Your suggestion actually turns me off on the game a bit.  So it would not get me to add another team at all.

It wasn't a suggestion.   It was more of a survey.  

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/9/2011 6:48:00 AM (view original):
So no opinions other than a deano/tec ******* match?

let it be noted that i clearly emerged victorious

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/9/2011 11:35:00 AM (view original):
It wasn't a suggestion.   It was more of a survey.  

Then why is it in the "Suggestions" forum?

Because there's no "Survey" forum.  Duh.

tec defeated in ******* matches on back to back days!

I'm not having a good week.

I am generally for decreasing the effects of time constraints. 36 hours is better than 24 as long as extra days is not added to the world schedule and it does not conflict with the following steps in the world schedule.

Every time I miss a in game deadline it leads me to the conclusion I do not have time to play this game. If every in game action lasted 90 days no one would use the reasoning I do not have time to play this game, however that is not realistic.

Yes, more  available time for deadlines equals more likely I will add teams and less likely I would drop teams. For me personally I dont know if 12 hours would be enough to excite, but its better than 12 less hour

No, your survey question would not inspire me to add more teams. 

You'd just abandon them anyway.  That's why you have a problem finding quality worlds.

Thats not in the plans, but then I am getting married in June, and possibly moving again next summer.  But it remains to be seen. 

What's his name?

Emily.

Odd name for a dude. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/8/2011 8:24:00 (view original):
Not really a suggestion as much as a survey.

Some owners believe time constraints are why owners don't have more teams.  While this is a reasonable assumption, I don't think extending time consuming events will really help alleviate the problem.   So what I'm semi-suggesting is a 50% extension of deadline during the pre-season.   Events that you are given 24 hours to complete will now be 36 hours.  Once ST starts, the game would revert back to 4 hour half cycles.

So the questions are:

1.  Would this allow anyone to add teams?
2.  Would this stop anyone from reducing teams?

Also, what, if any, changes would convince you to add teams?  And, please, don't say "Cheaper teams!!"

Time is a more legitimate excuse than money, but not by much.

1. No. In fact, it would be an added factor against adding teams.
2. Same ... I'd be more likely to kick teams to the curb.

3. Cheaper teams... lol! A. Good owners in good worlds ... but that's nothing WIS has anything to do with. Although if WIS instituted a hard cap of 20m and a hard floor of 6m (or eliminated transfers in private worlds), I'd be open to adding a team or two ... Biggest thing, though, right now is the initial budget. I'm more likely to take a team on in-season than at rollover.

But don't discount the price .... and I don't mean LOWER THE TEAM PRICE, YOU FOOLZ! But a redistribution -- eliminate the tanker credits and most of the postseason credits, absolutely the WS prizes -- and perhaps lower the 4-pack price and institute prize money available based on more fan-friendly factors that don't encourage tanking and trade rape.