The Rally Point

[stockwellpete]

This thread is for all the players in the competition to ask questions about various aspect of the rules, to make suggestions for changes in future competitions, and to generally talk about anything relevant to The FOG Digital League. Anything goes really, as long as it is conducted amicably. Members of the committee will respond where it is appropriate.

[rexhurley]

Nice Pete and thanks Turk, Voskarp and Slitherine.

When it comes time to enrol clean slate with army use or does our history from the LOEG follow us with this?

Cheers Rex

[stockwellpete]

Nice Pete and thanks Turk, Voskarp and Slitherine.

When it comes time to enrol clean slate with army use or does our history from the LOEG follow us with this?

Cheers Rex

Hello Rex.

Rule 2 states, "Players are required to select three different army lists for each of the sections that they wish to enter and to post them in the relevant “recruitment” threads. Players will be allocated one army for each section they have entered. Lower rated or un-rated players are more likely to receive their first preference choice while the higher rated players are more likely to receive their second or third choices."

So there is nothing there about armies that you used last time in the rule. The actual wording of the rule does give the organisers quite a bit of scope when we come to the allocation of armies. For instance, a player is not guaranteed to get an army they have picked even if no-one else has selected it. While we want to allow players to use the armies of their choice wherever we can, we also want to try and make sure that the divisions are as competitive as possible. The only thing we will do, at the top of each recruitment thread, is to recommend that players choose armies from at least two different nations, preferably three. This should be understood as advice rather than us stipulating a rule.

Is that OK?

[ianiow]

For instance, a player is not guaranteed to get an army they have picked even if no-one else has selected it. While we want to allow players to use the armies of their choice wherever we can, we also want to try and make sure that the divisions are as competitive as possible.

Can you give an example of an army choice being forbidden to make a division 'more competitive'?

[stockwellpete]

For instance, a player is not guaranteed to get an army they have picked even if no-one else has selected it. While we want to allow players to use the armies of their choice wherever we can, we also want to try and make sure that the divisions are as competitive as possible.

Can you give an example of an army choice being forbidden to make a division 'more competitive'?

Yes, I think it may happen very occasionally in the top divisions, although "forbidden" is completely the wrong word to use here, Ian. Players may choose any 3 armies and they will be allocated one of them. It would be a mistake though to view our rules through the prism of LOEG - our competition will be quite different in many ways.

Take a look at the top twelve players in the latest LOEG ratings for a moment (up to and including Season 10). The tournament committee will be using these as a guide when we come to allocate players to divisions for the first season . . .

1. pantherboy 8.89
2. iversonjm 7.20
3. ericdoman1 6.91
4. sharkall 6.85
5. klayeckles 6.77
6. hidde 6.76
7. ianiow 6.40
8. CheAhn 6.22
9. davouthojo 6.13
10. TheGrayMouser 4.86
11. Londo 4.79
12. Fedem 4.74
-
20 Tiavals 4.14

A couple of things stand out here for me. Firstly, that pantherboy is really in a class of his own at the top (iversonjm is taking a break from FOG at the moment); and secondly that there is also a big gap between the rating score of davouthojo at number 9 and TheGrayMouser at number 10. This means that the top 8 players active currently (we can call them the "A group") are consistently much better than the next group of players positioned from 10 to 20 in the ratings (the "B group"). So, when we get applications to the new league the committee will have to look very carefully at our top divisions to see what the balance is between the "A group" and "B group" players. Whatever the balance is - it might be 5 from the "A group" and 5 from the "B group" - it will almost certainly be the case that the top divisions will have the widest spread of rating scores contained within them. The B and C divisions have always been much more even if you look at the experience of LOEG.

So, to give a hypothetical example, one of our A divisions in Season 1 has 4 players from the "A group" and 6 players from the "B group", and the top "A group" player of the 4 has chosen one of the more recognisably lethal armies in the DAG (maybe the Dailami Buyids or Catalan Company or suchlike) - we might then decide to give the top player their second choice on this occasion in the interests of making the division "more competitive". Obviously we would have to look at the armies chosen by the other players too before coming to a decision.

I hope that is clear. I think such an instance will happen very occasionally and probably not at all in the B and C divisions.

[ianiow]

Thanks for the reply Pete.

Hmmm. This sounds very subjective to me. Looking at the rankings my choice would probably never be effected, but if I were Steve, Matt or Eric and my 1st choice army were deemed too powerful I'd feel a little insulted, like I was being unsporting in choosing such a hard-to-beat army.

If you must vet the choice of army, a forbidden list and who it applies to should be known beforehand. Otherwise I would just leave it to the conscience of the players. After all, it has worked for 10 seasons up until now.

Ian

[stockwellpete]

Thanks for the reply Pete.

Hmmm. This sounds very subjective to me. Looking at the rankings my choice would probably never be effected, but if I were Steve, Matt or Eric and my 1st choice army were deemed too powerful I'd feel a little insulted, like I was being unsporting in choosing such a hard-to-beat army.

If you must vet the choice of army, a forbidden list and who it applies to should be known beforehand. Otherwise I would just leave it to the conscience of the players. After all, it has worked for 10 seasons up until now.

Ian

Yes of course, it is subjective to the extent that the committee has to make a decision about anything. But there is no reason why anyone should feel insulted. I really cannot understand that point And I repeat, there is no "forbidden list" - and players will be free to choose whichever armies they like. But as a committee, we have a responsibility to provide as good a competition as we possibly can to all the players who enter - so, on occasions, we may feel the need to exercise some judgement. As for LOEG, it has always been the case that higher rated players were more likely to get their second or third choice army than someone further down the ratings list, hasn't it? We aren't doing anything that is new really, Ian.

[stockwellpete]

This is what LOEG Season 10 had for its rules on this issue. It is actually a much stronger rule than we have in the FOG Digital League.

"When posting your selection you are required to make a 1st, 2nd and 3rd preference. Players will be awarded their choice based upon their ranking. Lower ranked players will receive their 1st preference while the highest ranked players will often receive only their 2nd or 3rd choice and oft times be required to make a 4th selection."

http://www.slitherine.co.uk/forum/viewt ... 13&t=41602

[ianiow]

Just trying to prevent feathers being ruffled. Don't say I didn't warn you.

[stockwellpete]

Just trying to prevent feathers being ruffled. Don't say I didn't warn you.

One of the things that the committee can offer, if there is a wider concern about this or any other issue, is to put it "under review". That means we will look very closely at the working of the rule, or whatever it is, in the next season and then report back to you all in the close season (the FOG Digital League will have a pattern of 3 months on, one month off to start with). Then we can have a debate and amend (or not) the issue accordingly. Shall we just see how many feathers start twitching about this particular issue, Ian?

[rexhurley]

Thanks for the answer Pete and mainly its a new world order, all good. As for the rest of the discussion I doubt any of the top players take power cheese armies anyway as its below their capability

[Jonathan4290]

Why did you decide to collapse the Classic and Imperial eras into one? Is the concern there won't be enough players for all four eras?

[stockwellpete]

Why did you decide to collapse the Classic and Imperial eras into one? Is the concern there won't be enough players for all four eras?

No, not really. We wanted to create some space for a historically themed fourth section to cater for those players who like their battles to be more realistic. We have one such themed event available for use now, based on armies from "Eternal Empire", but we will have to see how recruitment goes for the three historical periods that we do have first. If we look like filling the 90 slots we will initially have available (30 in each time period in 3 divisions of 10) quite quickly then the committee will make a decision about the fourth section. We do not have sponsorship from Slitherine for this extra section though, so we will just have to ask nicely and see. We can still run it without sponsorship, of course.

[Demetrios]

Hi folks,

just entered the FoG battlefields after a longer break again. i´m very fancy for taking part in this contest.
Thanks for setting up the Digital League.
Two questions from my side:

1. How about army lists that belong to more than one of the historical eras. Will they be excluded ?

2. Do older records from the LoeG count for qualification. Guess I´ve been mentioned at least to the end of LoeG 6 with 25 games played but no League rating.
My god, can´t say how much I missed playing this great game !

Cheers

Klaus

[stockwellpete]

Hi folks,

just entered the FoG battlefields after a longer break again. i´m very fancy for taking part in this contest.
Thanks for setting up the Digital League.
Two questions from my side:

1. How about army lists that belong to more than one of the historical eras. Will they be excluded ?

No armies will be excluded. We will be putting the army lists for the three historical periods we are going to use on the forum on Thursday.

2. Do older records from the LoeG count for qualification. Guess I´ve been mentioned at least to the end of LoeG 6 with 25 games played but no League rating.

Anyone is free to join the FOG Digital League whether they have entered LOEG before or not. New players to competitions will be restricted to 2 divisions in their first season. The LOEG ratings will now change into the FOG Digital ratings, but we still have some work to do as a committee before we will be able to say exactly how that will happen.

[klayeckles]

i thought that the 2.0 update was emminent...not the case? we are playing via current version?

thanks for all your effort...and for what its worth, i don't have issues with the adjudication of an army choice by the moderators...it is a game after all, and a true champion wins with the weapons given him...we just need to choose some armies we'd be happy to play, and on we go!

[stockwellpete]

i thought that the 2.0 update was emminent...not the case? we are playing via current version?

thanks for all your effort...and for what its worth, i don't have issues with the adjudication of an army choice by the moderators...it is a game after all, and a true champion wins with the weapons given him...we just need to choose some armies we'd be happy to play, and on we go!

We did discuss the timing of the release of 2.0 with Slitherine when we were sorting out the sponsorship. There is no definite release date yet so decided to go-ahead. My guess is that will want 2.0 ready for the Xmas market, but I thought that last year too! So we will play with the current version. Hopefully most games will be completed by the end of November even though our first season is scheduled to run until December 31st.

[stockwellpete]

Rule clarification - we have added this provision to Rule 5.

"If two or more players finish on the same number of points at the end of the season, the committee will look at the result(s) of the matches between the players to ascertain the final placings in the league table."

http://www.slitherine.co.uk/forum/viewt ... 47&t=44243

Thanks to hidde for raising this issue.

[stockwellpete]

Recruitment to the Eternal Empire themed section of the FOG Digital League

The committee would like to explain how we are recruiting players to this section in Season 1 and how we intend to do it from Season 2 onwards. The reason for this is that we haven’t quite got it right this time.

First of all, we started off putting a thread up entitled “Who would be interested in this?” to see if there was support for the idea of a themed event this time. It soon became apparent that there was but possibly a mis-understanding started to creep in that some players took the thread to be a recruitment thread in itself, rather than it being a sounding out thread. At that point, as secretary, I should have intervened to make it absolutely clear that recruitment had not opened, so I apologise for that mistake.

Given the situation, the committee then decided to invite, by personal invitation, all those who had expressed an interest in the tournament in that thread as well as other players who were rated in the top twenty of the player ratings. The last of these invitations have gone out today.

If there are any spaces remaining then they will be advertised on the forum on a first-come basis. New players will not be eligible for this section as they have already been offered up to two out of the three historical periods available.

It is our intention that the themed section should always be the centre-piece of the league season and that it should attract a very strong field. However, we do not want it to appear like an “exclusive club”, as it may have seemed to be this time. So for Season 2 and beyond the recruitment process will be slightly different inasmuch as the top 20 rated players will still receive a personal invitation from the committee, but they will have just 48 hours to register for the tournament before we open it up to everyone else (excluding the new players). In this way we hope to have a strong field and a more transparent recruitment process.

I hope this explanation is satisfactory to everyone. We are quite happy to answer any further questions about this recruitment process.

stockwellpete (for the tournament committee)

[batesmotel]

Most likely the real problem with the recruitment for the Early Middle Ages is the limited list of armies included in it. The organizers seem to have realized that limiting it to armies from Decline and Fall (with the exception of the Sassanids) is a problem for this. IT seems like there are a number of additional armies could have been included from LT such as the Early Alans, Gepids, Lombards, Early Anglo-Saxons, as well as it would have made sense to allow armies from Swords and Scimitars that are early enough to not allow Heavily Armoured Knights. The usual break point for FoG TT tournaments is with the introduction of Heavily Armoured Knights rather than with Armoured Knights and I think this would make sense for dividing the early and late Medieval periods for FoG PC divisions as well for the future.

Chris