it's okay to speak your mind d1, but the passive aggressive 'I think you should leave and take a break from TUS' was probably not your best commentary. you should be more direct next time if you have something to say, because I also felt a little irk'ed by your choice of words.

Quote from: Komito on April 12, 2012, 07:52 AM
This idea is good, it's been suggested literally hundreds of times in the past, but it will simply never work for 2 reasons.

There aren't enough players, and timezone variation makes that even worse, we struggle to do 8-32 player cups, this idea would be a disaster.

hm the system should be progressive, so i thought 10% group A, 40 % group B, 50% group C would be ok.
we have a average number of players of about 220 each season, this would make 22 players for group A


possible group A:

best 22 overall players with more then 30 games played in season 24   (number next to the player = games aginst the other best 21 players in season 24 )

Random: 25
Artic :34
crash:23
Ray: 28
Almog 25
MI: 81
Daina: 31
Sm0k: 26
Bryan: 105
Franz:50
Sock:  41
Guaton:20
Kaleu: 42
barmann:4
fr4nk:42
phanton: 73
chelsea: 8
chicken 23: 32
dese: 34
albtraum: 14
r3spect: 59
free: 44


together: 841

average: 38 games

bar & albtraum,  obviously were inactive this season. looks like a season with a limit of  30 games against each other (to stay in division)  and 50 for playoffs is easy to reach. remember they didnt search for each other.

Oh guys relax, i have and idea...lets brb beach?



1,2,3 GOOOO , brb beach

may be the only good post in this thread nino  


lets go guys!!

And just to clarify before I go have fondue.

I don't have an agenda, I'm not trying to impose a system based on my personal taste. MI raised the idea of changing the league and I'm proposing ideas that are a result of weeks of debating, I am by no means asking MI or anyone in the staff here to put them in practice. I'd be happy enough if they understood the concepts behind those systems and why they make sense to guarantee a high level of all around competition. If I can get them to see that and they can come up with systems of their own that guarantee said concepts to shape up then I'd be happy enough. And if not, well, I tried even if that's against your will.

thank you for trying dude, good effort... better luck next time, enjoy your fondue...


me and nino are gonna hit the beach!! we will tkae pix of all the thongs, maybe some speedos pix for youropa

Quote from: nino on April 14, 2012, 10:40 AM
Oh guys relax, i have and idea...lets brb beach?



1,2,3 GOOOO , brb beach

listen him lol, for 4-5dayz i,m in big along adventure and I feel great ;P

only sun, water, beach, stones and snakes HEHe +fish whit coin

fishman`s - old friends

while your understand new league rules I play only CUPs AE
(i agree the old rulez is good - and sistem is good, find what you are looking for)

    

Quote from: avirex on April 14, 2012, 12:41 PM
maybe some speedos pix for youropa

We went through this already:
http://i40.tinypic.com/2vcfj9y.jpg

Quoting avirex from the hysteria topic:

Quote from: avirex on April 14, 2012, 12:56 AM
each player has the option to refuse one scheme... but not 1 scheme per person...   like, i cant just refuse ttrr, when mablak wants to play... but then refuse bng when komo wants to play...

more like, its a set option, in my profile the scheme i refuse, and no one can pick that scheme vs. me.   

I think this is the best idea which has surfaced in the past few days. It doesn't seem hard to implement and it should fix most of the problems people have been recently complaining about.

In my opinion, it should work like that:

• You can set the scheme you "dislike" in your profile settings.
• The scheme can be changed once per season (if you make your decision during season i, it would apply for the season i+1).
• In the playoffs, your opponent wouldn't be allowed to pick the scheme you "disliked" during the season from which you qualified into the playoffs.
  
• This scheme wouldn't contribute to your overall score (although there is a problem with people who would not "dislike" any scheme at all - their ratings would still consist of 8 instead of 7 schemes - maybe this could be fixed by not taking the lowest-rated scheme into account for such people?).

Any comments?

cool idea,I wouldn't have to play bng anymore ! 

.. so if I "dislike" Hysteria I'd get avoided by like 50% of the active players. Sounds good!

bye

Quote from: ropa on April 14, 2012, 12:07 PM
And just to clarify before I go have fondue.

I don't have an agenda, I'm not trying to impose a system based on my personal taste. MI raised the idea of changing the league and I'm proposing ideas that are a result of weeks of debating, I am by no means asking MI or anyone in the staff here to put them in practice. I'd be happy enough if they understood the concepts behind those systems and why they make sense to guarantee a high level of all around competition. If I can get them to see that and they can come up with systems of their own that guarantee said concepts to shape up then I'd be happy enough. And if not, well, I tried even if that's against your will.

hi fassy.

dude you get your girlfriend involved in worms squabbles haha, sad

See in that other thread you're telling HHC to admit he contradicted himself, yeh? Look back on page 1 of this thread and admit you contradicted yourself and got owned by me hard.

I thought that by making you believe you owned me you would shut up. I was wrong. On that.

edit: only on that.

Just because I didn't reply to your ownage post were your verbally destroy me to death using your clearly superior knowledge it doesn't mean you're right or anything, I mean, you might be but all it means is that I can't be bothered with someone like you. I'd be wasting my time.

I hope that settles it between you and me, you can continue calling me names and stuff just don't expect me to get into that game, I do it many times, mainly because I'm not very good at picking my battles, but not this time. You can feel proud, or the complete opposite.

Quote from: ropa on April 14, 2012, 08:16 PM
I was wrong.

good, apology accepted.