That's why we are in the process of asking all team leaders on the official stance of their teams on this. We will do that by PM here on ensl. We want to know what they prefer, ladder or season, with link to this discussion to see all the stances. When we gather enough data, we will present it to you all and to Zefram.

Trying to replace the season with a ladder will be community suicide, now it's said. No ladder will ever run as efficient as the current season, due to the very nature of a ladder, they are simply not sustainable. I really hope this will not become reality, it's really mindboggingly stupid considering the state of the community.

In any case, last time we did ladder in NS1, it failed. Just a reminder.

Probably we can stop ladder activity during defalt Season.

However, I think that ladder is better.

I honestly don't think putting both regular seasons and ladder system simultaneously is a good idea. (...)
There's a choice to make, either keeping at the regular format or changing to this ladder proposal.

The problem is that a ladder by itself WILL slow down very quickly with this amount of teams, and breed inactivity.

It will fail unless there is an enforced season to play in as well, even if its only 1 division in the 'league' format.

Again, it looks great on paper, but what you don't understand is that people with experience with ladders in the past are here telling you guys that its a bad idea to do it by itself. That is a fairly good warning in my opinion.

The reason for inactivity is the lack of teams who are willing to play early (18-19 CET) and such system wouldn't help much for that matter, now would it?

Just stick with the seasons, ladders didn't work in NS1, won't work in NS2 either.

Just stick with the seasons, ladders didn't work in NS1, won't work in NS2 either.

Just saying: "We did it, we failed thats why this will fail." is not a valid point on its own. For that the ladder that was done (as far as I know of it) is vastly different to our proposal. The only connection is that we call both call "ladder", because teams are sorted in an order in relation to each other.

Seb says

The problem is that a ladder by itself WILL slow down very quickly with this amount of teams, and breed inactivity.

Why? I don't see a reason for that.
If you read the proposal very carefully, you will see that the system is designed to support activity and punish inactivity. Also I can't not see how there can be less activity in a ladder, then in the playoffs (while most teams idle) or in the offseason.

Seb says

It will fail unless there is an enforced season to play in as well, even if its only 1 division in the 'league' format.

One point againts a ladder was always "teams are too lazy to do anything themself".
So what you are trying to say is, that teams that are given a schedule for matches in a normal season, will then also play active in the ladder?

Seb says

Again, it looks great on paper, but what you don't understand is that people with experience with ladders in the past are here telling you guys that its a bad idea to do it by itself. That is a fairly good warning in my opinion.

Why do I not understand? I do, but till now, no one could explain why it failed.
Just saying: "We did it, we failed thats why this will fail." is not a valid point on its own. For that the ladder that was done (as far as I know of it) is vastly different to our proposal. The only connection is that we call both call "ladder", because teams are sorted in an order in relation to each other.

The fact that there are very large skill gaps between teams and not many teams is the reason that a ladder would stagnate.

Ladders are more optimised for bigger communities than seasonal leagues imo.

No, what I would suggest is trying to break up some of the skill level and have a ladder for low to medium skill teams and let the high level teams play in a 8 team division seasonal league. Top 4 slots invite, bottom 4 slots are up for grabs for the top teams in the ladder.

Nah ladders are still all very similar to each other. The fundamentals are still the same.

Of course it was pointed out, that some teams might be even to inactive for that, but then again whats the point of playing in any kind of ns2 league if you have trouble playing every 2 weeks at least once?

So basically you're saying we should just quit for rarely playing competitive matches?

Draw those pub players into the comp scene, form more teams and maybe, maybe then try this system out. Should've tried this a few seasons ago, I'm afraid it's a little bit too late now.

Do we really need a ladder system for such a small competitive community though? That is the question here.

I don't see why you should not run it in the off-seasons. I agree that it might be too much for teams to participate both contests at the same time, but when the season is not there, this ladder could be the exciting thing going on. I do not think you should abbandon this project. It has alot of support, from me too. I simply don't agree that it should be replacing the season.

Having a ladder in between seasons is simply a question of who's going to commit a lot of free time and volunteer to maintain and run a ladder that is played by only a handfull of teams.

swalk says

I don't see why you should not run it in the off-seasons. I agree that it might be too much for teams to participate both contests at the same time, but when the season is not there, this ladder could be the exciting thing going on. I do not think you should abbandon this project. It has alot of support, from me too. I simply don't agree that it should be replacing the season.

Having a ladder in between seasons is simply a question of who's going to commit a lot of free time and volunteer to maintain and run a ladder that is played by only a handfull of teams.