1. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    23 Jul '10 19:29
    Thread 132425

    The size of the 1-day leagues is indeed dwindling; the quoted thread is but one reason why. A 3-team 'division' is pointless.

    RHP could force the divisions to have roughly the same number of players each, but this would ruin the whole promotion/relegation concept...

    ...which is ruined anyway. Teams that were to be relegated stay up as other teams from Div 1 drop out. Teams may get promoted two divisions just because of high dropout rate.

    So, consider this. Teams change from season to season anyway. People quit clans and new players are recruited. These get to play in Div 1 just by joining a team that's already in Div 1. There is no 'earning the place' for those players.

    Proposal: Rank teams according to average rating. Throw out promotion/relegation altogether, and have divisions with roughly the same number of teams in each. As in the quoted thread, instead of having 10, 10, and 3 teams per division, make it 8, 8 and 7.
  2. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    516078
    23 Jul '10 20:31
    A good idea to have the divisions battling it out with reoughly equal strength.
  3. Joined
    16 Aug '09
    Moves
    23744
    23 Jul '10 21:31
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Thread 132425

    The size of the 1-day leagues is indeed dwindling; the quoted thread is but one reason why. A 3-team 'division' is pointless.

    RHP could force the divisions to have roughly the same number of players each, but this would ruin the whole promotion/relegation concept...

    ...which is ruined anyway. Teams that were to be rel ...[text shortened]... the quoted thread, instead of having 10, 10, and 3 teams per division, make it 8, 8 and 7.
    i like the idea of dividing the divisions as equally as possible and using an average rating to determine division placement.

    I guess Russ would have to wait until just before the league begins to determine the divisions as the individual ratings constantly change.

    Would using the ratings for the top 4 or 5 rated players on a team to determine the teams entry rating reduce the chance of sandbagging - or is that not a concern?
  4. New York
    Joined
    23 Mar '07
    Moves
    143138
    23 Jul '10 21:53
    I think the quote below from my2sons brought up in another thread is the guts of the issue:

    "We believe that the fewer games you play, the better your performance. Clan leagues require a commitment of 18 games for 6 members. That's 108 games. If you enter teams in all 4 leagues, that's a total of 432 games. Rather than expend time and talent playing in clan leagues, we prefer to focus our energies on clan challenges in order to maximize those points and our clan ranking."

    So, the top clans see no point in the Clan Leagues (generalisation). my2sons raises a good point - if the winning clan actually got something out of it, would more clans enter? Answer is yes. When there were 60 clans competing in the 1/14 league, were there any issues? Answer is no.

    There is always a lot of talk about the clan scoring systems & how it'll be the same 10 clans at the top of page 1 probably for the rest of eternity. But what if your clan's league points counted to your total? These are clan games, after all & maybe a few more clans would enter.

    For the wretched three currently in Division 3 of the 1/14 Clan League Season 15, why bother - at the current rate with no changes in sight you'll be competing again together in Season 16 in Division 2 - and again called the wretched three. The league is shrinking so fast Season 16 will only have 13 teams as clans realise slowly that the League matters not on this site.
  5. New York
    Joined
    23 Mar '07
    Moves
    143138
    23 Jul '10 22:39
    Here are some other interesting facts to ponder:

    Ladder - 3 Days per move
    837 people are currently on the 3 day ladder, challenging other players and themselves being challenged.

    Siege Boards - 3 Days per move
    There are 30 boards. Of these:
    - 3 are free. You could join the queue now, play now and win the board.
    - 2 have 2 people queued.
    - 12 have no-one waiting to play the winner.

    What's the difference? Your ladder position appears on your profile. Siege boards do not. Ladder = popular. Siege = unpopular.

    This compares directly in my opinion to the Clans/Clan League discussion. People are vain. Put a trophy next to winning clans and they'll all want one.
  6. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    23 Jul '10 23:081 edit
    Originally posted by Swiss Toni
    I think the quote below from [b]my2sons brought up in another thread is the guts of the issue:

    "We believe that the fewer games you play, the better your performance. Clan leagues require a commitment of 18 games for 6 members. That's 108 games. If you enter teams in all 4 leagues, that's a total of 432 games. Rather than expend time and talent pla will only have 13 teams as clans realise slowly that the League matters not on this site.[/b]
    The so-called "top" clans are ranked by a system that rewards quantity over quality. I can't give much weight to the Metallica comments, sorry.

    The winner of the leagues gets the prestige of winning in a system that IS an apples to apples comparison, where each team plays the same number of games [not one team playing 1000 challenges and saying they are 'better' than teams that 'only' play 200].

    I don't want to see the leagues sullied by becoming part of the worthless clan challenge scoring system. I'll fold my clan rather than participate in such a system.

    The leagues don't get enough publicity, because all the main clan pages point to the lame clan challenge points. To even find the league pages, you have to search obscure menus. This is a shame. The leagues should be the PRIMARY form of clan competition on this site. Instead, it seems the site owners and the clan challenge-focused teams are content to just let leagues die. A damn shame.
  7. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    23 Jul '10 23:13
    And who exactly cares about the clan points? I think only Metallica does, maybe Amsterdamn if you rank by net points. I'm not even sure IVV cares anymore; they just seem content to post bitter comments without any plan to actually dent the gap in points.

    Everyone else is just playing because they want to be on a team with similar interests, like guitar players, or archers or whatever the hell interest they happen to share outside RHP. Which is fine, but let's not pretend that these teams care about clan points, even though they participate in the system.
  8. New York
    Joined
    23 Mar '07
    Moves
    143138
    23 Jul '10 23:42
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    I don't want to see the leagues sullied by becoming part of the worthless clan challenge scoring system. I'll fold my clan rather than participate in such a system.
    I agree with you - I prefer the League to the normal clan structure & I believe the Leagues should be considered more impartant, being the first thing you see when you click on the Clan icon on the toolbar.

    Its sad to see the below trend in the 1 Day Clan League:
    Season 15 - 23 Teams
    Season 14 - 27 Teams
    Season 13 - 36 Teams
    Season 12 - 41 Teams
    Season 11 - 43 Teams
    Season 10 - 48 Teams

    I just don't think they will change it.

    SG - Surely we are not in the minority in this? Does everyone else rate the existing clan scoring system as being superior to the League?
  9. Joined
    10 Jan '08
    Moves
    10258
    23 Jul '10 23:50
    Originally posted by Swiss Toni
    if the winning clan actually got something out of it, would more clans enter? Answer is yes.
    because clans at the top of the ranking list get something out of it? your argument is flawed.

    both the clan leagues and he clan table are pretty pointless but at least you have to be able to actually play chess in order to win a league not solely to be able to handle 100+ games on the go and eck out a few wins along the way against lesser opposition (thank you clan leader).
  10. New York
    Joined
    23 Mar '07
    Moves
    143138
    24 Jul '10 09:28
    Sorry, probably didn't put my point across properly. What I mean is that currently, all anyone seems to care about is the position your clan is in on the main page when you click on the Clan Icon (Metallica 1, IVV 2 etc). All I'm saying is that winning any of the Clan Leagues does not aid you in this ranking in any way (which is a fact).

    When I say that all anyone cares about is the position on the main page, I'm saying that because almost every thread in the Clan forum is about Metallica in some way or another. Every thread is about points, mis-matches, dastardly deeds, unfair challenges etc - all coming down to the position a clan holds on this one page.

    In my opinion the main issue is that fewer & fewer teams are entering the Clan League & this is a real shame. How do we reverse this slide? How do we get more clan leaders to put a team forward?
  11. THORNINYOURSIDE
    Joined
    04 Sep '04
    Moves
    245624
    24 Jul '10 10:58
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    And who exactly cares about the clan points? I think only Metallica does, maybe Amsterdamn if you rank by net points. I'm not even sure IVV cares anymore; they just seem content to post bitter comments without any plan to actually dent the gap in points.

    Everyone else is just playing because they want to be on a team with similar interests, like guita ...[text shortened]... t pretend that these teams care about clan points, even though they participate in the system.
    IVV does care its just that with all the recent shenanigans it seems to have become a pointless exercise.

    Ideas about new scoring options discussed and then dismissed.

    The total points accumulated to date should not be used as a measure or a clan. The points each year should be the main stay and the first stat seen.

    As for the Leagues why is there so much difficulty obtaining new teams for the following year?

    Is it because of the wide disparity in rated players you could face?

    There is nothing worse than knowing you may have 16 League games to play and if you are lucky you might get a draw in 1 game.

    That leave no incentive and may be a reason why so many teams drop out. At least in the "fair" Clan challenges you should have a chance of winning/losing 50%
  12. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    25 Jul '10 06:35
    Originally posted by adramforall
    IVV does care its just that with all the recent shenanigans it seems to have become a pointless exercise.

    Ideas about new scoring options discussed and then dismissed.

    The total points accumulated to date should not be used as a measure or a clan. The points each year should be the main stay and the first stat seen.

    As for the Leagues why is ...[text shortened]... op out. At least in the "fair" Clan challenges you should have a chance of winning/losing 50%
    If the clans were ranked by average rating, there would be more matchups close to the appropriate skill level.
  13. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39593
    31 Jul '10 15:16
    Fun fact: from Season 2 to Season 12 in the one day league, there were only two seasons where the first place team in the top division didn't have someone eventually banned as a cheat. The record holders were the Notte in Bianco team led by IronMan31 in season 2 and the serial cheat clan Rumania in seasons 11 and 12; both had three players who were subsequently banned.

    When the perception was that the clan leagues mattered, you had more cheaters. Maybe the way it is is better now.
  14. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    02 Aug '10 06:27
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Fun fact: from Season 2 to Season 12 in the one day league, there were only two seasons where the first place team in the top division didn't have someone eventually banned as a cheat. The record holders were the Notte in Bianco team led by IronMan31 in season 2 and the serial cheat clan Rumania in seasons 11 and 12; both had three players who were subse ...[text shortened]... n was that the clan leagues mattered, you had more cheaters. Maybe the way it is is better now.
    Maybe they should just start banning the cheats again, like they're supposed to, instead of letting them kill off interesting forms of competition.
  15. Joined
    01 Oct '08
    Moves
    13897
    02 Aug '10 08:571 edit
    I agree leagues should be given back their importance; although, I am not sure reshuffling the teams for every new league is that productive, people will just take it less seriously (and we want seriousness!!) I would rather give it a strong symbolic place, (like on the first page of rhp - let us dream); and symbolic titles, for this is what makes people work... (like "team champion RHP 2010" on people's profiles... that makes you dream, I am certain)
Back to Top