Suggestions for the League

Moderators: pantherboy, Slitherine Core, NewRoSoft

pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Suggestions for the League

Post by pantherboy »

Hi guys,

This thread is for any ideas on how to improve the league or changes/additions you'd like to see tried. I'd appreciate any comments people have but nothing posted here will be final. Everything will be mitigated by the time I have available and my veto or approval of any decisions will be final unless I put it to a vote.

Here are some changes that maybe happening:

1. Very kindly, stockwellpete has been tabulating an alternate scoring system for player ranking (not league ranking for a particular season) which awards more points for a Division A win as opposed to a lower Division win. This is then divided by the number of games played to create an average score which will be used for determining Division allocation. This scoring will take into regard all matches from every league and be based upon the last 4 Seasons of matches. If absent for longer than 4 seasons of play then your ranking will reset to zero. This will help place players in the new leagues as the game keeps expanding into other army lists and ensures the more experienced players aren't mixed in with the newbies.

2. My brother suggested a super league where army lists may be drawn from any book.

3. Not as a permanent replacement but more of an attempt at variety every now and then some kind of change to army selection, usage, rules etc. At the moment I'm considering having one season where everyone must submit a fixed army list and play with that versus all comers. To ensure fairness I'd post the army lists after recruitment is finished and request FOW be turned off for those matches. Any opinions or better ideas?

4. Setting each Division to either 10 or 12 players and ensuring that it is filled before spilling down to a lower Division. Doing this will allow me to use my template for the tables indefinitely. The downside would be that the lowest Division may at times be under strength but this may encourage people to recruit for the league. My preference is 10 players especially if you want to play in multiple leagues. Any preferences?

5. Petitioning slitherine for some small prize for Season winners from the bottom or mid Divisions (B/C/D) to encourage more people to sign up and to reward their support of the game.

Cheers everyone for helping me out with the league and making it so much fun.

Steve
Last edited by pantherboy on Fri Jul 29, 2011 5:08 am, edited 4 times in total.
TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Post by TheGrayMouser »

Like the idea of the superleague

Like the idea of a fixed army list , although it might be a problem if that list ends up being non competative and you are stuck in 10 plus matches :)

Add: maybe Army lists should be submitted in secret and only when the leauge games start do you get to see what armies you will be facing , could go either way but it seems might encourage more diverse armies.
At the least it would prevent people (not saying anyone is doing this) from waiting for the majority of players posting their picks and THEN posting theirs with a relatively more competive army...(gamemanship vs tactics)


cheers!
pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Post by pantherboy »

TheGrayMouser wrote:Like the idea of the superleague

Like the idea of a fixed army list , although it might be a problem if that list ends up being non competative and you are stuck in 10 plus matches :)

Add: maybe Army lists should be submitted in secret and only when the leauge games start do you get to see what armies you will be facing , could go either way but it seems might encourage more diverse armies.
At the least it would prevent people (not saying anyone is doing this) from waiting for the majority of players posting their picks and THEN posting theirs with a relatively more competive army...(gamemanship vs tactics)


cheers!
I was assuming the lists would be submitted to me before being released to ensure no gamesmanship via PM. Prior to setting up the new seasons league I'd submit my lists to a non "A" Division player who will be able to ensure that I don't abuse my position before opening up the league to recruitment.
TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Post by TheGrayMouser »

Sorry, I likly wasnt being clear, I meant armies picks(choices) in general should be submitted in secret , even if nothing else changes next season.
Of course a fixed list(in terms of BG's purchased) by nature would need to be submitted in secret (would make it more akin to TT competions where players submit army and line up to the ump for aproval, then you show up and see what you will be fighting)
ianiow
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1198
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Isle of Wight, UK

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by ianiow »

pantherboy wrote:3. Not as a permanent replacement but more of an attempt at variety every now and then some kind of change to army selection, usage, rules etc. At the moment I'm considering having one season where everyone must submit a fixed army list and play with that versus all comers. To ensure fairness I'd post the army lists after recruitment is finished and request FOW be turned off for those matches. Any opinions or better ideas?
I like this idea. It levels the playing field with lists that have lots of options and lists that have few. It also simulates an army on campaign in the real world. I would however leave FOW on as it adds too much fun to tactical manuvering. I trust my opponents not to sneak an illegal elephant onto the battlefield :D
pantherboy wrote: 4. Setting each Division to either 10 or 12 players and ensuring that it is filled before spilling down to a lower Division. Doing this will allow me to use my template for the tables indefinitely. The downside would be that the lowest Division may at times be under strength but this may encourage people to recruit for the league. My preference is 10 players especially if you want to play in multiple leagues. Any preferences?
I would go further and have 8 in the division. With EE coming up, 6x8=48 games is more than enough for me. I propose that the lowest division be allowed to have a larger number of players. New players are currently only allowed to play in [edit: 2 divisions], so the more opponents in the lower divisions the better.
pantherboy wrote: 5. Petitioning slitherine for some small prize for Season winners from the bottom or mid Divisions (B/C/D) to encourage more people to sign up and to reward their support of the game.
Perhaps a little Forum icon " SAS Division B champion, Summer 2011".
Last edited by ianiow on Tue May 10, 2011 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Post by pantherboy »

Regarding posting your army selection secretly it is obviously better to do that secretly but as a compromise for my work it is far easier to post to a particular thread. The inbox has a limitation on number of messages it can store and then it forces me to pay constant attention to what people are submitting rather than leaving it as a labor at the end of recruitment on a single thread. This is purely an administrative issue for me as opposed to anything else.
pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by pantherboy »

ianiow wrote: Perhaps a little Forum icon " SAS Division B champion, Summer 2011".
I really like this idea and it costs slitherine nothing. What about having cup icons (or laurels maybe better) colored gold to bronze with a number times won? Just like hidde's table shows so that a player can at a glance get an indication of the player's capabilities and successes.
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 14500
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by stockwellpete »

pantherboy wrote: 4. Setting each Division to either 10 or 12 players and ensuring that it is filled before spilling down to a lower Division. Doing this will allow me to use my template for the tables indefinitely. The downside would be that the lowest Division may at times be under strength but this may encourage people to recruit for the league. My preference is 10 players especially if you want to play in multiple leagues. Any preferences?
I would favour divisions of 10 too, particularly for divisions A+B anyway - and I would be in favour of you saying at the start of recruitment that there will be only 30 places (or maybe 40 for the latest expansion) available for each league relating to a particular book. So, for example, once you had thirty places filled for SOA then recruitment would be closed for that league and players would have to choose other leagues instead.

I have compiled a list with all the various numbers of possible entrants on it that I could send to you, Steve. But just to give a couple of examples from it - if 30 players apply to join ROR next time then that is 3 divisions of 10, simple. But what if only 26 apply? Instead of 9-9-8 as you might have done this time, an alternative viable pattern might be 10-10-6 where the division C of 6 players actually play each other twice (thereby getting 10 games where players in Divs A+B ould be getting only 9).

I certainly think that we can all help with recruitment to the league. There seem to be a lot of reliable and talented people playing the game who are perhaps not aware of LOEG at all. Maybe they don't know about the forum either? One of the ideas behind my Condotta tournament that is running at the moment is to invite players who have not been in LOEG before so that they get a bit of a feel for tournament play. Hopefully they will join the league for season 6.
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 14500
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Post by stockwellpete »

One thing that I would toughen up in your instructions for the league is point 3, Steve. Currently it says this,

"3. Participation in Divisions

This Season I’ll be enforcing some limitations upon participation. Any player who has been able to complete 80% or more of their league games will be free to join all 4 divisions (this is pretty much most players). Players who have been unable to complete the majority of their matches will be restricted to 2 divisions. New players to the league will also be limited to 2 divisions though in later Seasons they will be able to participate in more once they have a proven track record."


Personally, I would change that figure to 100% on the first line - and then the second sentence should read, "Players who have been unable to complete 100% of their matches will be restricted to 2 divisions."

So everyone would know that that is the basic rule - but then you should retain some powers of discretion for players with extenuating circumstances e.g. a usually reliable player who suffers illness, or something like that.
pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by pantherboy »

stockwellpete wrote: I would favour divisions of 10 too, particularly for divisions A+B anyway - and I would be in favour of you saying at the start of recruitment that there will be only 30 places (or maybe 40 for the latest expansion) available for each league relating to a particular book. So, for example, once you had thirty places filled for SOA then recruitment would be closed for that league and players would have to choose other leagues instead.
With my new tables and players updating themselves I feel it isn't necessary for me to restrict the number of players. Also if your worried about how it would impact your scoring system then I'd suggest scoring Division C and lower equally.
stockwellpete wrote:I have compiled a list with all the various numbers of possible entrants on it that I could send to you, Steve. But just to give a couple of examples from it - if 30 players apply to join ROR next time then that is 3 divisions of 10, simple. But what if only 26 apply? Instead of 9-9-8 as you might have done this time, an alternative viable pattern might be 10-10-6 where the division C of 6 players actually play each other twice (thereby getting 10 games where players in Divs A+B ould be getting only 9).
I'd prefer each Division to operate identically to cut down on my work. Having players do two matches in a smaller pool requires a rebuild of the table and creates extra work for me. A better idea I feel would be to set a minimum number of players to create a group and if that number can't be reached then those players can play in a tiny pool but be allowed to try and recruit some fresh blood to bring it to an active level.
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 14500
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by stockwellpete »

pantherboy wrote: With my new tables and players updating themselves I feel it isn't necessary for me to restrict the number of players. Also if your worried about how it would impact your scoring system then I'd suggest scoring Division C and lower equally.
No, it's not a concern about the scoring system - I have just sent you an alternative values system to consider. It is more a case of being concerned about a situation such as this - you have a smaller league of 8 players and then one goes AWOL so there are only 6 games each then. A bit frustrating, I would say - and it has happened in a few divisions this time.

pantherboy wrote: I'd prefer each Division to operate identically to cut down on my work. Having players do two matches in a smaller pool requires a rebuild of the table and creates extra work for me. A better idea I feel would be to set a minimum number of players to create a group and if that number can't be reached then those players can play in a tiny pool but be allowed to try and recruit some fresh blood to bring it to an active level.
OK, I understand your point here, Steve.
CharlesRobinson
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:47 pm
Location: Hawaii

Ideas

Post by CharlesRobinson »

Just another idea:

Vary army sizes sometimes.

Season X - army size is limited to 400pts
Season X - army size is expanded to 600pts

Just an idea :D
Last edited by CharlesRobinson on Tue May 10, 2011 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CheAhn
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 9:44 am

Post by CheAhn »

How about a League Cup, a knock-out tournament to run in parallel. Each league entrant gains automatic entry. Two ways to structure it - multiple entries for a player one from each division they are in (when fighting self the player chooses the army to progress); or a player chooses one of their armies to use (probably the better way to go). Seeding for the draw can be based on the ranking system that has been proposed. The army composition to be fixed and perhaps a different points value. Just need a volunteer to administer this.
davouthojo
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:49 pm
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Suggestions for the League

Post by davouthojo »

1. I like it. I only have time to play in 3 leagues, yet I like the variety of switching periods (I'll probably reenter SOA and drop LT next time) Some ranking flowing season to season would work best for players like me.

2. I'd join a Superleague...at least the first time...
3. At the moment I'm considering having one season where everyone must submit a fixed army list and play with that versus all comers.


I'm neutral on this. For some people, customising your army is part of the fun. If implemented, I am with ianiow - trust your opponent and keep FOW. On the other hand, I think a more proactive approach to force people to play a variety of armies would be beneficial, especially if it results in different types of army into each division. For example in IF Season 4, there were 6 favours of Successor/Macedonian pike armies - not much variety, from a book that covers a wide range. Possible ways to do this:
a. Require players to select a different type of army to that used last season
b. List out a subset of 10-12 armies which players select from in reverse order of performance
4. Setting each Division to either 10 or 12 players and ensuring that it is filled before spilling down to a lower Division.


Definitely, need standardisation to reduce maintenance, but I'm with ianiow again - I would go further and standardise on 8, with bigger bottom league. 7 is enough games as the Leagues proliferate, 100% complete should be the expected standard, and having a bigger bottom league will make up for the fact that players are more likely to drop/not complete their games in this League.

5 Icons are a great way to reward players for free and liven up the forums. Maybe they can appear when posting challenges too as a guide to level?
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 14500
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Post by stockwellpete »

I would have a definite "close season" of a couple of weeks in between league campaigns and have a designated awards thread where all the winners are listed/congratulated etc.

So at the beginning it would be announced - "Season 5 starts April 1st, ends June 15th" - so everyone knows the timescale.

On other points, I think 8 players per league is too small. That is only 7 games, barely time to get "into the groove" with your chosen army. I am not too sure about the fixed army list option. Personally I like to customise my army after considering my opponent ("scouting", I call it :oops:). So if you do want to try it then just do it for one book not all of them. The format you have now is perfect, in my opinion.
TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Post by TheGrayMouser »

I personally find 7-8 players per division to be a good #

Another thought , although it would be really hard to track and do it fairly and likly a lot of players wouldnt enjoy , armies are chosen randomly for each player :shock:
ianiow
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1198
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Isle of Wight, UK

Post by ianiow »

TheGrayMouser wrote: armies are chosen randomly for each player :shock:
Sounds like a challenge. I like it!
CharlesRobinson
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:47 pm
Location: Hawaii

Post by CharlesRobinson »

TheGrayMouser wrote:




armies are chosen randomly for each player



Sounds like a challenge. I like it!


I love the idea as well. :D
pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Post by pantherboy »

What about each player in a Division selects an army for the pool to be randomly drawn from with the provision that they can't recieve the army they nominate? In this way maybe we'll see all the trashy armies for a change :twisted:
TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Post by TheGrayMouser »

pantherboy wrote:What about each player in a Division selects an army for the pool to be randomly drawn from with the provision that they can't recieve the army they nominate? In this way maybe we'll see all the trashy armies for a change :twisted:
:twisted: Like it, although there is the risk a division will be fighting with all 3 variants of Numidians, Early Arminians w no allies, 3 Rd Punic Carthos etc LOL Actually would be a lot of fun imho
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory: League of Extraordinary Gentleman”