trust me I want to win, i'm not saying I look forward to losses, but I know they will happen.

That's the other big concern I keep hearing the term "too many" in relation to upsets, with no real quantifier to how much is "too much" and when I look at Standings, National Tourney, etc, the stronger teams are usually going where expected, with minor deviations.

what IS frustrating is I don't feel that I know what I should be doing to get better / how I should be building guys.

have to figure it out again...already tweaked my practices twice this season and probably another one coming up.

I couldn't agree with this opening statement any more!

I like the changes and I'm fine with the level of information given. Just my two cents...

This is part of why I'm leaving. In other games, I have been able to figure out what is causing my losing, whether I'm not skilled enough, I chose the wrong tactics, how important it was, etc etc.

Here, especially right now, everything is a moving target. If I was a coach of a real hockey team, I could tell them 'we weren't serious enough, not skilled enough,' whatever.

Here I can't tell anything. That is what is frustrating. How do I fix it? I have no clue.

Now, another part is that I don't have the time nor inclination to figure it out, plus there are so many parts to track, that it's just not worth my time and not enjoyable to me any more.

If you know all the variables though then the only "skill" is how well you paper rock scissors the other guy. Not knowing for me is half the fun of the game.

Not to jump up two league levels to comment, but I'm with you opivy.

I agree 100% opivy

But i'm starting to see what Socc/Legg/BlackKat are saying, it's hard to look at the results and find what needs to improve.

I know I personally try to watch the play by play, for what good it does, and note players who seem to be performing especially well. Then if things aren't working for whatever reason i'll start changing my linup a little bit based on what I think is wrong. Doesn't mean I know it is the answer, but just my approach

So if you keep losing, what do you do? What do you tweak to make your team better? I didn't say you need to know everything all at once, but there is no guidance as to what is wrong.

What kind of players work with an umbrella vs shoot from the point PP? That really shouldn't be something to figure out, but something known so you can form your players into your preferred system, or change your system to fit the players.

In basketball, for example, you don't play run and gun when you have big, slow players. Everyone knows that. What do we know here? Pretty much nothing.

As just one example, if I knew that to use umbrella, I need good passing all around, then I can form my PP to do that. Figuring out what one needs for certain play types is not fun, it is a long, arduous process that takes seasons. AND, we don't even know how important tactical factors vs skill even is. So if you build your players wrong, then you have wasted your time and either start over and start guessing again or you leave the game.

Guess which most will do?

If you have to watch the play by play to figure things out, then something is inherently wrong with the game.

Games like this should be easy to learn and hard to master. This one is becoming harder and harder to learn.

OK opivy time to throw the same jab at you as I did taloncarde but maybe a bit harder at you with NO LOSSES to speak of. But hell when is the last time you really lost in II.2? You have been running the show there for so long I think I will just call you leggy 2 of II.2 (kinda liked the way all that went toghether). You are 10 points higher then your closet competition. You dont need to know there variables when your just plain out stronger then your counterparts.

I get leggmans fustration and not that it is from losing here and there but it is not understanding the reason for the loss so that there is a way to "increase the chance" to prevent.