So, we can't keep adding championship levels forever, right? It would be absolutely ridiculous for a new player to join the game and see that all the top players are hanging out at championship level 40. It would take almost a year to catch up.

So what is the plan for capping championship growth? I propose some form of relegation. Instead of having all the bottom 4 or 5 players stay at the same championship level, create a system split into 4 groups. Go up 2 levels, go up 1 level, stay at the same level, and go down 1 level. At the very top, you have just stay at the same level, and go down one level.

It will make it a little tricky as far as player attributes are concerned, but you could just let them keep their existing attributes that are over the cap, but not allow them to increase anything that is over their cap.

Slowing teams ahead of you down is a weak way to catch up. There is already a way to catch up built into the game; level 18 (top level) teams can only gain one level. And to let a team drop a level, but keep their stats, is a path for sandbaggers and cherry-pickers. Football is a tough-mans game; both mentally and physically. Natural selection weeds out the weak and promotes the strong. Only the strong deserve to be at the top.

I did try to suggest relegation a little bit ago and got shot down, but I did it because I have yet to face a challenge in a league. I feel it would increase competition at higher levels by pushing sandbaggers to a level where they can't make their players any stronger (having already pushed closed to the cap on the level they got dropped to), while pushing weaker teams out of the double digit leagues. Maybe we could make it the last two places, and only if they have no stats above the prior level's cap?

Basically, I'm tired of facing teams that don't know what they're doing/have severely undertrained players. I want to have to fight for first place, not yawn my way to it.

I fundamentally disagree with this. Having played a game for longer does not at all make you mentally and physically better. Neither is playing a simulated football game a tough man's sport.
There will absolutely need to be a cap on championships at some point, and only the naive believe any differently. I'm also not speaking for myself. I'm not going to have much trouble getting into the top 100.

It also doesn't slow anyone down. It just ensures that you have to continually compete with the very very best. Anyone not able to compete at the very top levels will be relegated and have to fight their way back to the mountaintop. Right now, it's just a race between those that have played the game for longer. A new player who starts now would already have to play for at least 3 months to get to the top in the best case, and it's only going to get worse.

So, in 7 seasons, when you finally make it to the top (theoretically), will you be other than a long time player only? Maybe something special? Your lack of respect for the pioneers of the game, the best teams in the game, shows your arrogance and ignorance. I was warned about talking with you by players who had to put up with your constant self-absorption and whining, but I wanted to see it for myself. I do not expect I will see you around much longer, except when skipping over your posts, so goodbye.

I think you're confusing Dynasty with Touchy Tigers lol

I doubt that capping will happen and personally I tend to agree with it not being capped. Players who put the time and effort in deserve to be on top and miles ahead of the new players. I would be very much annoyed if a guy playing a couple of weeks boosted his way to the top and beats me if I've been playing for several months.

Time and effort should be rewarded and capping the championships will be more of a punishment.

Word has really spread about me my first three 3 days posting on the forums. I'm just going to ignore this post because you split from the subject of the thread. Sorry to hear you'll be skipping my posts in the future.



In my opinion, not capping the league count is only going to hurt the game's sustainability in the long run. If the leagues go to 40+, and new players find out they can only go up 2 leagues each season while the league count continues to grow, people aren't going to want to play. People will join, find out there's no way they can catch up, and quit, which hurts everyone. Imagine it being even higher than that. A 60+ league count would make this a game for loyalists alone. It would take over 2 years (in the best case) to catch up if you planned on doing so. The games ability to attract new players will be significantly diminished.

You say that capping the leagues would be a punishment, but why would that be? If you cap the leagues at 30, the best players will still hover at 29 and 30 and have to play hard to stay in that area. It also takes a new player 15 weeks to catch up (in the best case). That hardly seems unfair

I'm not advocating for a restructure that allows new players to catch up in 2 weeks. That's the other end of the spectrum, which will produce equally poor results. I am, however, saying that continuing league growth at this pace is going to eventually hurt the game.

You should ask Maoris about the league count in Rugby Manager.

Also, I'm fairly certain that Sublinet has used the structure most games use to combat new players insta-quitting- they start a new version of the same game (if I remember right, there is already a Football Manager II). My first timered social game was Starfleet Commander, which now has something like 20 universes, and most of the older ones are dying. It doesn't hurt the developer, and most players get bored after a while and seek a new challenge anyway, so anybody who wants to start fresh starts in a new game.

That makes sense. Starting another universe would definitely fix the issue if the concern was losing players. I used to play Ogame, which implemented a similar strategy with hundreds of systems each running concurrently.

Then I suppose I would just advocate for a separate universe that implements a cap/relegation system to promote more concentrated competition.