Lalaya
Banned deucer.
Well, the ZUPL IV is over, and with that the 9-week long competition that saw the most people heated in a debate right BEFORE the tournament, so let's see what YOU guys think about it!
Was 8 teams good or bad? Was double SM good or bad? What should we do next year?
Are you satisfied with the hosts and the manager choices, and the decisions taken?
Are you satisfied with how the tournament went up?
If you have anything to say about this ZUPL IV or what should happen in the next one, as well as any comment or proposal about next year's formats or rules, or just wanna narrate your experience, please do so!
Was 8 teams good or bad? Was double SM good or bad? What should we do next year?
Are you satisfied with the hosts and the manager choices, and the decisions taken?
Are you satisfied with how the tournament went up?
If you have anything to say about this ZUPL IV or what should happen in the next one, as well as any comment or proposal about next year's formats or rules, or just wanna narrate your experience, please do so!
On teams:
As a host, 7 or 9 weeks doesn't strictly matter to me, as in my workload doesn't change that much - Nevertheless, I heard complaints about how 8 teams made it less competitive, but I'm waiting those people to speak up and explain better than me; either way, at least we're covered for retains
On format: Double SM was the best alternative for the tournament out of the possible ones, and I think it got reflected in the teams too, where BW didn't really kick up, there's already annoyance at having to prep this much for these many weeks and no other format is played enough for it to be added; with next gen we don't have to pick x2 of anything, but x2 SS might be all right specifically for next year, but that's a matter of the future host
Retains, manager prices, etc: not really much to say, we can tune manager prices better for a better "representation" instead of a change this small but w/e, and 1 retain is perfectly fine imo
If you want both managers to play or just one, that's on you to decide, but I think this year's format was functionally okay and the only real gripe is in how this tier can't handle 8 teams that well in this competition
Lastly, I just want to emphasize that it's okay if you're unhappy with some of the choices we made, you don't have to strictly agree with me (or Oath) over some administrative decisions or anything like that, although we still believe we made the right ones
As a host, 7 or 9 weeks doesn't strictly matter to me, as in my workload doesn't change that much - Nevertheless, I heard complaints about how 8 teams made it less competitive, but I'm waiting those people to speak up and explain better than me; either way, at least we're covered for retains
On format: Double SM was the best alternative for the tournament out of the possible ones, and I think it got reflected in the teams too, where BW didn't really kick up, there's already annoyance at having to prep this much for these many weeks and no other format is played enough for it to be added; with next gen we don't have to pick x2 of anything, but x2 SS might be all right specifically for next year, but that's a matter of the future host
Retains, manager prices, etc: not really much to say, we can tune manager prices better for a better "representation" instead of a change this small but w/e, and 1 retain is perfectly fine imo
If you want both managers to play or just one, that's on you to decide, but I think this year's format was functionally okay and the only real gripe is in how this tier can't handle 8 teams that well in this competition
Lastly, I just want to emphasize that it's okay if you're unhappy with some of the choices we made, you don't have to strictly agree with me (or Oath) over some administrative decisions or anything like that, although we still believe we made the right ones