I'd prefer #3 (make minor changes) over all the proposed options.

My arguments against the other proposals are if we make massive changes, it will take a long time hashing out the details, and we'll likely lose more players through disatisfaction with the changes, and simple weariness with the discussion itself.  Disbanding the MVL is a non-starter for me.  There are certainly enough people to have something going on.  As for making no changes, I think that will need to make some adjustments considering where GC2 is in it's life-cycle, and frequent recent member changes in the MVL.

Possible changes could be: 

A. Reduce base victory points to 6.  One small problem with this is that in an "all-victory" round, where each team needs all four victory types, one of those games will earn no base points.  And somone mentioned before about possibly including ascension victory too, which would be 5 games needed.

B. Reduce the number of teams to 4.  This would make it much more likely that a team can get the required number of games/victory conditions completed.  The major drawback is that one team would be disbanded.  How would we decide this?  It would be really difficult...maybe team with the lowest season total, or the team with the least active members (which would be my Team D), or through discussion amongst everyone in the MVL, or whatever.  Whichever way it might be decided, there are probably going to be some unhappy people.

C. Shift some people around between teams.  This probably has to be done anyway, and could be in conjunction with either of the former two changes.

Sentient species taste better...

All the suggestions I’ve read are acceptable to me, except the modding one. I’m very favorable to the idea of dictating what race must be played and against which opponents. This makes more sense if you’re playing TA, since the races there are so different. Not so much with DL or DA.

The only other thing is, we should collapse the teams. I know, I know, not another draft, but 5 teams are too many for what I perceive the number of players to be.

i think several of us are feeling pessimistic, and it is indeed difficult to retain a positive mentality in the face of many of the issues SB pointed out. i think the MVL can last longer than we might think from this, though. i think at the moment interest in GC2 has wained a bit, but based on my own gaming habits, not many of the people "walking away" from GC2 will walk away for good. sometimes one just needs a break.

there was a slightly more intricate idea i'd had. a mixed settings round, that would basically work sorta like an all victory conditions round, but the difference would be that each team had to submit a victory from completely different settings. SB (or another MVL admin) could "roll" 4 different game configurations, and each team would have to submit a victory from at least one each of those configurations. so one player might have to earn a political victory on a tiny/all common map, while another was going for a cultural victory on a medium/uncommon map, etc. just a thought.

lastly, i'm hoping we can get a bit more input from some of the newer players--what did you all like and dislike about the MVL in the time you've been playing? do you have any ideas? don't be afraid to participate, your opinions are just as valid as any of ours.

Well, as long as each team would have 1 or more players on it with TA (perhaps there should be a roll-call for versions) adding in that ascension victory condition of the mix game would be one of my comments.  It's a waste for the game to have this condition and it not being implemented into the MVL.

As for re-organizing the teams.  I think that if we do do (hehe) add in the ascension victory, then we'd need to up the base points to 10 and thus have more players per team to cover such.  So them we would have to dismantle 1 team in order to allow for at least 1 extra player per team.

I couldn't comment on re-doing the rules or changing the rules very well since this is my first run thru MVL so I don't exactly get the oddities that people may dislike with the current setup.  The emphasis on 'team' though I think should be kept.  Without that, during the match you wouldn't be AS willing to share any ideas with others on how to accomplish something in the current round's settings.  This 'meeting of the minds' and collaberation is one thing that helped draw me in here.

I certainly want to keep playing in the MVL, I've only just started with 2 rounds.  I wasn't there for the earlier rounds, but the two that I've played were each different.  I would like to continue to see diverse settings, that will challenge me to adjust my game style and play in ways I normally wouldn't.  I can live with any of the proposals so far except, disbanding the league.  I'd hate for my team (D) to break up with so little time since the draft, but if that is best for the league, so be it. 

I definitely think we should continue the team focus for the league, rather than tournaments.  Tournaments would just end up with the top players dominating and the rest of us would eventually dirft away when we wouldn't have much chance to beat the top players.  The teams (with good distribution) allows the lesser skilled/ newer players a sense of accomplishment with their team and a way to learn from the better players on the team.

So basicaly I vote #3

I'd like to clarify my previous post, coz when I said collapse the teams, I meant reducing the number of teams, not eliminating them. It might have sounded like I my opinion was to play individually. That's not the case. I believe the team concept of the league is a big drawing point.

I agree that we should keep the teams and not do tournament style.  As for reduced base points vs reduced number of teams I think that we should drop down to four teams.  It would be best if people could talk it out and agree which team to disband, but if that isn't possible then maybe randomly selecting the team would be best.

As for settings, I like dystopic's suggestions for adding more restrictions like alignment and race.  One of the benefits of the MVL is learning to be more versatile by playing different settings than you normally would.

I've thought about this quit a bit, and I really can't come to any conclusions other than I don't think it makes sense to shut the MVL down when there are still people enjoying it.  Personally, I think playing with mandatory race settings (for instance) would be a lot of fun, but ultimately I'm ok with any option that keeps the MVL going. 

I'll just echo the sentiments of most those here. I even like the more restrictive race settings idea. Sound like it could be fun.

I'm gathering status of my teamates and will post the situation after I know. the Eternal Villainy may have as little as one player or as many as 3 or 4 at this point . I'll find out

meanwhile, i think ive let this percolate long enough.

seems we've had a pretty strong response in keeping the MVL going

I'm waiting to hear back from DA, but from what I've been told there's a good chance the Villainy is about to go on sabbatical (not officially retired of course, we may need it at a later date)

So...I think the consensus is to go with some minor changes; esp adding new features.  Dystopic definitely had some good ones.

also...JustinSane, are you around?

Sorry, I forgot to report back sooner(busy weekend). I have talked to Pndrev and he is back for Team-E. I also Pmd Rhetorical Sun but haven't gotten a response yet and not sure he has even been on the forum lately as the PM remains unread. Also Neilo did mention he might still play. I think he was waiting to see how this discussion went, but maybe we can drag him back as well(Come on Neilo :D) . That would give us three, but we have two for sure.

Yes, I'm still around.  I've just been quiet lately . 

This is largely because I feel that basically all of the options under discussion are worthy and have little distinct preference between them.  I'm perfectly happy to go with the majority opinion on what course to take from here.  I did however quite like Dystopic's suggestion of having all victory rounds with unique 4 unique settings, with each team needing to submit a game on each setting group as well as victory type.  That sounds like fun, and could open up some interesting tactical considerations. 

they're actually horns, like these:

Ah, but are there more than one per side, or is it still a shadow on the backdrop I saw?

Sorry for going OT here guys.  I distract easily...

The first time I saw this post, it was using Dys's old picture, and made absolutely zero sense to me.  I thought Loup was just being rediculous.  Now, it makes a lot more sense.

I wouldn't have ruled it out on most days...but as I said to KP the other day when I saw his karma went down a point, I had copy/pasted the pic into the reply so I had hard evidence to what I was seeing lol.

those earrings and a shadow on the backdrop. that's actually an ID photo, i just really like it. world's greatest ID photo ever taken.

Ah, so the chair/mark on the floor was too close to the white backdrop, causing the shadow.  So it's a partial on what I originally thought, with the earrings tossed into the mix.

A side note, I'm not one to critisize hair choices (see my "mullet much?" comment) as I sported a lazyhawk/skatercut all through highschool.  Imagine the sides shaved and the top long, but all of it pushed to one side.  It looked like a had a shaved head and was wearing a beret.  I grew out of that though and now am just doing the no-maintenance buzz cut like in your ID lol.

~bounces on the balls of the foot~ so whens round 11?

well....I opened the voting for the VC position about a week ago and no one has voted yet....i mean, really...the candidates aren't THAT bad guys

Was that in this post or where?  I saw your post in here about "later this week", but I don't think I saw a "it's on beotch" post.

I dont remember anything about the vote starting either... 

Sentient species taste better...

lol, ummm...its entirely possible...anyhow, its on now...so send me your votes

It's on like Donkey Kong!!!

May I get a quick reminder who is running please