Subject: »[info]DevDiary 80: “Price is what you pay, value is what

Well, that's why we devided our work in parts and talk about it with every next week.

You are right with overall goals, most of them where posted in first Dev Diary, as you can check in archive.

- reduce the length of the season
- increase the number of games during the week
- modify the structure of training by assigning 10 slots defined

Except of this one:
- increase the number of teams by League group
That is idea from users, not our own one - but as we prepared proposition based on it - and it get so much votes in first poll (we know that the poll wasn't perfect, but still almost 500 votes is serious). But, when we use it for our changes that we prepare, it fits most checkboxes, thats why we decided to describe it as prefered by Devs. In the same time, option 2 can be also adjusted for changes, at least on few areas.

Calendar discussion is most difficult - even now, just take a quick look on forum, we have at least few different threads about each part of that proposal - cup types, cup rules, or league proposals, continental cups, NT schedule, etc. It's simply to much elements, to prepare final solutions - we need to decide for now about general frame - number of games per week and league structure, as major ones for other our work. We are open for changes of all other elements, but it need to be next step.

6 Which system of relegation/promotion play offs do you prefer?
You can select several answers.
Just one match
First match and rematch

There isn't my answer: I don't want play-off matches...
:-)

First, why is there an option to leave the system unchanged?
Does this imply leaving the training system unchanged?

1. We just think it's still fair, to give chance to vote against any changes - but as we see, it's not prefered option (based on results in first poll).
2. I dont think so - we are 100% certain that training system is an improvement and will work. Even with 2 games per week it can be adjustet (for example by increasing relevance of friendy games).

Second, I can't tell you what I think about the break between seasons trough the poll.
I want a 1 week break, between league matches.
So, the break in the first option is too long, but the second option's break is good.

I'm not sure i understand you correctly - you man, if its a "play off" week, that could be a break, and no need for additional one?

Thx :-)

I totally understand the choice to reduce lenght of season. If it is a basis, thus last poll must not include an option that keep the same lenght as now. Even the poll given this morning involve the same option, no change in lenght.
That's why this does not give a clear vision of what you really want.

Can't be done with current structure - relegating 50% of league without chance to stay it's a bit to harsh punishment:)

Well, even in first poll we see that rather low number of users deided to choose it. I will be rather surprised, if that time it will get more votes than previously.

I think there is fair to keep it, to make people able to protest against changes still - we want to know how many of you dont want any changes, it's also affect our decissions, and give us more understanding.

I'm not sure i understand you correctly - you man, if its a "play off" week, that could be a break, and no need for additional one?

Yes.
If playoffs get an exclusive week, then that should be the break.
Of course, only one payoff match, so you guys have space for updates.

Let democracy win!

+1

Let democracy win!

+1

OK, then, it could be more simple to have to have a poll like that :

1- Reduce length of the season
2- Stay as now

You could even explain why you want to reduce because you have already think and find solutions about this and then only give time to talk about how to make it with users because you are openminded with that (no idea in mind but just want to reduce). Then after discussion and options submitted (and perfectly clear), make a poll to let user choose if you want to

Then, once done, submit another poll :
* Number of teams :
8
10
12
14
16
explaining contraints/opportunities of each choice

An so on

Here you have given a view but let people think they can have choice and today give a poll biased by choices already made by you (i can understand as owner decide)

I like the idea of more teams in the league. 12 is perfect for me, it brings more diversity and competition. Now you only have 2-3 teams who can play for the title, where it will now be 4-5 teams.

Thi is not democracy, this is a private entreprise :-)
Owner can ask for some ideas but they must know where they want to go or i don't think people will be sure of his captain :-)

Can't be done with current structure - relegating 50% of league without chance to stay it's a bit to harsh :)

Increasing the number of teams in the league would decrease the ratio (from 4: 1 to 2: 1) between the lower and the upper category? And, in this case, could the play-offs be removed? So there would be one direct promotion and two direct relegations on 12 teams, it would be honest: the right prize for winner teams, the right punishment for losers teams.

That is why we are glad that we have a choice.
Let's vote for what we have, not debating what the survey should look like in my opinion

Is it usual for you to choose between :
1- nice option fitting with our recommendations
2- bad option not fitting...

?