Print

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

[-Stef-]

Hi everyone,


The intention of this post is to find out how people would feel about a Dominion League.
I've thought about it for a while and I think I would structure it like this, although many parameters are open for discussion:

• Every player joining is placed in a division with 7 other people.
• An iteration takes up 2 months, in which you play 6 games against every other player in your division.
• There is a suggested week schedule, but you're free to reschedule as you see fit as long as you finish within the first 7 weeks.
• Both players start 3 games, order is irrelevant
• No matchpoints exist. At the end it all comes down to how many of your 42 games you managed to win. Tie counts for .5
• If multiple people win the same amount of games, you need some kind of second criteria. I'm sure we'll manage to write something down.
• There is 1 A division, 2 B divisions, 4 C divisions, 8 D divisons, ... (depending on number of players joining)
• At the end of the 'season', if you're #1, you go up one level.
• if you're #7 or #8, you go down one level.
• If you're #2, #5 or #6, you get to play a one-on-one match 'first to 4 wins' for promotion/demotion.
• If you're #3 or #4, you just stay where you are.
• I am clueless on this one: should division A still play a final or is #1 there just the winner of the season?
• Initial seeding is done based on current leaderboard.
• Problems will arise like people leaving, people sitting out for a season, strong players joining later that shouldn't start at the bottom (no fun for anyone involved).
  No formal rules can/shall be written down to handle this. In stead, we'll leave such decisions in the capable hands of a small group of 'organizers' we all have faith in.

Although I have nothing against the current Gokodom tournaments (in fact, I love them, many thanks to Kirian) I think I would prefer this. I would particularly like the following advantages:

• Freedom to reschedule your matches to another week if you're very busy in a specific week
• More matches against equally-leveled players. Sorry to say, but a tournament for me now has a long phase of 'trying not to lose a match'.
• Near the end of the two months, it's not just exciting for A1 vs A2, but a lot of other people fight over promotion/demotion and can win 'something'.

Curious to find out how the rest of you think about it, so please let me know in a reply.

[RTT]

I guess Stef just wants another competition where he can be #1

but seriously that sounds pretty good. I just would like to have bigger divisions and also longer seasons. like 12 players and 3 months at minimum. But thats just personal preference.

[Ozle]

I think you'll face a problem towards the end where people know they cant get promoted or demoted so there's very little incentive to play that game. Which would mean you would need some sort of penalties...


If you're #2, #5 or #6, you get to play a one-on-one match 'first to 4 wins' for promotion/demotion.
If you're #3 or #4, you just stay where you are.

Not quite sure I understand this bit.
Does 5 play 6 to see who is demoted.
Who does 2 play?


I love the idea of the league, to see who can pull out wins at key times.
And #1 at the end should be the winner, no finals.

[Awaclus]

I think this is a cool idea.

[Kirian]

Interesting, I like it!  Kind of a King of the Hill style game, but enough different from a plain leaderboard to be interesting.  The flexibility of scheduling is definitely a plus as well, and it seems that having a division with 6 or 7 wouldn't be a terrible problem, though you'd have to work out a different promotion/demotion scheme.

As a tie-breaker criterion I would recommend the match between the two players who are tied, which is easy enough to figure out.

Let me see if I understand the playoff scheme, though.  So at the end of the round:

B-1-2nd plays B-2-2nd, winner is promoted, loser stays.
B-1-5th plays B-2-5th, and B1-6th plays B-2-6th, in each case winner stays, loser is demoted.

And in the A division, 1-4 stay, 5 and 6 have a playoff to see who falls, 7 and 8 automatically fall.

So basically three players switch between A and B each iteration; six between B and C; and so forth?

[hsiale]

Let me see if I understand the playoff scheme, though.  So at the end of the round:

B-1-2nd plays B-2-2nd, winner is promoted, loser stays.
B-1-5th plays B-2-5th, and B1-6th plays B-2-6th, in each case winner stays, loser is demoted.

I think it should rather work this way:
Level X has 2^(X-1) people at 5th places and further 2^(X-1) people at 6th places. Level X+1 has 2^X people at 2nd places (because level X+1 has twice as many groups). At the end of the season people from first group (5s and 6s) are randomly paired against people from 2nd group. Each pair plays a match. If the player from 5th or 6th place wins, he defended his place and both players stay where they were the previous season. If the player from 2nd place wins, he won promotion and they switch groups.

[Eevee]

I think you'll face a problem towards the end where people know they cant get promoted or demoted so there's very little incentive to play that game. Which would mean you would need some sort of penalties..

Surrendering more than say one match per season sounds like good grounds for disqualification from the league.

[A Drowned Kernel]

This sounds like a really awesome idea. Would you be willing to organize the whole thing yourself or would you ask some member(s) of the community to step forward?

[AdamH]

I love me some tournaments and I would probably participate in every one I can find, but this one seems really exciting!

[SCSN]

I guess Stef just wants another competition where he can be #1

I rather thought it was a meek attempt to avoid elimination

I like the idea, count me in!

[Qvist]

AFAIK there was a f.DS league and it died because of too many dropouts.
Dropouts have to be handled well, that's the key, not sure how though. Maybe only allow f.DS regulars in and all others have to qualify through a special division just to guarantee regular participation. I just don't want to join a league where half of the games are cancelled.

Other than this, I like the idea and love to take part as fodder to other players.
Regarding the format, I don't quite get the idea of promotion/relegation matches, can you explain the use of them, Stef? Because I'm not a fan of them. It adds extra tension, but I don't think that's needed in a league environment.

I'm also not sure about the size of the leagues, but the suggested 8-12 participants sound good.

[JOG]

Sounds great.  I would suggest shorter cycles.  More movement between divisions would add interest and excitement.  And, it could be frustrating to play certain members regularly for a few months, have a few bad games, and then have to wait 2 months to play the members you're used to playing.

[SCSN]

Sounds great.  I would suggest shorter cycles.  More movement between divisions would add interest and excitement.  And, it could be frustrating to play certain members regularly for a few months, have a few bad games, and then have to wait 2 months to play the members you're used to playing.

When you feel like you're playing below your level you can set yourself challenges like trying out really retarded stuff and still make it work. Well, often it won't, and then you're stuck for another 2 months, but it's a great learning experience.

[Ozle]

B-1-2nd plays B-2-2nd, winner is promoted, loser stays.
B-1-5th plays B-2-5th, and B1-6th plays B-2-6th, in each case winner stays, loser is demoted.

And in the A division, 1-4 stay, 5 and 6 have a playoff to see who falls, 7 and 8 automatically fall.

So basically three players switch between A and B each iteration; six between B and C; and so forth?

Ahh, Gotcha, didnt see the two divisions bit.

Although I would think B2-5 should play B1-6 and vice versa, otherwise you are rewarding the player who came 5th instead of 6th with a harder match in theory.

Surrendering more than say one match per season sounds like good grounds for disqualification from the league.

And the trouble with penalising dropouts with demotion is sometimes it can be hard to organise a game with people, what happens if a league has two of those people and you struggle to play them both Eevee, you have now failed two games and are disqualified

How is it possible to tell whose fault the game didnt get played?

[-Stef-]

Great to see so many people enthusiastic about the concept. I'll try to answer some questions.

Regarding the format, I don't quite get the idea of promotion/relegation matches, can you explain the use of them, Stef? Because I'm not a fan of them. It adds extra tension, but I don't think that's needed in a league environment.

hsiale got it right, and I'm sorry about my way too cryptic explanation.
The idea is that #1 gets promotion unconditional
#7 and #8 get demotion unconditional
#5 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
#6 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
(Since there are twice as many divisions one level lower, there will be two #2's available. #5 gets to choose who he plays.)

I think you'll face a problem towards the end where people know they cant get promoted or demoted so there's very little incentive to play that game. Which would mean you would need some sort of penalties...

I'm strongly against penalties unless absolutely necessary. This is why I included this system for promotion/demotion matches. It matters if you end up #1, #2, (#3 or #4), #5, #6, (#7 or #8). Although still possible, it's not very likely you'll be sure of your final ranking before the last match(es) are played. There is one important exception to this case: the lowest division(s). There only #1 and #2 are special, since you can't demote anyway. Then again, the bottom divisions automatically function as some kind of...

AFAIK there was a f.DS league and it died because of too many dropouts.
Dropouts have to be handled well, that's the key, not sure how though. Maybe only allow f.DS regulars in and all others have to qualify through a special division just to guarantee regular participation. I just don't want to join a league where half of the games are cancelled.

... buffer to get into the divisions with the more serious players, who already have shown the commitment to actually play out the games they scheduled.

Surrendering more than say one match per season sounds like good grounds for disqualification from the league.

And the trouble with penalising dropouts with demotion is sometimes it can be hard to organise a game with people, what happens if a league has two of those people and you struggle to play them both Eevee, you have now failed two games and are disqualified

How is it possible to tell whose fault the game didnt get played?

For these kind of problems, no formal rules will exist. In stead we'll go for the common sense / judgement of the 'league organizing committee' (whomever that may be). Usually it's clear who is trying to get the match scheduled and who is completely non-responsive. If both players are willing, and you have 7 weeks available, I'm pretty sure you'll manage.

And #1 at the end should be the winner, no finals.

I think I agree with you.

I like the idea, count me in!

Just to be clear: no counting has started yet. I would definitely not start this before Gokodom 3 ends. But great to hear you would be in.

This sounds like a really awesome idea. Would you be willing to organize the whole thing yourself or would you ask some member(s) of the community to step forward?

Still in doubt here. Someone stepping forward is always good, but I wouldn't accept just about everybody.
No matter what, I'd like this thing to be organized by >1 person.

I just would like to have bigger divisions and also longer seasons. like 12 players and 3 months at minimum. But thats just personal preference.

If a lot of people feel this way I'd reconsider, but for me 8 is already high. I was also considering 6 for a while.

[Voltaire]

This concept sounds fantastic, and hopefully would hit a sweet spot for people like me whose availability is sporadic enough it's hard to commit to a short-term tournament.

[markusin]

This sounds like a really cool way to find opponents at your level and hopefully have friendly chats with them too. It sounds like a big time commitment on the part of the organizer. Also, how would it handle players who wish to drop out of the league?

[Emeric]

Very nice idea.

[Qvist]

Regarding the format, I don't quite get the idea of promotion/relegation matches, can you explain the use of them, Stef? Because I'm not a fan of them. It adds extra tension, but I don't think that's needed in a league environment.

hsiale got it right, and I'm sorry about my way too cryptic explanation.
The idea is that #1 gets promotion unconditional
#7 and #8 get demotion unconditional
#5 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
#6 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
(Since there are twice as many divisions one level lower, there will be two #2's available. #5 gets to choose who he plays.)

Sorry, but I think my question was misunderstood. I got the idea of the relegation matches, but what is the intention behind them? Why not just promote the first and demote #7 and #8. Why do the #2 and #5 and #6 all have to play relegation matches? I just don't like when after a league all comes down to one single game. Either promote (demote) only 1 (2) in each league or do it with 2 (4) right away.

[yed]

Regarding the format, I don't quite get the idea of promotion/relegation matches, can you explain the use of them, Stef? Because I'm not a fan of them. It adds extra tension, but I don't think that's needed in a league environment.

hsiale got it right, and I'm sorry about my way too cryptic explanation.
The idea is that #1 gets promotion unconditional
#7 and #8 get demotion unconditional
#5 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
#6 could get a demotion, and #2 could get a promotion: they play for it one on one
(Since there are twice as many divisions one level lower, there will be two #2's available. #5 gets to choose who he plays.)

Sorry, but I think my question was misunderstood. I got the idea of the relegation matches, but what is the intention behind them? Why not just promote the first and demote #7 and #8. Why do the #2 and #5 and #6 all have to play relegation matches? I just don't like when after a league all comes down to one single game. Either promote (demote) only 1 (2) in each league or do it with 2 (4) right away.

I like it how Stef proposed it. Because only promoting #1 is not enough and demoting 4 people (1/2 of a league, so that you can promote 2) is too much.

[yed]

Also the 8 people groups at same league level (2nd and more) can be somehow shuffled together so that you play with different people each season.

[Davio]

Also the 8 people groups at same league level (2nd and more) can be somehow shuffled together so that you play with different people each season.

Nah, you should just have timezone divisions to make scheduling easier.

I.E:

- Division A would be essentially a "World" division, no way around it
- Division B could be divided roughly into Europe/Africa and USA/Asia/Oceania
- There are 4 Division C's, so these will be mostly people in the same timezones, not more than 3 hours apart
Etc...

The fun part about having regional divisions is that you could choose to play your match in real life if you wanted to.

[Emeric]

A few question about the league :
-How do you take care of new player (specially strong player who decide to integrate the league later)
-How do you take care of player who is absent for a long period (I want to go three month in tuvalu and don't know if I will find any connection so I prefer not play next season) ?

[-Stef-]

Sorry, but I think my question was misunderstood. I got the idea of the relegation matches, but what is the intention behind them? Why not just promote the first and demote #7 and #8. Why do the #2 and #5 and #6 all have to play relegation matches? I just don't like when after a league all comes down to one single game. Either promote (demote) only 1 (2) in each league or do it with 2 (4) right away.

I want as many rankings as possible to be 'special' in the end from a perspective of promotion/demotion. Using 5 categories (promotion, conditional promotion, nothing, conditional demotion, demotion) in stead of 3 increases the chance that your last match(es) will still matter for the category you end up in. This decreases the chance you're unwilling to play them. That, and I think it's more fun this way.

Sounds great.  I would suggest shorter cycles.  More movement between divisions would add interest and excitement.  And, it could be frustrating to play certain members regularly for a few months, have a few bad games, and then have to wait 2 months to play the members you're used to playing.

I play in a bridge competition, and we're playing almost exactly the same teams this year as last year. I actually really enjoy that part - in stead of playing new people every time we don't know, we can now try to do better then last year and win from those !%@# that cost us promotion last time around.
Anyway, assuming you'll stay in the same division as last time, from your 7 opponents 3 would be new for sure, 3 could be new and 1 would be the same for sure. Doesn't really sound like playing the same people over and over again to me.

Also, how would it handle players who wish to drop out of the league?

A few question about the league :
-How do you take care of new player (specially strong player who decide to integrate the league later)
-How do you take care of player who is absent for a long period (I want to go three month in tuvalu and don't know if I will find any connection so I prefer not play next season) ?

As I said, no formal rules will exist. The organizing committee will off course follow certain guidelines:

• If you don't want to play next season - that's fine. I expect some dropouts at the end of every season. You won't be guaranteed your spot when you return but we will do best effort to give it back to you. If you announce your return in advance we're probably able to guarantee it.
• If you just leave in the middle of a season, I'm sure we'll manage to think of something fair for the rest. But this is very much against the idea of the league, and I don't expect you to join a season unless you expect to play the entire season. However, accidents happen and if you have a really good reason all is forgiven. If not, you won't be welcome to join again.
• People leaving will create some free spaces, and it's up to the committee to fill them up. Could be filled with people that stepped out for a season and now want to return, could be filled with people that are new to the league but we know they're quite good. If nobody is available we could have some free promotions or divisions with <8 people, but these are exceptions
• The lowest division is open for everybody that claims some commitment to play out the season. If you're good and we can't create a spot for you, it's a long road but you'll get there eventually.
  

- Division A would be essentially a "World" division, no way around it
- Division B could be divided roughly into Europe/Africa and USA/Asia/Oceania
- There are 4 Division C's, so these will be mostly people in the same timezones, not more than 3 hours apart
Etc...

The fun part about having regional divisions is that you could choose to play your match in real life if you wanted to.

Yes that sounds like a good plan.

[TheMirrorMan]

Very exciting idea. I'm in!