MartindalexC

Seen as I was complaining about stuff in the chatbox, I may as well say one thing here. If there's one thing that makes zero sense to me is the ruling pertaining to what should happen should a player drop from a game. So, we're a 6v6 league, why should we even entertain the prospect of playing an entire period with an ai on the ice? If a player drops, the game should be dead (mostly). I will digress that if the game ends if someone drops, then there will always be someone scummy enough to try and abuse it, so it would make sense then to say that the next stoppage would end the game. Still though, isn't it better to try and work through these problems instead of just straight up copping out and defeating the purpose of a 6s league? As it stands the onus to decide whether or not the period should continue is left to the opposing team for some reason. Why is that so? I can't possibly think of a single reason why this more reasonable than letting the team that dropped a player decide, especially since they're (typically) in direct contact with the dude that dropped. I'm sure there are other rules that strike me as odd, but this just straight up perplexes me and as such I would welcome some clarification on the thought process behind it.

Nah man I have a madcatz controller to handle that for me, it turbo charges the C button and I get puck hacks

Press up to score Very secret strat only the best know tbh

Oh come on, there's positive thinking and then there's delusional thinking. We'll go no where if we're constantly aiming for the stars when we can't get past the trees in front of us.

We really, really, really couldn't. Thinking that we could in some way actually influence EA is beyond naive. Does anyone here actually go to EA invite-only events? Because otherwise we're gonna do diddly-fuck-all, especially since EA barely listens to those that go to play tests year after year, let alone some random EU nhl eashl site.

...

Modesty is key here

...

Fairenough, but don't hold it against me if shit remains the same for next season

You see the thing is, I did do that before, legit go through my post history, you'll see the post quality gradually decrease as I begin to realise that very little will actually be changed. Seriously, I implore you go through all of these topics and see how much has actually changed even on the most basic of decisions (such as a player dropping mid period for example), so yea, pardon me for losing a little faith in the system so to speak.

Ha, so instead of voicing my opinion I should just straight up shut up and 'deal with it', man you should go into politics with thinking like that. And yes, you are correct that not everything will go my way but out of what I have said, what is completely unique to me? The ban on Pair? Nope. The WO rule with a banned team? Nope, Billy also thinks it's stupid. How the site is setup so that any discussion can ultimately get immediately veto'd? Well I know I'm not alone in thinking that. Believe it or not, but there are a lot more members on here besides those that post a lot, unfortunately most that actually do post are so far up this site's ass they're gonna need a toothbrush soon. And dude, this isn't my first tournament so don't try to talk smack to me about not lasting. Better to have some criticism than a bunch of yes men which is what this site is turning into, but w/e, this site completely perfect and anyone that complains about it should be banned right? Sick.

You raise a point about this site being more like a business, but is that entirely the correct way that people (ie: Kenu) should be approaching this? Besides, what even is the point in even asking for input if only the select few will be heard, seems a little counter-intuitive. Plus, if we are treating it like a business, it's more like a monopoly at this point since there's no where else with this many teams running these tournaments, so people telling me to fuck off because I'm complaining are a little dim in the head.

Hmmm, please direct me to a site that is doing European EASHL 6s tournaments... yea about that. Nice try tho

Please, I'm acting like this because appearing in the manner you have suggested has gotten no where in the past. Besides I'm just pissed at this entire site in general but that's something for another day. Although I am curious if any of these so called 'discussions' have led to anything substantial before, all it feels like at the moment is a bit of fake democracy (ie: say people have a choice and can make decisions but in reality they can't do anything). Additionally, pray tell how I look more childish than the guy calling the admins Nazis? Nice filter you've got going there.

Just saying but if the main guy was banned and the rest of the team was left (because you know, plausible deniablity and all that law garbage amirite???) we wouldn't have this issue.

Congrats, you're currently one of the few outsiders, doesn't show shit for the entire community.

And why the fuck should we respect the stats and keep them in tact? Who the fuck cares if the stats are intact? No one is going to look in from the outside on this league and join because the fucking stats "look intact" Jesus Christ. Be fair for fucks sake, it's really not difficult, fuck me.

Arguments can be made for keeping stats intact and giving WO for all teams, arguments can be made for striking them from the records completely, but FFS how does anyone have the mind to arrive to keeping the stats together, then give out WO to those that haven't played? So damn illogical it's hilarious.

As far as I can tell, nope you are wrong. The rule is as follows, "if the opponent was available they get a walk over win". Therefore it would go without saying that seen as other teams played them, they were available to play. And btw, don't use the excuse that you can't change rules mid tournament as an excuse for not making better rules before hand (ie: covering all scenarios).

I agree, if a team is removed from a tournament through bans or inactivity, all games involving that team should be nullified. Side note, so lemme get this straight. Because my team played Circus last night instead of waiting, we lost out on 3pts? Sick system broskis, should either give every game a WO or take every game out of the records

That's 12 teams out of 52 (23.1%), that's beyond unfair and then some.

I'm confused, in my model and Billy's there is 2 finalists (one from group a/b and one from group c/d). Unless of course you're talking about the 'bye week' I outlined. In which case, yes it would be a little strange / awkward but it could just be given to the top ranked team remaining in each 'conference'. A reward if you will for playing well throughout the tournament.

[1]- Wildcard spots would be given out based on points, with the tie breakers being the greater number of games won and then if this is the same between two clubs, another tie breaker will be used that is concerned with which team has the best goal differential. [2]- The reasoning is that the NHL is the premier hockey league, plus there isn't much complaints about it's structure (specifically how many teams go to the playoffs), ie: it's a good thing to try and attain. Additionally, seen as my structure mimics the real life NHL model, it would reduce any potential confusion to a degree. [3]- You are correct. I should have pre-faced the model by stating that its use would be vastly diminished if a lot of teams leave and if it is used past the current season (afterall, this is a first to have this many teams registered). [4]- This would work perfectly from what I am reading, the only issue I have is that while it does give us a good way to allocate teams for later tournaments, I feel that the divisions may become unbalanced (Eg: 17 in Div, 15 in Div 2 and 10 in Div 3) due to lower teams leaving (This could be due to a whole host of reasons, ranging from scheduling issues to straight up being shit). [5]- What is this? The second thing we've agreed on in as many days? What is the world coming to? [6]- I guess by definition, if they just happen to not shit the bed and finish relatively decently, that said how would you try to keep teams that are propping up the bottom of the table around? I'm talking about the really bad teams, the ones that would struggle to win in general (Think Ashton). They would gain nothing from keeping in the league and getting the shit kicked out of them, so it would be a good deal for them to feign 'scheduling issues' and retract from the tournament, then join back next year in Div 3. They wouldn't have gained anything for sure, but on the other hand they wouldn't have lost anything. [7]- That shouldn't really be a negative of a model. Realistically only two people need to understand a league model 'fully' (ofc it is better if everyone understands it perfectly, that said, apart from the WC selection which as I've outlined is based off points, there isn't much of a complicated aspect to it), the creator and the person actively using it (ie: the commissioner / scheduler). Overall I'd say our models differ on the basis from which they were created. Yours is to be used to allocate divisions for the next tournament. Mine is to try and raise the skill of those that eventually make it into the playoffs (WC selection) and stop basically everyone getting into the playoffs. (an issue that may very well appear later on in the tournament as teams leave). That said yours would work better for season one, however I'd say mine would be better suited for when there isn't a need to later split teams into divisions for later tournaments.

I'm not sure where this should go but I guess here will do. Basically I'm a bit concerned about the playoff structure. I assume right now the idea is that the top 4 from each group go forward into the playoffs and it follows a structure that is seen in the NHL playoffs, the main difference for me however is that they have 30 teams, we have 52... so I think it's a little unfair to use the same structure as seen in real life. If we're actually wanting to be vaguely fair we should try to match the real life % of teams making the playoffs (53.3%), comparatively if we were to follow the same model only 30.7% would make it in this league. My proposal is that the top 6 from each division are 'locked in' while there are also two wild card spots open for each two groups (1 & 2 / 3 & 4). Meaning group 1 could send 8, however group 2 could only send 6 as all the wild card spots for those two groups would have been taken. This would send 28 out of 52 teams to the playoffs, giving us a participation % of 53.8, *slightly* more lenient than the rl NHL model but a hell of a lot more fairer than the one I assume will be used at this point. One major issue with this however is that it assumes that all teams currently signed up will still be here at the end of the season, otherwise the participation rate gets skewed. That said however, I highly doubt 22 teams will drop out so even then this model would be more applicable than what is currently in use. An example of the model in action: (Note: these are not predictions of how the season for these groups will finish, but merely just an example) There is a bit of scheduling problem as the fourth placed team in each group would have no one to play from within their own group but that can easily be fixed by pairing them up with the fourth placed team from the other group. After however one team would have to have a bye week (ie: round off almost) in order to get the scheduling back to an even number of series. The team taking this would be a middle ranked team above but there's no real reason it couldn't be the top ranked team for instance. The model also tries to favour inter-group matchups above all else, hence why B2 does not play A6 in the second round, but instead plays B3, whilst A3 plays A6 instead of B3. At the end the winner of this side of the tournament will play the winner from the other two groups (noted as C / D in the model). It must be said that the table above does show it in a bit of a convoluted way, nevertheless the idea was to make a model that would be much more fair than what is in place atm, which imo it has accomplished. Any queries about certain matchups please feel free to ask, like I said it looks convoluted so I understand if anyone doesn't pick it up immediately.

But is it? Look, I'm not trying to be aggressive or purposefully awkward but come on. This site has been in his mind for atleast a year and we're still waiting? To me that's just plain silly and the 'lag' is getting used as a scapegoat when it is completely down to the site not even being complete. Don't mistake this for me just bitching, it's along the lines of looking at this situation critically more than anything else.