The Sky Is Falling II:The Sky Falls Again Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Anyway, this is a dumbass discussion to have with you. You firmly believe that 88 worlds will be eliminated and owners from those worlds will disappear into the night.

That's not what I've suggested but you keep going back to it. I'm done with you. And I'm ****** at myself for taking this long to make that decision.
10/2/2009 9:59 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
I said that individual team. Did you leave the team or did you stay? I waited 2 months for F.Y.C to fill 1 season and I would of waited 2 more months, hell I would of waited forever. Since then that world has rolled within a week. If WIS folded that world I would not of moved to another world and it would of effected my future decision making when renewing.
10/2/2009 10:02 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 10/02/2009Anyway, this is a dumbass discussion to have with you.   You firmly believe that 88 worlds will be eliminated and owners from those worlds will disappear into the night.  That's not what I've suggested but you keep going back to it.  I'm done with you.  And I'm ****** at myself for taking this long to make that decision.

If 1 world folds that would be too much too me. They already have merging worlds as a acceptable solution that allows owners the confidence of not losing their team. No reason to fold worlds and **** people off with the false hope of making other owners happy at the expense of others enjoyment.
10/2/2009 10:04 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009
Anyway, this is a dumbass discussion to have with you. You firmly believe that 88 worlds will be eliminated and owners from those worlds will disappear into the night.

That's not what I've suggested but you keep going back to it. I'm done with you. And I'm ****** at myself for taking this long to make that decision.

10/2/2009 10:08 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
I'm too lazy to go back and read through the last couple pages of this thread.

But I'm assuming that nobody is talking about truly eliminating worlds. It's just merging worlds, which consolidates "live" teams and gets rid of the "dead" (unowned) teams.

So the only thing that really gets lost is world and player history. Nobody loses their team unless they decide to walk away out of protest/spite/whatever because of a merger. Then it's their choice.

And since this would only be done with the most troublesome worlds, I don't see how this is as huge of a problem as some people wnat to try to portray it to be.
10/2/2009 10:10 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 10/02/2009I'm too lazy to go back and read through the last couple pages of this thread.But I'm assuming that nobody is talking about truly eliminating worlds.  It's just merging worlds, which consolidates "live" teams and gets rid of the "dead" (unowned) teams.So the only thing that really gets lost is world and player history.  Nobody loses their team unless they decide to walk away out of protest/spite/whatever because of a merger.  Then it's their choice.And since this would only be done with the most troublesome worlds, I don't see how this is as huge of a problem as some people wnat to try to portray it to be.

They are suggesting the actual elimination of worlds, not the merging of worlds. Merging worlds already exists.
10/2/2009 10:13 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Nah, I'd eliminate worlds/teams. Merged worlds aren't really working either. The last few that have rolled have had half a dozen openings. Seems that those owners were more committed to winning than they were attached to their teams.
10/2/2009 10:15 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
Interesting. So merged worlds are seeing their owners leave, but you think that those same owners if the world were to fold would just move onto another world.
10/2/2009 10:20 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Nah, I'd eliminate worlds/teams. Merged worlds aren't really working either. The last few that have rolled have had half a dozen openings. Seems that those owners were more committed to winning than they were attached to their teams.

I still wouldn't eliminate worlds completely. If a merged world has five or six openings after rollover, no big deal. They still have 26 or 27 committed owners. If a merged world gets 'tardier with 10+, do further consolidation until you reach a state of stability.

End result is still the same . . . fewer worlds, less supply to balance out with lower demand. It just takes longer to get there, but you **** off fewer people on the journey.
10/2/2009 10:21 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 10/02/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Nah, I'd eliminate worlds/teams. Merged worlds aren't really working either. The last few that have rolled have had half a dozen openings. Seems that those owners were more committed to winning than they were attached to their teams.

I still wouldn't eliminate worlds completely. If a merged world has five or six openings after rollover, no big deal. They still have 26 or 27 committed owners. If a merged world gets 'tardier with 10+, do further consolidation until you reach a state of stability.

End result is still the same . . . fewer worlds, less supply to balance out with lower demand. It just takes longer to get there, but you **** off fewer people on the journey.



I'd think the guy who moves his 128 win team into a merged world, wins 73 and drops his team is just as ****** as the guy who'd simply have his world eliminated.
10/2/2009 10:24 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 10/02/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Nah, I'd eliminate worlds/teams. Merged worlds aren't really working either. The last few that have rolled have had half a dozen openings. Seems that those owners were more committed to winning than they were attached to their teams.

I still wouldn't eliminate worlds completely. If a merged world has five or six openings after rollover, no big deal. They still have 26 or 27 committed owners. If a merged world gets 'tardier with 10+, do further consolidation until you reach a state of stability.

End result is still the same . . . fewer worlds, less supply to balance out with lower demand. It just takes longer to get there, but you **** off fewer people on the journey.




I'd think the guy who moves his 128 win team into a merged world, wins 73 and drops his team is just as ****** as the guy who'd simply have his world eliminated.
So a new owner comes in with lower expectations, takes over the team, and is happy.

Or should we just kowtow to the 128 game winner owners, who are typically the tankers and trade rapists that we all know and love?
10/2/2009 10:27 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
10/2/2009 10:29 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Anyway, this is a dumbass discussion to have with you. You firmly believe that 88 worlds will be eliminated and owners from those worlds will disappear into the night.

That's not what I've suggested but you keep going back to it. I'm done with you. And I'm ****** at myself for taking this long to make that decision.

10/2/2009 10:32 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 10/02/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 10/02/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 10/02/2009

Nah, I'd eliminate worlds/teams. Merged worlds aren't really working either. The last few that have rolled have had half a dozen openings. Seems that those owners were more committed to winning than they were attached to their teams.

I still wouldn't eliminate worlds completely. If a merged world has five or six openings after rollover, no big deal. They still have 26 or 27 committed owners. If a merged world gets 'tardier with 10+, do further consolidation until you reach a state of stability.

End result is still the same . . . fewer worlds, less supply to balance out with lower demand. It just takes longer to get there, but you **** off fewer people on the journey.




I'd think the guy who moves his 128 win team into a merged world, wins 73 and drops his team is just as ****** as the guy who'd simply have his world eliminated.
So a new owner comes in with lower expectations, takes over the team, and is happy.

Or should we just kowtow to the 128 game winner owners, who are typically the tankers and trade rapists that we all know and love?



Is he happy? He's going to get his *** handed to him by the other 128 game winners who have managed to maintain their winning ways.
10/2/2009 10:33 AM
plague
Posts: 2330 (0)
Hall of Famer
18 1 200 602 203
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
10/2/2009 10:43 AM
◂ Prev 1...11|12|13|14|15 Next ▸
The Sky Is Falling II:The Sky Falls Again Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.