Jump to content

VHLE Expansion


Victor

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, JardyB10 said:

Was there actually a gold rush in the Alps or are y’all just makin’ shit up?

 

At any rate, this is a satisfying change, congrats to all! The VHLM will miss you both.

No Gold rush as far as I know... but the mountaineous tourism started in the Alps notably Switzerland where a lot of boarding schools for English kids were located. And apparently, they had nothing better to do then to climb mountains in their spare time (and go down on wooden boards).... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
7 hours ago, JardyB10 said:

Was there actually a gold rush in the Alps or are y’all just makin’ shit up?

 

At any rate, this is a satisfying change, congrats to all! The VHLM will miss you both.

I see it more as the general rush like alpine skiing. It works with mountains imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So when I made my article about the VHLM and said we needed Balance. Killing Yukon was not what I meant ;) but ill take it lol.

 

Congrats to both of you. Well deserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, a_Ferk said:

The VHLM had enough players, the problem was how they were dispersed. The top teams had full rosters and the bottom teams were nearly empty. If they were evenly distributed every team probably would've been around 6-4-1.

As a newbie I think one of the key problems is that not all GM's have the same agenda in the VHLM (this is no criticism, just an observation). Some embraced the 'build up' function  of the VHLM (i.e. getting players acquainted with the mechanics, how to earn TPE, encourage them, giving tips for builds etc.) and accepted that the VHLM is only a thouroughfare for the player's ultimate goal the VHL. Others prioritised success (i.e. winning the Founder's Cup) and traded draft picks for seasoned veterans in order to get the final push over the hump. 

For example, the Hounds were in the final for the Founder's Cup in S79 and did not succeed. The GM changed and the new kid on the block was left with a wiped roster (literally) and the earliest pick being an early round three (7 picks in total), three of which turned out to be duds (stopped updating shortly after being drafted) and had to be released... midway into the season and after many, many defeats, @N0HBDY traded my brother and me (who were two of the more active members in the LR) for some picks to Philly in order to try and rebuild (at least that is my assumption). So in my opinion reducing the league by two teams does at least partly address this, as there are as many players to go around for less teams... I for example maxed almost every week on the TPE and reached the 200 threshold within one season, and I am surely not the only one (take all the 2nd+ generation players for example). Therefore the turnover is relatively high and rosters may not be sustainable with only average 7 players per team available in the draft. 

Edited by Daniel Janser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Victor unfeatured this topic
  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...