relegation

[Killerbee]

Because whend relegaste you win a star, so you buy a bunch of scouts, and next season you would be a level less with a full 7 stars players.

Whend you tank, youre players keep the stars. It is a lot diferent.

If you're in a position to buy a bunch of scouts, I doubt you'd need to relegate to play a good season..
It's already possible to have a team full of 7 (or 8 or 9) star players without relegating, so what's the difference? That it will be possible for someone to have good players (6 stars) for ONE season in which they don't even play CL?

[Cat Harrison]

Maybe only have inactive teams get relegated, or some mechanism that prevents too strong a team relegating? I don't know, I really like the idea, because it would be more like RL, but I'm just not sure how they could implement it in a fair way, so that there wouldn't be abuse like dv8r said, you would have people deliberately working the system otherwise.

[Maxtax]

That will be "powertanking" completely destroying the set up of the game. Besides allways advancing and at worse remain in same level i think its more attractive for a game, from effort investement aspect.

[littledude072]

yeah havent thought about the trophy mongers, im only interested in getting promoted every season

what if 7 teams are still promoted, and the last 3 teams are demoted? i thought not making the CL was punishment enough so people will tank. if they get demoted next season that means yet another season without CL. also with the way the cups are set up theyd probably get those that are on the same level, so that too is kind of a punishment where getting demoted isnt the best solution