Limit number of back ups by each team member


#403

Limiting back up is a no go for me. Our team has faced teams where I was the only one who could hit half the team. And you know what? We won those wars due to us hitting more bases than them (neither side hit 250). If you limit backing, we would have lost because our players wouldn’t be able to hit them.


#404

You should have lost :man_shrugging:


#405

Yes we should have lost when they had 20 players not show up, but we only had 5? Love your plan there, brosky. :roll_eyes:


#406

Both of your teams have issues that I’ve already covered.

They have a lack in activity and will remain sucky until they drop the dead weight. Your team has a lack of strength and will remain sucky until you drop the dead weight or assimilate your strength into teams that require the plug. Neither of your teams deserve to move up based on your issues, and that is a terrible example of competition. Next.

I’m saying that both of your teams should all go their separate ways basically. Leave the dead weight in the lower leagues and plug your strong members into teams that need them. That is how you fix this league and competition in general. I’m not sure why all of you feel so entitled to win with glaring issues. You literally write these things down like there’s nothing wrong and it’s Incredible to me :joy:


#407

I think the problem here is not whether it can be implemented easily or not, but to find the best possible system, which elaborate most aspect in WD.


#408

Right, and I’m saying that your idea is to cater to lower strength players being in higher leagues and that is simply backwards at best.


#409

You’re assuming we’re attempting to move up. Not at all. We know we have problems on our team that we are working on, then focusing on moving up. But, I would not punish the low levels who do show up in that scenario by not letting them hit in a war simply because they’re small. You do that and any new player will quit.


#410

:popcorn:

Grumpy wisdom of the day: limiting backup is like saying LeBron can only play 5mins of each game cos it’s unfair.

Ok back to your squabbling :eyes:


#411

Dude, who the heck is saying lower levels in high leagues? I don’t know where that is coming from?


#412

Noo…

drag Grumpy back into discussion, and flee

Kinda off topic here, but has Red’s topic got a conclusion yet?
Hopefully it will be useful here :eyes:


#413

If basketball was played with 50 players and not 5, Lebron’s solo effort would not win the game. The same way as I pointed out that he is not enough to overcome the challenge of a stacked TEAM like GSW. Your wisdom is flawed Grump. Limiting backup in the way that would be done here is actually not comparable to the NBA, because it’s basically like saying Diamond would have a hard time with these changes - they wouldn’t.

The difference is the competition. Also, these changes would be inclusive to everyone not just Lebron, so it would be exactly how the NBA is played, which is everyone doing their part and not being carried. Y’all are so simple :roll_eyes:


#414

Read the whole thread before commenting? Idk how to help you here. You joined a conversation already 400 replies deep.


#415

Sorry. In basketball, body size (big size) doesn’t matter more than skills.


#416

First of all, I joined the conversation earlier than that. So maybe you need to read up? :face_with_raised_eyebrow: Secondly, you still haven’t addressed what lower level players are to do. You say they shouldn’t be in upper leagues. How is gold, an upper league?


#417

How is that relevant or contradictory to anything I’ve said?


#418

Chance to win. In basketball, as long as our strategy works as planned, we still have chance to win.
In war case you’ve proposed, it’s 0 chance. No strategy is involved, only competition on how many bigs you have.


#419

You asked a question you only need to scroll and read to find the answer to. That was my point.

Lower level players are not to rely on one person to get the job done. I can’t be any clearer than that. You belong in a higher league and the majority of your team belongs in Silver. There are lower leagues than Gold for a reason. But this is all based on us just talking about YOUR team, when some of the focus needs to be on the other team you’re talking about too. You think they would survive very long with these changes either? Probably not. They would either drop the weight, and move up, or be pushed down by other teams. You’re coming at this from a perspective that is massively flawed thinking that either one of your teams should be a team in the first place. You shouldn’t be. Stop oversaturating leagues with teams that are made up like this. That is a huge part of the problem.


#420

You have a chance to win based on your team effort and overall level of skill. Putting up a D league team against an NBA team and you’re going to lose, strategy or not.


#421

My point is being active should not be punished reagrdless of the level. You say join stronger higher teams. Most of our players are under lvl 150. Why would a higher level team even bother with them in your proposal? And you know what, I would take an active and reliable low level player over a high level any day.


#422

Not them, you. You should join a higher level team and let your team of lower levels work things out themselves. Not all of them would be shunned from higher level teams if they brought game knowledge, activity, and skill to the table. Again, my level 135 is on an S3 team and could probably go higher if I had the willpower but I don’t. It’s hard enough trying to maintain the level of play required by both of my accounts. I’m in S3 to continue growing it at a decent rate.

This is not to punish the activity level of one person, it’s to ensure that A TEAM OF 50 PEOPLE shares that persons drive, otherwise it’s in that persons best interest to surround themselves with people who DO.