Print

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

[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.