New plan for leagues

[TheWalrus]

I agree with the roper/wxw, intermediate/elite, in fact the only one I don't agree with is t17/shopper.  That doesn't mesh so well for me.  I see where the premise is in theory, but they don't really coincide in my opinion. 

As far as HHC/ropa dialogue, Mablak and Random do seem to be a cut above, you don't see new people challenge them or get to their level because their skill has been attained over many years.  The good 'early' players that kicked ass in league early on, MPH, Volcom, Bizerker, Wario, ect. had only been playing a few years.  Now this learning curve from bottom to the top of the standings is years and years.  I can't imagine how long it would take me to get anywhere near the level of expertise in the game of worms that Mablak has.  So in that aspect, TUS certainly has 'inherited' the dominant players, but not because TUS is lame, but the rules of the game have changed.

The community is pretty linear these days.  In the early days of worms armageddon, aliasing was rampant, and you never knew who was an alias and who wasn't, because people could get very good very fast in comparison with their peers.  Nowadays, you can spot an alias right away, and everyone knows who the best players of the community are.  I don't think that people are any less competitive.

[ShyGuy]

I'm with Walrus on this one...

let me make this clear - I agree with Mablak's/ropas system, just not the way the schemes are paired. Sorry avi, lawl

[DarkOne]

Don't you guys think an opinion should stand on the reasoning behind it rather than on the person uttering it?

but i dont think inactive players of the league, carry much weight as far as opinions on how the league works is concerned

By this standard, people who don't actively moderate a league, don't carry much weight as far as opinions on how the league moderation is concerned. Guess that would end the discussion entirely, wouldn't it?

If someone has an idea and then has a convincing motivation for that idea, then it's worth checking into, whether it's the world's biggest genius or the world's biggest idiot, whether it's the world's biggest douche or the world's nicest person.

"You don't even play" is a very weak argument against someone's idea. It's just ad hominem, that never works. Just like "he's the most active player" is a weak argument.
Besides, going for ad hominem usually distracts from the problem at hand. Discussions would go a lot smoother around here if people would disagree with an idea rather than with the person uttering it - would make it less of a self defense thing and more of a co-operation to find a solution to an existing problem, don't you think?