Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
Like Tree10Likes

Thread: Question about the "top of a server".

  1. #11
    Apprentice Alexinho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by kynan View Post
    I think bots aren't the way to go.

    I'd be looking at doing something where severs start to merge after a certain level, to keep natural promotion going for as long as possible.

    Say for example if we have 5 servers that end at around level 40, instead of trying to create a level 41 league across those 5 servers, it would be better to move all the promoted teams from that level into the same server, swapping them across with other teams from other servers to make up the difference.

    Eventually we will get to the point where someone somewhere will be at the top of the server and they can't promote further as there are simply no more than the 14/28 teams needed at that level, at which point they will have to wait until teams from the level below it catch up.
    Well. it depends how easy/difficult it is to do that.
    If it's too complicated for them to move teams around servers, then bots, as a simplier solution, would be their choice.
    Btw, I like your idea.

  2. #12
    VIP Buffs Mad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    3,270
    Quote Originally Posted by kynan View Post
    I think bots aren't the way to go.

    I'd be looking at doing something where severs start to merge after a certain level, to keep natural promotion going for as long as possible.

    Say for example if we have 5 servers that end at around level 40, instead of trying to create a level 41 league across those 5 servers, it would be better to move all the promoted teams from that level into the same server, swapping them across with other teams from other servers to make up the difference.

    Eventually we will get to the point where someone somewhere will be at the top of the server and they can't promote further as there are simply no more than the 14/28 teams needed at that level, at which point they will have to wait until teams from the level below it catch up.
    Yeah thats what I suggested a wile ago. From the feedback from high level managers on here I actually thought they tried it and it messed up the TM....hence my comment on it above. No idea if they did or not but logically I think population management is the way to go.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12