Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[-Stef-]

I just want to talk a bit about how it's going and ask some questions.

For starters, I think it's going really well. I see a lot of people playing a lot of matches and enjoying it. I especially liked the little sub-communities that arose in some of the groups.
In most groups it's also really close who is going to win.

The upcoming challenge for the league will be how to deal with people not getting their matches finished on time. I have just removed one player from the C level for not playing any match at all and not responding to messages either for over two weeks. That was a clear-cut case. However, how to deal with those that have finished one or two matches by the end of the season? Whatever happens, I don't want the influence of (semi-)inactive players to be too big. The league should be about the people that do want to play, not about those that don't.

I'm inclined to let it depend on the division you're in. In A, B & C, I just expect you to finish in time. Maybe I'll give you a few more days after the 5 weeks are finished, but that's about it.
If you don't manage to do so, I expect you to explain to me why on your own, and we'll see where we go from there.

I would like to apply the same thing to D-divison, but that's just not going to work. Some of those groups (D2, D6, D7, D8) are really active and no problem whatsoever.
D1 has a level of inactivity where I just don't believe the last week, or even the week after that, will solve anything. The resolution will be simple there: nobody promotes (unless of course they really surprise me in the last week). The hard decision will be what to do with the groups where some players finished all their matches, while others finished only 1 match.

---

Next season, I'll introduce some rules on playing matches. They will probably be
* after week 2, you need to have finished 1 match
* after week 3, you need to have finished 2 matches
* after week 4, you need to have finished 3 matches
If at any point you cannot comply to these rules, send a message to the organisation and explain why. If you don't, you'll be removed from your group.
Also, I intend to get together an 'organizing committee' and assign a member to every group.

Currently I'm inclined to to create an E-divison even if the league doesn't grow. With the current numbers I would rather have had 6 groups in D and 3 groups in E. D would be for people that really want to play competitive dominion, just one level below C. Division E would be for people that still need to prove they really want to be in the league by getting their matches played. With those numbers the rule could even be "Everyone in E that gets all their matches played in 5 weeks gets promoted to D". It's too soon to decide anything for season 2 (I don't know the numbers yet) but something like this sounds like a good plan.

If you have any thoughts/suggestions on this topic - or any other change - please post them here.

---

In the meanwhile, have fun with your remaining matches. After you finished your last match, please post a message in your own groups scheduling thread stating your intentions for next season (I'll be back / I'm quitting).

[soulnet]

I think everything went pretty well. I am willing to be in the organizing committee for next season. I would suggest, at least for A, B and C, to get someone from the actual group to organize the group, to make it easier to focus attention. Unless the organizer assigned to the group is expected to make decisions, in which case someone from outside the group should do it to avoid conflicts of interest (not a big deal in this community, but its easy to avoid it completely).

[yed]

D1 has a level of inactivity where I just don't believe the last week, or even the week after that, will solve anything. The resolution will be simple there: nobody promotes (unless of course they really surprise me in the last week).

That seems hard for Aidan Millow who played 3 4 matches and only did not played against moharimo and ashersky (both with no matches). Are you sure, he is at fault too?

EDIT: It is even 4 matches.

[-Stef-]

D1 has a level of inactivity where I just don't believe the last week, or even the week after that, will solve anything. The resolution will be simple there: nobody promotes (unless of course they really surprise me in the last week).

That seems hard for Aidan Millow who played 3 4 matches and only did not played against moharimo and ashersky (both with no matches). Are you sure, he is at fault too?

EDIT: It is even 4 matches.

It's still a hypothetical discussion because there is another week remaining and who knows what happens. But suppose at the end of the season group D1 still looks like this...

D1 (26%)

rank	name	average	points	#played	2nd	3rd
1.	a mad mongoose - marvelously	4,5	4.5	1	0	42
2.	moharimo	4,0	4	1	0	38
3.	mikemike	3,0	3	1	0	28.5
3.	ConMan	3,0	3	1	0	28.5
5.	Aidan Millow	2,3	9.5	4	0	32
6.	ashersky	-	0	0	0	0

a mad mongoose - marvelously - Aidan Millow: 4.5 - 1.5
moharimo - Aidan Millow: 4 - 2
mikemike - Aidan Millow: 3 - 3
ConMan - Aidan Millow: 3 - 3

... then I wouldn't promote anyone from this group, and that wouldn't feel hard either. No way I'm going to promote someone who plays only 1 match, and I'm not going to promote someone on 2.3 average either just because the rest is inactive. Aidan Millow would be welcome again in D, whereas everyone else first would have to prove themselves in E. I don't expect people that finish only 1 match want to come back, but who knows they might.

[Joseph2302]

I was going to say the same think looking at group D1.

So to clarify, the suggestion is that anyone who has not played sufficiently many games may be dropped down to a new group E, regardless of what league they're currently in? That seems fair, I don't particularly want no-shows from Group C being in Group D next season to no-show again.

But if you demote some people like this, will this open up more promotion slots, or will this be in place of the relegation of other people from groups i.e. if someone is dropped from C to E, will you relegate one fewer person from C, or promote 1 more from D?

[SCSN]

What happens if in a group with players A, B, C, D and E, player E has only played against A and C and then drops out, either because he just vanishes or because your rules force him to?

Particularly, what if all other players played all their matches, and the points are such that A would promote and D and E demote as it is, but with a good result against E player B could pass A and player D pass C?

My first thought was to just declare all the matches against E void, but that doesn't sound fair either, because if A beat E with 6-0 and also had some great results against C and D, he'd likely play a bit less focussed and driven against B, or at the very least be more willing to take ties than had he known beforehand that the 6-0 against E wouldn't count.

[TheMirrorMan]

For starters, I think it's going really well. I see a lot of people playing a lot of matches and enjoying it. I especially liked the little sub-communities that arose in some of the groups.
In most groups it's also really close who is going to win.

I agree, and I'm having lots of fun. It's a nailbiting competition at the moment in D8.

Next season, I'll introduce some rules on playing matches. They will probably be
* after week 2, you need to have finished 1 match
* after week 3, you need to have finished 2 matches
* after week 4, you need to have finished 3 matches
If at any point you cannot comply to these rules, send a message to the organisation and explain why. If you don't, you'll be removed from your group.

You're going to receive a lot of messages this season, since it's mid-summer. Would you be up for extending the summer season a few weeks ?

Also, I intend to get together an 'organizing committee' and assign a member to every group.

That would mean 15 people - I think that's a bit much. I would propose putting together a "referee" committee (It's what happens in chess) containing :
1 from A, B, C and D + Stef himself. You could make this a rotating system of all "more active" players. They make decisions when there is a problem. The one per division makes sure that if there are conflicts, you have at least 3 people deciding independantly.

For the individual groups, I would just take the most active player and give him the leading role on keeping an eye on the matches. In D8 this was never a problem.

In the meanwhile, have fun with your remaining matches. After you finished your last match, please post a message in your own groups scheduling thread stating your intentions for next season (I'll be back / I'm quitting).

Stef : could you post this in the Season 2 thread too ?

[yed]

My first thought was to just declare all the matches against E void, but that doesn't sound fair either,

That sounds fair to me if it is in the rules and you know it before playing the first match.

[shraeye]

I'm pretty behind on my schedules, but I'm working to get them in.  I was thinking what should happen if I don't manage to play everybody.  I'm not sure what is fairest actually.  But i suppose if somebody gets just 1 match in, or 2 matches, then discarding their results is reasonable (like Euro qualifiers where results against lowest ranked teams don't count when comparing 2nd place teams because there are smaller groups and such)

[mikemike]

D1 has a level of inactivity where I just don't believe the last week, or even the week after that, will solve anything. The resolution will be simple there: nobody promotes (unless of course they really surprise me in the last week).

Fair enough. But for the record, I think we'll have most of our matches done by the deadline (which is when, exactly, by the way? I can't find that info). Ashersky has played 2 or 3 half matches, and I have reached out to all those I haven't played yet.

What was most difficult for me this first season was being placed in a division where I am halfway across the world from my 5 fellow D1ers. A ~12 hour time difference is maybe something I could deal with 2 or 3 times, but having to schedule all 5 matches at a time that is probably weird for both parties is asking a lot (especially, for me, while school is going on, which it is now not as of last week, which I why I saved most of my matches for the end).

[-Stef-]

Fair enough. But for the record, I think we'll have most of our matches done by the deadline (which is when, exactly, by the way? I can't find that info). Ashersky has played 2 or 3 half matches, and I have reached out to all those I haven't played yet.

Just getting those matches played is off course by far the best resolution. You can find info about scheduling here.

What was most difficult for me this first season was being placed in a division where I am halfway across the world from my 5 fellow D1ers. A ~12 hour time difference is maybe something I could deal with 2 or 3 times, but having to schedule all 5 matches at a time that is probably weird for both parties is asking a lot (especially, for me, while school is going on, which it is now not as of last week, which I why I saved most of my matches for the end).

I'm sorry for that. Timezone-wise, you're in the worst D-group, I think only A is worse. 12 hours is overdone though, unless I'm mistaken your time differences with the other players are 8, 7, 6, 6 & 4.

You're going to receive a lot of messages this season, since it's mid-summer. Would you be up for extending the summer season a few weeks ?

created a poll.

Also, I intend to get together an 'organizing committee' and assign a member to every group.

That would mean 15 people - I think that's a bit much.

I was thinking about 3 people each assigned 5 groups.

In the meanwhile, have fun with your remaining matches. After you finished your last match, please post a message in your own groups scheduling thread stating your intentions for next season (I'll be back / I'm quitting).

Stef : could you post this in the Season 2 thread too ?

It already has been in there for two weeks (?)

What happens if in a group with players A, B, C, D and E, player E has only played against A and C and then drops out, either because he just vanishes or because your rules force him to?

Particularly, what if all other players played all their matches, and the points are such that A would promote and D and E demote as it is, but with a good result against E player B could pass A and player D pass C?

My first thought was to just declare all the matches against E void, but that doesn't sound fair either, because if A beat E with 6-0 and also had some great results against C and D, he'd likely play a bit less focussed and driven against B, or at the very least be more willing to take ties than had he known beforehand that the 6-0 against E wouldn't count.

There is no general rule here, and I will look at each individual case before coming up with a solution. Above all I don't want people to (ab)use any general rulings here.
So far, I removed one player from C1 and in that case I declared his played games void. He finished 5 games and disconnected during the sixth against ADK, who was 3-2 ahead and likely to win the last one. I have no clue if this would have been a good score or a bad one for ADK, as I cannot compare how many games other players would have won against this player.

[liopoil]

At this point, D1 is farther along than a few other divisions. I think most of the games in all the divisions will be completed in time, and there will be just a couple people which you might need to send to division E, if any.

[ConMan]

At this point, D1 is farther along than a few other divisions. I think most of the games in all the divisions will be completed in time, and there will be just a couple people which you might need to send to division E, if any.

Somehow the stars aligned and I think about 3 or 4 pairings managed to get their matches finished yesterday, at least that I'm aware of (and likely more).

[-Stef-]

At this point, D1 is farther along than a few other divisions. I think most of the games in all the divisions will be completed in time, and there will be just a couple people which you might need to send to division E, if any.

Somehow the stars aligned and I think about 3 or 4 pairings managed to get their matches finished yesterday, at least that I'm aware of (and likely more).

Yes very nice. Keep going

In the meanwhile, it looks like D2 will be the first to finish. With only one match to go it's a real nail-biter...

D2 (93%)

rank	name	average	points	#played	2nd	3rd
1.	michaeljb	3,6	14.5	4	0	194
2.	Alan Malloy	3,6	18	5	0	228
3.	kylar	3,3	13.5	4	4	185
4.	GeoLib	3,1	15.5	5	0	209
5.	MtMagus	2,7	13.5	5	2	184
6.	kipkoan	1,8	9	5	0	130.5

michaeljb - Alan Malloy: 4 - 2
Alan Malloy - kylar: 2 - 4

So if Michaeljb manages to take 3.5 games against kylar he wins the season. If he wins 2, 2.5 or 3 games Allan Malloy wins. If he wins 1.5 game or less, kylar wins the season.

[michaeljb]

I'll be streaming my match with kylar, but I'm afraid it will be a silent stream. My computer's pushing five years old, and the fan goes nuts when doing all the processing to get the stream going, and I don't have an external microphone so you mostly just hear the fan instead of me talking.

We're planning to start the game at 6:30pm PDT tomorrow evening. Tune in at http://www.twitch.tv/michaeljb_13

[ashersky]

I'll be streaming my match with kylar, but I'm afraid it will be a silent stream. My computer's pushing five years old, and the fan goes nuts when doing all the processing to get the stream going, and I don't have an external microphone so you mostly just hear the fan instead of me talking.

We're planning to start the game at 6:30pm PDT tomorrow evening. Tune in at http://www.twitch.tv/michaeljb_13

Tell your fans to be quiet.  It's not a stadium where they can go crazy.

[Emeric]

B2 (93%)

rank	name	average	points	#played	2nd	3rd	Season2?
1.	Monsieur X	3,6	14.5	4	0	217	?
2.	yed	3,5	17.5	5	0	222.5	?
3.	silverspawn	3,0	15	5	0	195.5	Yes
4.	Mr Anderson	2,8	14	5	0	208	Yes
5.	Jean-Michel	2,7	13.5	5	0	189	Yes
6.	MarkowKette	2,3	9.5	4	0	133.5	?

Monsieur X - yed: 3 - 3
Monsieur X - silverspawn: 5 - 1
Monsieur X - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
Monsieur X - Jean-Michel: 2.5 - 3.5
yed - silverspawn: 4.5 - 1.5
yed - Mr Anderson: 1 - 5
yed - Jean-Michel: 3 - 3
yed - MarkowKette: 6 - 0
silverspawn - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
silverspawn - Jean-Michel: 4.5 - 1.5
silverspawn - MarkowKette: 4 - 2
Mr Anderson - Jean-Michel: 3.5 - 2.5
Mr Anderson - MarkowKette: 1.5 - 4.5
Jean-Michel - MarkowKette: 3 - 3

So MarkowKette have to win 4,5 points to save his B2 place
And Monsieur X have to win 3 points to go in division A

[yed]

B2 (93%)

rank	name	average	points	#played	2nd	3rd	Season2?
1.	Monsieur X	3,6	14.5	4	0	217	?
2.	yed	3,5	17.5	5	0	222.5	?
3.	silverspawn	3,0	15	5	0	195.5	Yes
4.	Mr Anderson	2,8	14	5	0	208	Yes
5.	Jean-Michel	2,7	13.5	5	0	189	Yes
6.	MarkowKette	2,3	9.5	4	0	133.5	?

Monsieur X - yed: 3 - 3
Monsieur X - silverspawn: 5 - 1
Monsieur X - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
Monsieur X - Jean-Michel: 2.5 - 3.5
yed - silverspawn: 4.5 - 1.5
yed - Mr Anderson: 1 - 5
yed - Jean-Michel: 3 - 3
yed - MarkowKette: 6 - 0
silverspawn - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
silverspawn - Jean-Michel: 4.5 - 1.5
silverspawn - MarkowKette: 4 - 2
Mr Anderson - Jean-Michel: 3.5 - 2.5
Mr Anderson - MarkowKette: 1.5 - 4.5
Jean-Michel - MarkowKette: 3 - 3

So MarkowKette have to win 4,5 points to save his B2 place
And Monsieur X have to win 3 points to go in division A

Yes, MarkowKette you can do it!

[MarkowKette]

B2 (93%)

rank	name	average	points	#played	2nd	3rd	Season2?
1.	Monsieur X	3,6	14.5	4	0	217	?
2.	yed	3,5	17.5	5	0	222.5	?
3.	silverspawn	3,0	15	5	0	195.5	Yes
4.	Mr Anderson	2,8	14	5	0	208	Yes
5.	Jean-Michel	2,7	13.5	5	0	189	Yes
6.	MarkowKette	2,3	9.5	4	0	133.5	?

Monsieur X - yed: 3 - 3
Monsieur X - silverspawn: 5 - 1
Monsieur X - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
Monsieur X - Jean-Michel: 2.5 - 3.5
yed - silverspawn: 4.5 - 1.5
yed - Mr Anderson: 1 - 5
yed - Jean-Michel: 3 - 3
yed - MarkowKette: 6 - 0
silverspawn - Mr Anderson: 4 - 2
silverspawn - Jean-Michel: 4.5 - 1.5
silverspawn - MarkowKette: 4 - 2
Mr Anderson - Jean-Michel: 3.5 - 2.5
Mr Anderson - MarkowKette: 1.5 - 4.5
Jean-Michel - MarkowKette: 3 - 3

So MarkowKette have to win 4,5 points to save his B2 place
And Monsieur X have to win 3 points to go in division A

Yes, MarkowKette you can do it!

If this continues like this season went so far it will probably go 3,5-2,5 so that neither of us reaches his goal.

[hvb]

I think the first season went very well so far. For me it was a lot of fun to play competitive dominion in this format and i enjoyed it a lot. And its my impression, that almost all other players enjoyed it a lot as well, it simply is a well thought-out and well executed format.

Its hard to set up strict rules regarding promotion and demotion, if not all matches get played. The situations of the groups will be very different, so will be the reasons for not finishing. I think, it would be best to set up some "soft rules" like Stef did with the guidelines in the Rules&Regulations-Thread.

I suggest to remove all players, who only played 2 games or less (<40 % or <50% of the games is also reasonable) . To be fair regarding de-/promotion, the results of the matches played by those players should be removed as well. It will be often the case, that Player X was able to play a match against the removed player, while player Y wasn`t, although he tried to contact him.

I would also ban these removed players for one season from league. As the active players shouldnt suffer from the inactive ones, the removed player should count as a demoted player. So in Division C1 where already one player has been removed (5 player division now), only #5 in the final standings should demote.


Edit: If two active players dont manage to play their match, the standings shouldnt be affected by that. For example if MX and Markowkette (sry to both for using you in my example  ) in B2 wouldnt manage to play their last match in time, they just dont get any points out of their match and have to live with 0 points. 5 weeks is just a long enough period to play the match for active players. The current standings would be the final one in this example and yed should promote with 17.5 points.

[Joseph2302]

I suggest to remove all players, who only played 2 games or less (<40 % or <50% of the games is also reasonable) . To be fair regarding de-/promotion, the results of the matches played by those players should be removed as well. It will be often the case, that Player X was able to play a match against the removed player, while player Y wasn`t, although he tried to contact him.

I would also ban these removed players for one season from league. As the active players shouldnt suffer from the inactive ones, the removed player should count as a demoted player. So in Division C1 where already one player has been removed (5 player division now), only #5 in the final standings should demote.

I agree with all of this, it seems to be a good idea. If you can't schedule more than 2 games in 5 weeks (unless there are exceptional circumstances), then surely you're not going to be able to schedule 5 in 5 next season. Also, the format has been good, most divisions look to be close, and gone down to the final matches, and everyone I've played seems to be friendly, and enjoying it.

I've also enjoyed the variety of matches being streamed, in A,B,C and D divisions, so thanks to everyone who streamed.

[Joseph2302]

also, a question: if we stay in the same division, will be be in the same group within the division i.e. i'm not getting promoted from D6, so will I stay in D6 for next season, or get moved to another D league possibly? I guess it depends on if you restructure D and E as suggested before.

[GeoLib]

also, a question: if we stay in the same division, will be be in the same group within the division i.e. i'm not getting promoted from D6, so will I stay in D6 for next season, or get moved to another D league possibly? I guess it depends on if you restructure D and E as suggested before.

I think the best option is to reshuffle by level, but again with considerations for time zone, so the sections will probably look pretty similar to this season.

[PitzerMike]

Hello -Stef-, well done!
I have not participated myself but I believe much fun was had.
I've followed the results of Stef division down to the Qvist divisions closely with excitement - the lower divisions not so much.
I enjoy reading game reports too.

As far as handling inactive players goes I think people who didn't play at least 2 matches can be removed only if they fail to explain themselves.
Imagine you're the guy who really wants to play some Dominion but gets drawn into a "problem division".
You wouldn't have any matches played although you really wanted to - then you get banned from the league to top it off!

[amalloy]

The season is supposed to have ended yesterday, right? But it looks like only four of the fifteen divisions are at 100% completion. Do we now send hired goons to menace those who aren't finished?

[hsiale]

At least for D hired goons need to wait a week more as the season is longer here due to more players per group.

My group (D7) has a player with 2 out of 6 matches played (I played him, it took us two sessions with 3 weeks separating them, but this was my fault, not his). Other than that, there is one unplayed match and it is scheduled for tomorrow. I don't know if the player with 4 matches remaining is going to play them, but it is definitely possible (I played most of my games during week one, including a day with 3 matches, I have to admit now it was a bit crazy and probably hurt my performance, but it's possible to get lots of games in a short period of time).

[-Stef-]

The season is supposed to have ended yesterday, right? But it looks like only four of the fifteen divisions are at 100% completion. Do we now send hired goons to menace those who aren't finished?

I would very much like for all A, B & C groups to reach 100%.
In order to do so, I will still accept all matches that get scheduled before/on Wednesday and played before/on Sunday.

We're still looking for 7 matches to be played:
B1: Destierro vs JDaki & Destierro vs Tao Chen.
C1: Chan Kuan Rong vs Slyfox & Chan Kuan Rong vs A Drowned Kernel
C2: Temron vs jsh357
C3: Qvist vs Lekkit & Fergesser vs qmech


For D3, D4, D5, D7, D8  - they have another week to go. Please try to get your matches played.
D2, D6 finished already.

D1 - the winner is clear so further inactivity won't hurt the league. However, especially if you want to come back for season 2 - please show me your desire to get matches actually played.

As far as handling inactive players goes I think people who didn't play at least 2 matches can be removed only if they fail to explain themselves.
...

Off course I will never remove anyone without trying to contact them and asking why / what happened.
So far the only player I removed didn't respond to my messages at all.

[Breezy D]

I've enjoyed the league but my biggest challenge has been scheduling.

Grouping by timezone has not been good for me. The best time for me is usually around 4-6 am in my time zone. In fact, I can play at those times almost every day. Yet most of my opponents have an easier time scheduling in the evening which only occasionally works for me especially when they are one or two time zones west of me.

To the extent that it is possible, I would be interested in seeing groupings for season 2 according to when folks are usually able to play rather than where they live.

[-Stef-]

I've enjoyed the league but my biggest challenge has been scheduling.

Grouping by timezone has not been good for me. The best time for me is usually around 4-6 am in my time zone. In fact, I can play at those times almost every day. Yet most of my opponents have an easier time scheduling in the evening which only occasionally works for me especially when they are one or two time zones west of me.

To the extent that it is possible, I would be interested in seeing groupings for season 2 according to when folks are usually able to play rather than where they live.

I will continue to group by timezone, but you're free to pretend you're in a different timezone then you actually are if your favorite playing times are unusual.
Please just PM me with the timezone you want to be in.

[mtmagus]

Hey Stef.  Can we get a little more information on how promotion/demotion/inserting and removing people is going to work?  I read your post in the rules and regulations, and there were a lot of "may's" and conditionals in it.  It might be better to have some sort of ironclad algorithm set out before you release season 2 divisions.  The more vague the rules are the more people will complain.

[silverspawn]

Hey Stef.  Can we get a little more information on how promotion/demotion/inserting and removing people is going to work?  I read your post in the rules and regulations, and there were a lot of "may's" and conditionals in it.  It might be better to have some sort of ironclad algorithm set out before you release season 2 divisions.  The more vague the rules are the more people will complain.

promotion and demotion is pretty straight forward. bottom 2 of divisions in A-C drop down, top 1 of B-D get promoted. E isn't decided yet and you can't promote from A, obviously. And inserting and removing seems pretty clearly left to his judgement in every individual case on purpose.

[impromptublue]

Will there be an effort to get players in divisions with opponents they haven't played before, or will we end up with mostly the same opponents (due to timezone)?

Thanks for organizing this btw. It's the first dominion league tournament I've participated in and I really enjoy the division structure.

[-Stef-]

promotion and demotion is pretty straight forward. bottom 2 of divisions in A-C drop down, top 1 of B-D get promoted. E isn't decided yet and you can't promote from A, obviously. And inserting and removing seems pretty clearly left to his judgement in every individual case on purpose.

Correct, but I guess I can say a bit more about it.

I will try to get the groups filled starting with A, then B, then C, then D.
Division A - the old top-4 and the two winners from B all want to stay.
Division B - some free spots due to leaving/sitting out of Perry Green, probably AI, jog, ?
  I will fill them up with the highest ranked players based on Isotropish leaderboard of July 4th.
  One of those spots will almost certainly be given to Obi Wan Bonogi (currently #10)
  The rest gets divided between the people that ended #2 in C divisions. Currently they're all very close to each other on the leaderboard.
Division C - similar process as described above. People leaving and the free promotions to B will both free up spots in C.
  I will make a group of all candidates (people in D ending #2, new players, people in C ending #5), see who is ranked highest, and give them a free promotion.

This means you're better off being new then ending up #6 in C.
It also means you're better off being new then ending up #3 in D.
(in terms of having a chance on a free promotion to C).
so be it.

[hvb]

  The rest gets divided between the people that ended #2 in C divisions. Currently they're all very close to each other on the leaderboard.

If it becomes relevant, that a free slot will be given to a #2 of the C devisions, i'd rather see the player with the most total points promoting (or in this case the player with the best average score, because C1 has only 5 players remaining) instead of the best on the Leaderboard.

I think its more fair/consistant letting a player promote based on a criterion, that belongs to the given performances in the League.

[Voltaire]

I think its more fair/consistant letting a player promote based on a criterion, that belongs to the given performances in the League.

I do agree with this, that if possible league performance should be used instead of the leaderboard (though I support using the leaderboard in situations with no/incomplete league data). The fun of the league comes from the fact that it isn't a perfect reflection of the leaderboard.

That said I don't care about this intensely and support whatever action Stef takes.

[-Stef-]

Next season hvb, TheMirrorMan and A Drowned Kernel will be joining the league organization.

For season 1 I enjoyed handling everything myself, but it's probably too much work to continue enjoying that all the time.
Also I want the league to not depend on one person.
I will still be handling the new seeding for season 2 myself but after that it's us 4.

--

next season I'll use different codes for players, probably something with letters in stead of numbers.
These codes are way too confusing for people with ranks, I'd estimate about 20% of the results posts mix them up.

--

If it becomes relevant, that a free slot will be given to a #2 of the C devisions, i'd rather see the player with the most total points promoting (or in this case the player with the best average score, because C1 has only 5 players remaining) instead of the best on the Leaderboard.

I think its more fair/consistant letting a player promote based on a criterion, that belongs to the given performances in the League.

I strongly dislike comparing how many points you get in group X to how many points someone else gets in group Y. Especially on D level the groups turned out not to be equally balanced and the final score of the #2's says a lot more about the group then about that #2.

I use league data wherever I (think I) can, and use the leaderboard for the rest. For instance, I will only consider #2 for a free promotion, even if #3 is higher on the leaderboard.

[SCSN]

next season I'll use different codes for players, probably something with letters in stead of numbers.
These codes are way too confusing for people with ranks, I'd estimate about 20% of the results posts mix them up.

Is anyone served by players having a code at all? Isn't

D8: hugovj 0.5 - QwertZuiop 5.5

clearer even to the organizers than

D8-2   hugovj - D8-6 QwertZuiop 0.5 - 5.5QwertZuiop wins

?

[-Stef-]

Is anyone served by players having a code at all?

yes, I am.

I enter the results into a file results.txt and then run my standings-generator to generate the first post in the standings thread.
It looks like this:

D4-5 D4-3 4
D3-3 D3-6 1
D3-3 D3-1 3
C2-3 C2-4 4
D7-2 D7-3 4
C4-5 C4-6 3
C2-6 C2-5 4.5
C2-1 C2-2 3
D5-5 D5-7 1.5
...


I could also match by name but then I'd be correcting spelling errors all the time.
But I can probably achieve best-of-both-worlds by making the codes look like this...

code	name	timezone
B2mo	Monsieur X	2
B2ye	yed	2
B2mr	Mr Anderson	2
B2ma	MarkowKette	2
B2si	silverspawn	2
B2je	Jean-Michel	3

... and I wouldn't have to bother anyone else with the existence of codes.
That is, assuming people will remember to put their group ID in the results post and spell the first two characters of all names correctly.

[soulnet]

I use league data wherever I (think I) can, and use the leaderboard for the rest. For instance, I will only consider #2 for a free promotion, even if #3 is higher on the leaderboard.

That seems inconsistent (why is using position in group ok but using point totals is not? I think both measures have the same problem of being possibly unfair due to groups unevenness. I, as discussed earler, would like for external data to be used as little as possible.

More importantly, is the leaderboard working properly these days? I haven't played in a week, but I think between goko not generating logs and some bugs in the leaderboards, recent rankings have issues and it would be especially important to not use it. I would go as far as to suggest using goko's ranking instead (ignoring their ridiculous variance through AI's work). Of course, my preferred choice would be to completely ignore rankings other than those produced by league results, and placing known-to-be-high players in a sensible division.

Also, I suggest using a google form or some other online form to gather results. It will make the gathering of results a lot easier. You can make the partial results public for accountability and use dropdown boxes for choosing players, to avoid misspellings as well as codes.

[Mic Qsenoch]

More importantly, is the leaderboard working properly these days? I haven't played in a week, but I think between goko not generating logs and some bugs in the leaderboards, recent rankings have issues and it would be especially important to not use it. I would go as far as to suggest using goko's ranking instead (ignoring their ridiculous variance through AI's work).

Unless the missing log bug was systematically related to player ranking in some way (extremely unlikely), there's no reason to reject the isotropish leaderboard based on this. This is just my intuition, but I think percentage of logs missing would have to be very high before we'd expect a large number of rankings to be inaccurate. The higher the percentage missed, the higher the likelihood that the recorded games are out of whack with a player's typical results. The leaderboard is still pulling from a very large number of games for most players.

The bugs in the isotropish leaderboard seem to show up in visually obvious ways at least, really high numbers of games and high skill/deviation.

The problem with using Goko's is that it's a pain to scrape for everybody at once at a single time. You would need to have everybody report their own rating at a certain time (approximately), and there would be no easy way to verify because who the heck wants to click through those pages to see each rating.

[soulnet]

The bugs in the isotropish leaderboard seem to show up in visually obvious ways at least, really high numbers of games and high skill/deviation.

There were several other bugs, apparently related to the migration to linode (e.g., I had disappeared for about a week from the leaderboard for no apparent reason, and afterwards my ranking was completely miscalculated for a while, and AI said it would be like this until he regenerated everything, which is something I do not know when it will be done). I am not sure if AI solved them all, maybe he did and I just did not notice due to my week-long inactivity.

Also, anecdotal evidence based only on my matches suggests that Goko has been missing between 50% and 70% of the logs. That looks high. It is true that if they are randomly chosen, it is not a big deal, but still, I completely distrust rankings at this point. Hopefully it will get better in the near future, but it only made me reinforce my believe that it is best not to use outside rankings for the league.

Major point: If Isotropish is going to be used for anything other than minor tweaks, it would be important to check with AI whether we can trust a certain publication. Maybe even request a full reconstruction of the leaderboard right before getting it, just in case.

[Jdaki]

I have enjoyed the matches played this season. However a couple of thoughts, it is possible to play multiple games in one week or to play games spread out over weeks. I would suggest rather than insisting one match per week. Perhaps two matches every two weeks. Or just enforce and schedule the matches ie. 1 v 2 week 1. 1 v 3 week 2.
Also I couldn't find the justification for use of game points over match points. Basically if you get thrashed in one match (like I did!) then you can't win because you shipped so many points. Now the group still did come out right, in that rabid is clearly better than me. But I could have just told you that. Leagues (in sport) don't normally mind one off drubbings- you can still capitalise on other slip ups. Anyhow good fun and thanks to stef for organising.

[hvb]

Also I couldn't find the justification for use of game points over match points.

A good example is League D2, where Alan Malloy promoted with 2 wins - 1 tie - 2 losses, while kylar did not with 4 wins and just 1 loss. So whats better?
Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages and its basically a matter of taste what you prefer. I like the actual system a lot, cause I like it that every single game counts and it turned out that in a lot of cases the league remains exiting until the last match and even game is played. In my case for example, I had already played 27 games and 3 games were remaining against AI. If I could have won all 3 it was still possible to win my division, if I would have lost all 3 it was still possible to demote (depending on AI's last match against PG).

So, I wouldnt change too much there, but can see your point. So, why not combine best of both worlds? It may be worth considering, to maintain the point system as it is and give a bonus point as reward for a match-win.

[-Stef-]

I have enjoyed the matches played this season. However a couple of thoughts, it is possible to play multiple games in one week or to play games spread out over weeks. I would suggest rather than insisting one match per week. Perhaps two matches every two weeks. Or just enforce and schedule the matches ie. 1 v 2 week 1. 1 v 3 week 2.

I don't understand everything you say.
If you want to play all your 5 matches in the first week, that is absolutely fine.
If you want to play all your 5 matches in the last week, that is not fine.
One match per week has been and always will be "just a suggestion".

Next season, if you fall behind a lot, you will be expected to proactively message the organization.
You could explain the situation, or better yet - schedule some of your remaining matches and announce the dates.
If you don't play, don't message and don't respond - you will be removed from the league.

Also I couldn't find the justification for use of game points over match points. Basically if you get thrashed in one match (like I did!) then you can't win because you shipped so many points. Now the group still did come out right, in that rabid is clearly better than me. But I could have just told you that. Leagues (in sport) don't normally mind one off drubbings- you can still capitalise on other slip ups. Anyhow good fun and thanks to stef for organising.

The justification is really simple - more accurate results. If you want to use only matchpoints, you really need at least 12 matches for it to be meaningful, probably 18+. Otherwise far too many people will end up on equal scores.
I also think the current system is more fair than counting matchpoints... winning 6-0 implies you're a lot better then when you win 3.5-2.5, and you deserve more points.

So, I wouldnt change too much there, but can see your point. So, why not combine best of both worlds? It may be worth considering, to maintain the point system as it is and give a bonus point as reward for a match-win.

If a lot of people like this idea I'm open for it. One or two bonus points for the winner could make close matches more tense. Although to be honest I don't think it changes that much, and perhaps it doesn't justify complicating the rules.

[-Stef-]

I have been playing around with an idea based on chess, and although I don't want to implement it right now, it might come in handy later.
So I just want to hear what you think about it.

We create two new positions, called "champion" and "challenger". While everyone else plays out a regular season, these two play a 20-game duel. The winner of the duel is the new champion, while the loser falls back into division A. The winner of division A gets to be the next challenger. (so it's the equivalent of having a 2-player division on top of A)

Advantages could be
* some special matches, extra fun to stream/watch
     maybe even with non-playing commentator(s)
* possibility to use specially selected sets
     I don't want designed sets, but would like random sets other people played and considered interesting.

and organisational:
* Introducing this system frees up some space at the top. This could come in handy if a lot of good players join / come back.
For example, even just having the option of introducing it would allow me to guarantee A.I. a spot in B when he wants to sit-out in season 2 and return in season 3, without announcing additional demotions up front.

[Mic Qsenoch]

We create two new positions, called "champion" and "challenger". While everyone else plays out a regular season, these two play a 20-game duel. The winner of the duel is the new champion, while the loser falls back into division A. The winner of division A gets to be the next challenger. (so it's the equivalent of having a 2-player division on top of A)

It is an interesting idea, and probably cool for spectators, but I think I'd rather play the regular league matches than one big championship match. The appeal for me in Dominion is always the variety, variety of opponents included. I also prefer as relaxed an atmosphere for the league as possible, because the higher the "stakes" the slower everybody plays.

But if everybody wanted to see this format, and I was in one of the two positions, I would do it.

[SCSN]

So, I wouldnt change too much there, but can see your point. So, why not combine best of both worlds? It may be worth considering, to maintain the point system as it is and give a bonus point as reward for a match-win.

If a lot of people like this idea I'm open for it. One or two bonus points for the winner could make close matches more tense. Although to be honest I don't think it changes that much, and perhaps it doesn't justify complicating the rules.

Ugh, please no, it pollutes with arbitrary vagueness a system that is pure and elegant as it is.

We create two new positions, called "champion" and "challenger". While everyone else plays out a regular season, these two play a 20-game duel. The winner of the duel is the new champion, while the loser falls back into division A. The winner of division A gets to be the next challenger. (so it's the equivalent of having a 2-player division on top of A)

I REALLY love this idea. I'm all for it, and would also like giving non-playing commentary if the players themselves want to focus on the match.

[liopoil]

We create two new positions, called "champion" and "challenger". While everyone else plays out a regular season, these two play a 20-game duel. The winner of the duel is the new champion, while the loser falls back into division A. The winner of division A gets to be the next challenger. (so it's the equivalent of having a 2-player division on top of A)

I REALLY love this idea. I'm all for it, and would also like giving non-playing commentary if the players themselves want to focus on the match.

I really like this idea too, fwiw. I like the chess system, and this really is the same.

[silverspawn]

So, I wouldnt change too much there, but can see your point. So, why not combine best of both worlds? It may be worth considering, to maintain the point system as it is and give a bonus point as reward for a match-win.

If a lot of people like this idea I'm open for it. One or two bonus points for the winner could make close matches more tense. Although to be honest I don't think it changes that much, and perhaps it doesn't justify complicating the rules.

Ugh, please no, it pollutes with arbitrary vagueness a system that is pure and elegant as it is.

yea, that. If you start counting match wins, all it does is make some games be worth more than others, that's not a good thing. keep it as it is.

[GeoLib]

So, I wouldnt change too much there, but can see your point. So, why not combine best of both worlds? It may be worth considering, to maintain the point system as it is and give a bonus point as reward for a match-win.

If a lot of people like this idea I'm open for it. One or two bonus points for the winner could make close matches more tense. Although to be honest I don't think it changes that much, and perhaps it doesn't justify complicating the rules.

Ugh, please no, it pollutes with arbitrary vagueness a system that is pure and elegant as it is.

Agreed. It makes the system less accurate as well IMO.

[rrwoods]

As one of the current (and probably future) inactive players, I'm heavily in favor of a division E for inactive players.  I'd need to seriously think about dropping out of the league for future seasons if this weren't instituted, as I am not able to play scheduled games of anything with as much regularity as I originally foresaw, and I don't want to be a drag on the league if that continues.

[soulnet]

I don't like the idea of the champion/challenger, but since I am nowhere near the top, I don't personally mind too much. It just makes the league seem less of a league to my eyes. I do like the idea of having better streams, but that can be easily pulled off with the current format.

[qmech]

Leagues (in sport) don't normally mind one off drubbings- you can still capitalise on other slip ups. Anyhow good fun and thanks to stef for organising.

I tend to think that the analogue of drubbings here are when your opponent hits Chapel T3 and T5 and has a lock on the game by T7, but that doesn't quite capture the fact that if you're on tilt in game 2 it's probably going to persist until game 6.

[soulnet]

Regarding extra promotions: Since the leaderboard is not working (not updating), I feel even stronger against using it. I think placing really high ranking players in high divisions is fine, because that was something sustained over time. However, comparing placement of similarly ranked players (like the proposed tie-breaker for extra promotions) seems like a bad idea, since there is literally no time to adjust your ranking before the deadline, if one would like to do so.

That being said, I would rather use any sort of league-data for deciding (could be average points, result against #1, or something in between like points against non-demoting players), or even choose/break ties randomly.

[soulnet]

Also, for next season, I propose "finishing time of his/her last game" as 3rd tie-breaker. It is unlikely enough to be used for people not to care, and rewards people for keeping the schedule. Maybe finishing week is better, but you get the idea.

[silverspawn]

Also, for next season, I propose "finishing time of his/her last game" as 3rd tie-breaker. It is unlikely enough to be used for people not to care, and rewards people for keeping the schedule. Maybe finishing week is better, but you get the idea.

How about "finished all matches in time" as first tie breaker, and if both players have "yes" or "no", the second tie breaker decides? then it might actually be a motivation.

[SCSN]

It takes two to tango...

[-Stef-]

That being said, I would rather use any sort of league-data for deciding (could be average points, result against #1, or something in between like points against non-demoting players), or even choose/break ties randomly.

We continue to disagree, but it looks like you're in luck for next season. Some of the new organizers (especially hvb) seem to think more along your lines, so when we will start discussing free promotions for season 3 probably we end up using more league-data. Not for now though.

I don't like the idea of the champion/challenger...

I REALLY love this idea. I'm all for it, and would also like giving non-playing commentary if the players themselves want to focus on the match.

Strong opinions on both sides... I will discuss this with the others first, perhaps followed by a poll to make an actual decision.

... I do like the idea of having better streams, but that can be easily pulled off with the current format.

can you elaborate a bit more on this? Although in theory possible, I don't see how we could get this going in practice. Selecting sets is a lot of work, and you don't want to do that for just about every match. Also scheduling 2 players + commentators + people actually watching... we don't have that many spectators in the first place.

[soulnet]

can you elaborate a bit more on this? Although in theory possible, I don't see how we could get this going in practice. Selecting sets is a lot of work, and you don't want to do that for just about every match. Also scheduling 2 players + commentators + people actually watching... we don't have that many spectators in the first place.

A couple of division A games I have seen had a good number of spectators. I imagine that publishing a request for commentators after two players in division A have scheduled a match should have no problem on coming up with people to do it. In particular, I cannot imagine that being more difficult than finding commentators for a champion/challenger match. My point being, people want to watch the top players play each other, I don't think the game being a regular div A match or a champion/challenger match changes the appeal that much, and the same goes for people willing to comment on the match.

[SCSN]

Apart from it being a lot harder to schedule a game when four specific people need to be there rather than just two, do people/you actually prefer external commentary?

I definitely prefer just having one of the players talking, and I quite enjoy commenting on my own games, I'd only be willing to give that up if I really cared about the match (b.c. commenting makes me play a bit worse), which may or may not be the case with some kind of final or challenger/defender match, but definitely not with regular A league games.

[soulnet]

Apart from it being a lot harder to schedule a game when four specific people need to be there rather than just two, do people/you actually prefer external commentary?

I definitely prefer just having one of the players talking, and I quite enjoy commenting on my own games, I'd only be willing to give that up if I really cared about the match (b.c. commenting makes me play a bit worse), which may or may not be the case with some kind of final or challenger/defender match, but definitely not with regular A league games.

The schedule difficulty is the same for any match, making it champion/challenger won't change that.

I personally prefer external comments if they can see the cards players are holding, that's why I enjoy mostly streams in which there is chat with other players, and not so much recorded videos to watch by myself.

BTW, maybe is because our different levels of play, but I think commenting myself makes me play better. Basically, because it forces me to think more on my turn and pay more attention on the opponent's. I know I should do that all the time, but, hey, there is a reason I am not division A material.

[soulnet]

Regarding extra promotions: I do not know where I stand on getting a free promotion to B (got second in C2), but regardless, I am willing and would like to play for it with some other #2 (jokes aside) chosen by whatever means (random, for instance). Especially if the proposed tie-breakers have issues like the ranking not updated or the numbers being to close to be significant. More league Dominion = more fun. And probably a nice game to stream.

[SCSN]

Apart from it being a lot harder to schedule a game when four specific people need to be there rather than just two, do people/you actually prefer external commentary?

I definitely prefer just having one of the players talking, and I quite enjoy commenting on my own games, I'd only be willing to give that up if I really cared about the match (b.c. commenting makes me play a bit worse), which may or may not be the case with some kind of final or challenger/defender match, but definitely not with regular A league games.

The schedule difficulty is the same for any match, making it champion/challenger won't change that.

It takes the same number of steps but people will be far less willing to actually take them when the event is less special and prestigious. It's the same reason why people are willing to pay a lot more to attend the world cup final than they'd pay for a friendly between the same two teams.

To make the Gokodom final commentary happen, Mic had to buy a mic (heh), I had to discuss with Andrew how to best set things up, Andrew had to test various configurations and streamline it with us and Jog, then I had to reschedule some stuff I had already planned and leave a visit early when I heard about some train nonsense that resulted in significant delays. Would we have gone through the same effort had it been a regular A league match? I can't speak for the others but for me the answer is "hell no lol".

You might want to argue that without a champion/challenger, the A league games gain in prestige, which is sort of true but with there being 15 of them and few if any of them being deciding on their own, they're just going to be less special no matter what, and while I'd be willing to comment if it suits my schedule, I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to make it happen.

Additionally, I'm very reluctant (maybe even flat out unwilling) to let others comment on my regular league games because I too much enjoy doing so myself, whereas I might be open to it for a potential champion/challenger match.