Print

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

[hvb]

Hi all. This season is the third Season in a row, where the Championship is more of less decided, before the Championship match is even played. Seeing that the CM is more of less meaningless is not very satisfiing, as it should be the highlight of the season. I would like to see ideas and a discussion here, how we can change this.

My idea is, to give the leading player more starts in the CM. What are your ideas, feel free to discuss.

[SCSN]

I fully agree, and a testament to your point is that I feel relieved rather than gutted about not having to play the 3rd championship match in a row as almost guaranteed loser (1st was "well, it's cool to have the experience", 2nd was "ok, there are these designed kingdoms", 3rd would have been "uuuuuh... fml").

I also like your proposol for how things could be changed, to which I'd add that the person who was ahead in the regular season would win in case the championship match ended 3-3.

Ideally these changes are effective immediately, not because that'd be entirely fair, but because it would be hilarious to see Mic lose a title he thought he had in the bag.

[MarkowKette]

I like the idea of the leading player being one game up. There should be a significant advantage for winning the group, like there is in all groups (place 1 promoting and place 2 not, independant on how close the scores are) but like you said the game should not be predecided.

[assemble_me]

I said this before during the last championship match:

The points achieved during the championship final could just be doubled.

But also your (hvb) idea just to give extra starts seems okay, but I guess we would need a good formula from points difference to extra starts (like 0.5-1 = 1 extra start, 1.5-2 2 extra starts, 2.5+ 3 extra starts?)

[-Stef-]

I don't think you can make the championship match have more weight without reducing the weight of the actual season. And I don't like that at all.
I think the current situation is perfectly fine. Mic played a lot better then everyone else in A this season. He deserves to win it, and he most likely will do so tomorrow.
Basically what you're suggesting is sacrificing a lot of fairness to gain spectacle, and that is the opposite of what I like in a competition.

[SCSN]

I don't think you can make the championship match have more weight without reducing the weight of the actual season. And I don't like that at all.
I think the current situation is perfectly fine. Mic played a lot better then everyone else in A this season. He deserves to win it, and he most likely will do so tomorrow.
Basically what you're suggesting is sacrificing a lot of fairness to gain spectacle, and that is the opposite of what I like in a competition.

But isn't the point of having the championship match in the first place to get a spectacle? I can see why you don't want it but then I really think you should ditch the thing altogether and either go back to how it was before or try out that champion-challenger idea (which I still really like). A meaningless championship match is the worst of all options.

[hvb]

@Stef I agree, that if we want to measure the performance the current System is totally fair. But why having a CM than at all, and not just a pure league like in season 1. I would Support that immediately.
My opinion is, either you have something like a final (CM) or not (pure League). And if you and we want to have that final, than it should be a real final. With advantages for the leading player, indeed. The CM in this form is just unsatisfiing, for the players and the spectators.

[MarkowKette]

I think the whole point of the Championship Match is on one side to have a special event for the audience and on the other side to be an extra reward for getting first or second in the A division. All other divisions have the big "first place gets to play in a higher division next season" point, but it doesn't get higher than A. So i think playing in the CM in front of a bigger audience than usual is kind of that for the A division. Yes, winning in the group phase should give you a significant advantage, but going in with a 5-1 lead or even an unbeatable lead takes away the whole purpose. Less people would want to watch a match where the winner is already predecided and so it also lessens the reward of playing in such a CM.
But that is only my thought. I would like to hear from other A division players what their opinion on that is (specifically if playing in the CM feels like a reward in itself)

[DG]

An alternative solution would be to have two A leagues with a championship match between the winners of the two A leagues.

[SCSN]

I would like to hear from other A division players what their opinion on that is (specifically if playing in the CM feels like a reward in itself)

For me: only the first time. The second time was saved by (some of!) the designed kingdoms. I'd have played the third only to not disappoint people, but nothing in the world would convince me to not concede in advance a (purely hypothetical) 4th meaningless match in a row.

An alternative solution would be to have two A leagues with a championship match between the winners of the two A leagues.

Not sure whether I'd be a fan of this in practice (would really have to try it out), but it's a a cool idea for sure.

[-Stef-]

I would like to hear from other A division players what their opinion on that is (specifically if playing in the CM feels like a reward in itself)

For me: only the first time. The second time was saved by (some of!) the designed kingdoms. I'd have played the third only to not disappoint people, but nothing in the world would convince me to not concede in advance a (purely hypothetical) 4th meaningless match in a row.

I don't get that attitude at all. You get to play a great game you love, on sets suggested by a lot of different people, commented on and watched by a group of others.
How could that be turned into something meaningless just because you won't be winning a league season?

[SCSN]

I would like to hear from other A division players what their opinion on that is (specifically if playing in the CM feels like a reward in itself)

For me: only the first time. The second time was saved by (some of!) the designed kingdoms. I'd have played the third only to not disappoint people, but nothing in the world would convince me to not concede in advance a (purely hypothetical) 4th meaningless match in a row.

I don't get that attitude at all. You get to play a great game you love, on sets suggested by a lot of different people, commented on and watched by a group of others.
How could that be turned into something meaningless just because you won't be winning a league season?

Maybe you have to go through it yourself to get it, or maybe you're wired differently and would have a different experience, hard to tell. In any case I'm just relating my own experience, which wasn't particularly great (quite a bit worse than I expected in advance), and I'd expect to enjoy it even less in the future the more the novelty wears off, to the point that I'd much rather just play normal games than a consolation match in front of an audience.

[AdamH]

I guess I'll weigh in here.

I'm all about spectacle, I'm all about having these high-profile live matches because I think it's good for the game and it's fun to hang out with a bunch of cool people.

That said, the League format we use here is meant to have the purest form of competition, and it sacrifices a lot to get that. I don't think the championship format should be changed. Look at most divisions in the league, they're very close. It just so happens that these last few seasons the A division was sort of a runaway, but that doesn't happen very often. MQ earned his huge advantage in the champion match and taking that away for pageantry would compromise what the league is about.

If you don't like the champion match, then go start your own tournament/league with your own structure and see who joins it. I probably would at some point (and I'd say in this one too, obvs.)

[2.71828.....]

I mean, last season in A was an anomaly.  Four 6-0 matches, Five 5-1 matches, and a 5.75-0.25 match. Yeah, there is going to be someone finishing way on top.

This season I just flopped 0-6 against Mic Q, otherwise it would have been closer at the top.

But go back and look at season 4.  Or season 3.  Sure, Mic dominated this season, Stef dominated last season, but then Stef almost got demoted this season!  I think the current setup for the championship match is fine.  Just because the last 3 seasons haven't produced a close match doesn't mean that the system is broken.  Close Championship matches will happen, and yes, they will be more exciting than the seasons that have big gaps between first and second, but I think over the course of time there will be more close seasons than runaway seasons.

[dudeabides]

I agree with anyone who thinks that I should start with a clean slate against Mic tomorrow 

[hvb]

@ Adam

If you don't like the champion match, then go start your own tournament/league with your own structure and see who joins it. I probably would at some point (and I'd say in this one too, obvs.)

That wouldnt make any sense. I love the League and Stef set it up phenomenally great. The League brought the game to another level for Players who like to play or/and watch competive Dominion. So please, dont misunderstand me, this discussion is just about the CM. This is simply no argument for me.

I respect, that you like the CM as it is. I and a lot of other Players do not.

[-Stef-]

Hmmm this discussion turned a little sour and I hope I can remove that. Everything about the league is always open for discussion. Even though in the end the organization has to make a decision, the post by Adam was (assuming, hoping) a little more blunt then he intended to.

Just for clarity: changing the rules of the league mid-season is not open for discussion. We're simply not doing that.
If there is a better proposal for the CM sure I'm willing to consider it, but only for seasons that are yet to start.
If I don't like the proposal but a huge majority loves it I'm willing to go with it anyway.
So far I'm not in love with the suggestions.

One property we have now is that during the season it's always better to win a game then to lose it. No matter what happens, I don't want to lose that property. The suggestion in the OP has such a weak advantage for doing well in the regular season that its no longer true. Throwing games to get a more advantageous opponent in later rounds - even if we assume no one is willing to go there I don't want to put people on the spot. It would also be advantageous to postpone your matches as long as possible and I don't like that either.

The suggestion by DG - effectively chopping of A - is creative but I don't think it works out. While the current setup (splitting it in 5 levels) works ok-ish, if I'd change it I'd rather go to 6 or 7 then to 4. The skill-cap especially between D and E is now already bigger then I'd like it to be.

The suggestion of doubling the points in the championship match is my favorite so far among all the things I don't really like. It should be workable.

I also still like the idea of challenger and champion, although I respect Mics objections of lesser variety for the two players involved.

[SCSN]

What about reverting back to how it was in the beginning?

If that's not an option and Mic still hates the challenger thing I'm in favor of doubling the points in the CM.

[2.71828.....]

One thought.  Instead of making it a "challenger/champion" from any given season, what about making it a match against the champion of the previous season.  Granted, it would not fix tie-break issues in a given season, but we have tie-break rules for that.  What it would do is create a high-profile match between two players for the title of reigning champion.  To make a football analogy, the Champions League champion gets an automatic berth in the competition the next year, even if they would not regularly qualify based on play within their own league.

So even though Stef would not qualify based on performance this season, he is the reigning champion, and would have a chance to defend his title in a special match.  Granted, this could create a situation of "undisputed champion" if someone were to win 2 seasons in a row, but this is just the beginning stages of a thought, not completely fleshed out.

[dudeabides]

Truthfully, I see both sides of the argument, and I don't have strong opinions about it.

The player who dominates during the regular season league matches plays better overall over the course of the 30 games of the season.  In this view, the championship match is just an extension of the season, 6 more games to give the player who did second best during the season a chance to play 6 more games to overtake the regular season champion.

Another way to look at the championship match is that it has nothing to do with the regular season, except that the players playing in it are determined by their performance during the regular season.  The player who barely avoids demotion and happens to make it to the championship match has the opportunity to heroically rise from near-demotion to become the champion by being given an even playing field on which to duel with the dominant regular season player.

The latter sounds like the stuff from which movies are made. "It's the... eye of the tiger, it's the thrill of the fight, rising up to the challenge of our rivals..."

It would be interesting to abandon the championship match and have a tournament to determine a post-season champion.  The regular season leaders in each of 4 C divisions play one match each to determine which 2 go on to play the regular season leaders in the 2 B Divisions.  Then, the 2 winners of those matches go on to play A regular season 1st and 2nd place, and the winner of those matches plays for the championship.  This would be a total of 4 rounds of play.

This totally defeats Stef's whole purpose for the league, if I remember it correctly, which was to have a competitive structure where poor performance on one day doesn't end your chances.  But it would be interesting.

[MarkowKette]

Lets's summarize what we want to achieve:
-an interesting Series that can be tense until the end
-a fair way to reward excellent in-season results (not dominating over 30 games and then not winning the season due to bad luck in a single match)
-diversity in competitors in the CM over the seasons

i think the only way to achieve both of the above things is to undock the CM from the Season, like the Champion/Challenger ,
"King of the Hill"-type of competition.
If you also want more diversity in players playing in the CM maybe make it a random selection of one of the players, with a distribution based on the seasons results in division A
Example (Number of points earned / 90)= chance of being chosen as "challenger"
And not to take anything away from Winning the Season as it's own thing and as the bigger achievement overall.

[Deadlock39]

I think it could make a perceptive difference just by adding a highlight for the winner of the Championship Match if it isn't the league winner. 

By this I mean, if dudeabides wins the match 4-2, he would be recognized as the winner of the Championship Match even though Mic still wins the league.  I don't know if that adds a significant amount of incentive to the 2nd place player in this situation or not.  I think I would personally enjoy playing the high profile games if I ever made it there even without any chance for recognition. This at least give the player something to "play for" at least until the Champion gets 3(.5?) games.

[AdamH]

Even though in the end the organization has to make a decision, the post by Adam was (assuming, hoping) a little more blunt then he intended to.

Dangit , I knew I should have put some emoticons in that post . They always help stuff like that out , but sometimes I worry that I put too many emoticons in my posts.

It's such a hard line to walk.

[dudeabides]

I think it could make a perceptive difference just by adding a highlight for the winner of the Championship Match if it isn't the league winner. 

By this I mean, if dudeabides wins the match 4-2, he would be recognized as the winner of the Championship Match even though Mic still wins the league.  I don't know if that adds a significant amount of incentive to the 2nd place player in this situation or not.  I think I would personally enjoy playing the high profile games if I ever made it there even without any chance for recognition. This at least give the player something to "play for" at least until the Champion gets 3(.5?) games.

If I beat Mic 4-2 tomorrow, I view myself as a champion regardless of how the rest of y'all view me. At the end of the day, I play Dominion for fun. If the winner of a game were simply the player who had more fun, well, I win 95% of my games, and I'm the top-ranked player . The 5% of the time I lose on that metric is when I play Big Money to avoid demotion in the league.

Lastly, simply playing in the CM is reward enough for me. 

[pubby]

I'll suggest starting the division leader off with 1 free win in a best of six match. That guarantees at least 3 good competitive games.