Ken started the (paint) ball rolling and the thread did what most PBN threads do--went downhill from there. Throughout there is support in the thread for a modified game with a race to win, ie; whoever is ahead when time runs out, wins. This instead of the Race 2 whatever. A modified scoring system is suggested that deals with the silly notion you deserve something for taking longer to lose (the OT point) and there's a request for an across the board standard ROF. All of these are perfectly reasonable ideas from a player's perspective. (There were also some unreasonable ideas. Along with requests to bring penalty boxes back and standardize the game across all divisions.)
Here's where I'm less than positive in my response. The league dropped xball and went to Race 2 with new ref jerseys and everything. Did anybody notice? I seriously doubt they want to try and re-brand their game all over again. That, and there is a reason matches are a race. The race total controls the average match length, not the match time. Statistically a match window can be calculated for the Race 2 matches, and trust me, it's significantly shorter than a race 2 win match would be. [For example, 12 minute match time Race 2 Win versus 15 minute match time Race 2 4. R2W using point time variables of 30 seconds up to 3 minutes gets a match window of 18 minutes to 60 minutes plus. Using the same variables in R24 results in a match window of 16 minutes to 26 minutes. Additionally the weakness--from the perspective of the PSP--is that faster, more aggressive points results in longer matches. And for the curious, the R25 match window is approx. 21 minutes to 33 minutes.] And there is a schedule to be maintained and there will be (already is) increasing pressure in the future to try and find ways to cut down event length. And of course the long term trend isn't more on field time--regardless of the rationale.
Regarding the idea of a new scoring system that weighs wins and overtime wins and losses differently the league might go for it. Given the limited number of matches played the current scoring system offers added complexity and uncertainty and (I'm guessing) that finds approval in some quarters. The suggested scoring change is even more complex, resolves the 3-1 record versus the 2-0-2 record conundrum and offers another layer of seeding clarity. Then there's the scoring system that is also a format modification in that it retains the Race 2 but adds a win by 2 element. The idea here is to identify a clear winner in the more competitive matches. (It would also be a value added for the players and not as time intensive as a simple Race 2 Win since it would only come into play under certain circumstances.) Or we could go to simple wins and losses but then the issue of limited match numbers re-enters the equation.
And then there is ROF. I doubt there is any discernible trickle down or that there is anything more than a gut feeling ROF values "saved" paint or encouraged more newbies to play locally. Even so it would be a mistake to change it--again. The lower ROF has real potential to be beneficial for lower level players (despite the fact most of them are certain they know everything already.) Now that it's done I wouldn't change it.Personally I'm tempted to begin with things I don't want to see. Like another batch of changes being touted as beneficial to me while in fact they reduce my game time and increase my per player cost. Like last year. (I know, I know, without the PSP we'd be playing guerrilla events in cow pastures (oh, wait!) on vacant lots and in the wee hours of the night in stadium parking lots. Whatever.) And the "inevitability" of small ball. Fortunately, with the 50 cal craze I expect the league to do their due diligence before they jump on that bandwagon. (What is it they say about the definition of insanity?)
Instead I'm gonna take a stab at being constructive too. First, I think the Win By 2 variant is a winner. By my rough calculations the time cost is minimal even in the matches where it occurs, say +5 min on average. Best of all though it only kicks in under very limited circumstances and only alters the Race 2 limits under the most competitive circumstances where a clear winner is a highly desirable outcome.
Here's my wish list. Keep D4 Race 2 4 as entry level to the-game-formerly-known-as-xball and make all the other Am divisions [1, 2, 3] Race 2 5 with identical entry fees and the bulk of the prizes offered in D1 & perhaps D2. Encourage teams to excel instead of penalizing them for getting better, or worse, force them to compete at a higher level based on a poorly conceived, anti-competitive scheme. [The classification system.] Carry that over conceptually to semi-pro and pro as well. If they play the same format they should pay the same entry. And don't start in on the prizes nonsense, the prizes have been shrinking faster than the match times. All I'm suggesting is a coherent policy that promotes and rewards excellence. (But I'm not holding my breath.)
Got any ideas you'd like to toss out there? Here's your chance.
UPDATE: On a nuts & bolts level I'd like to see the Pro roster bumped up to, preferably 10, but the number doesn't really matter as long as it's larger than 8. And it's already sorta 9 with the mid-season makeshift injured/replaced player rule so I suggest doing away with all the pointless detail and simply call it 10--which is where semi-pro already is. Besides, I am confident that if the PSP asked likely pro teams they would discover 10 is a pretty popular number. Just saying.