Onderwerp: Questions & Answers

Only in playoffs. League champions face off.

honestly, i like the system as it is right now (although it is tough to crack up to a higher league and to stay up there)

think of it as a real life, let's say league I is tier 1 league (NHL), league II is tier 2 leagues (KHL, AHL comes to mind), league III is tier 3 (various pro leagues at this point), and so on

even a mediocre player from NHL will perform well in say.. AHL. that's just how it works, NHL is simply a tougher league than AHL. that's why many top end players play in NHL

now, let's imagine if the "best" team from AHL gets promoted to NHL and the "worst" team from NHL gets relegated to AHL. i still can see the newly promoted AHL team having a hard time in the new league

so as far as the "toughness" of each league level, i have to admit i like the system that ppm has implemented. i can definitely see why some managers would complain though (as i said before, it really is difficult to do well in the new league for a promoted team)

So then, is III.3 truly a tougher league to be in than some of the other division III leagues. And if so, this is due to the current promotion/relegation system?

We agree on all the principles and my proposed system preserves promotion.

You refer to one (1) AHL team making the NHL. There aren't 4 making it as there are in our current system. The various divisions and conferences within the AHL play one another in a playoff and one winner is crowned. ONE winner of 4 divisions. That winner can promote.

Or consider the CHL's Memorial Cup. The OHL, QMJHL, and WHL all send their champion and the host team rounds it out (not a problem in our even numbered leagues). One team is crowned champion. I'm proposing a Memorial Cup for promotion.

I'm proposing scaling back promotion so only the most deserved get to promote. I am most certainly not obliterating the concept.

Oh certainly, some DIII leagues are tougher than others (said without looking). There's too many who aren't ready to promote that do while better stronger teams finish in the middle of the pack in stronger conferences.

If my proposal is accepted, only the strongest division winners promote. Thus, Division III.1 could see a winner promote each season, while none may promote from III.11. The weaker divisions retain some stronger teams for competitive balance to grow within them and the stronger divisions balance out over time.

This really should happen, the more I think about it.

I think it's good for the game and I think that the inter-divisional games would be exciting. New rivalries will be created and will carry forward to higher leagues.

Make it happen PPM!

Actually I think the system of promotion and relegation is great the way it is, the only thing that needs changing of where the teams end up.

Instead of having specific feeder leagues (ie. III.1-4 promote to II.1, III.5-8 to II.2, etc), it should be completely randomized. That way you dont have certain branches that are very strong and some very weak, it will be mostly even. Even if you have one or two that are stronger than others, its not guarenteed to stay that way as the next year could see strong teams promoting up from the tier below going to different leagues.

i second this post

salty - you've been in I.1 forever. How many teams that promote from II to I relegate the very next season? It's ridiculous.

Also, salty, to your previous point: the KHL would be tier I.1 in Russia, the Swedish Elite League I.1 in Sweden, and the AHL I.1 in North America. There are probably a lot more than 4 leagues at this tier of hockey and they are probably not equal talent levels. To reach the all-world level of the NHL, I think an international tournament featuring the winners of the KHL, AHL, Swedish Elite League, etc. would be warranted. It certainly would not be warranted to subtract between 4 and 8 NHL teams per season.

Why are you guys against inter-divisional competition? The upsides are numerous and all lain out in my posts above. What is the downside?

plus 1 .... and just a side note... the memorial cup, well no team should get in just because they host the finals... better jr's team should get the op...

hmm, if i may, i don't think the inter-divisional competition is an issue, basically i think what they are looking at is a better parity of the deregulation, which in part would approach part of your interest's..

the only downside to what you are proposing is i guess time, and i might add at some point, inter-divisional competion would be rather interesting...

i'm not actually against the idea of inter divisional competition (as you mentined earlier, teams that makes I.1 will then be much more likely to stay up in I.1), but i don't mind the system as it is, so why change it?

also, this would mean only 1-2 teams would make the I.1 rather than 4-8.. can you imagine the complaints (how it's impossible to promote, etc)? not to mention, the game developers are currenty focusing on other things, and i'd rather not bother them with hockey (which already works pretty well imho) until they have some time to work with little details

just to make it clear though, i am not against the inter divisional competition

I think you're wrong about complaints coming in about promoting to I.1. I don't think division II teams want to promote to I.1.

It is frustrating that winning a division means moving up, because the fact is, most teams aren't ready for that leap. Instead, teams are forced to play to lose to stay at a lower level in order to be able to win long-term.

As a paying customer, I'd rather they focused on improving hockey. I question whether I want to continue paying if I'm playing to lose now, and I think that it would be prudent for PPM to focus on updating and improving the game and creating a great experience.

To date, most of the improvements have been superficial. The general graphics change and the biggest news now is the change to the broadcast. The broadcast is fine and it isn't why I play.

what happens when i don't pay seasonal bonus to my players until the end of this season?

a couple of seasons ago we have made quite a few pro-promotion economical changes.

Yeah, but PMullings point is that it's too hard to stay in the higher leagues. Any pro-promotion changes made would be negated by promoting and relegating in 2 seasons. Sure, you get better sponsor offers in higher leagues, but you'll also get dominated and not get any OTR for a season and get immediately relegated. This will hurt long term and isn't worth promoting.

There is nothing currently relegating the skill level of teams in the same league. A team can have an ots of 100 and be top in their division, while a team with ots of 160 can be top in another division in the same league. They'll both win and promote to the next league, but the team with ots 100 is going to get tossed around like a rag doll and get put right back down a league.

PMullings suggestion would fix this.

Also, I second it.