46 coaches online • Server time: 14:39
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Secret League Americ...goto Post DOTP Season 4goto Post Skittles' Centu...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Arcon



Joined: Mar 01, 2004

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 14:17 Reply with quote Back to top

The first season of the Stable League Revival is coming to an end. And I will be on vacation for the next 2 weeks.


I would like to have some feedback when I return, since I would like to start a second season. But obviously, some changes have to be introduced.

This season was introduced as a testing round. It was my first ever group and a complex one with the different stables and small tourneys. I have to say, that, technically it was good to manage. The similar names of the teams in each stable and the team kept for the match-up tourney helped a lot. Of course setting up the tourneys regularly and ending them including manually updating the scores is some work, but not too much. I think I have the time to do that in a season 2, even if we upscale the league.

Are there any comments on what would be good to change considering the format?


The other issue is the reliability of the coaches. Too many games were not played, too many coaches replaced and one stable had to be replaced after the first round. Compared to other leagues, games not played have a much greater influence here.

Possible suggestions are:

-Reduce the number of teams in a stable to 3, and hope that the smaller stable leads to less games not played.
I do not think that this will help a lot, and I would prefer to have 4 teams per stable.

-Stable leaders can only be players known to be reliable. There are reliable coaches on fumbbl and we have seen many in the last season. So one has to “apply” as a leader and I will decide.

-Strict deadlines: During this season I did not handle deadlines strictly. The format is 2 weeks for playing a single match and 1 week to announce the pairings. I think that this is good.

I think the 1 week when pairings have to be announced can be divided into more parts:
-The first announcement (2 days(choose 1 pairing or not to choose))
-and then the announcement of the other stable (3 days (3 pairings or 1, depending on the others choice)),
-and, if needed, 2 more days for the 3 pairings…(if confused now, refer to the group page and try to work it out Wink )
I do not think I can send a group pm 3 times a week, but if one leader fails to decide, the decision goes to the other stable automatically, and he can post. This, of course, depends on active and dedicated leaders.
The other possibility would be that I set the pairings randomly. Or by TR.

-Player reliability: That is the most difficult issue.
And I am not sure on how to punish players that do not play. Right now they get -1 point, but it is difficult to decide, who´s fault it was.
We could use sk8bcns redline/deadline rule. If coaches do not play and I didn´t receive a pm, they get punished.

How about punishing? the -1 penalty may be abused. So, if a stable has won 2 games and lost 1, and would probably loose the 4th (thus, gaining 1 point) could decide not to play, win the match-up (3 points) minus penalty (1) and get 2 points.

What other improvements could be made?

What about the races? In this season we allowed only a team of each race. Is that good? Or would you like to play in an Khemri only stable? Or should we make more restrictions? Like: a stable has to include an Elf, a bashy, a stunty, a whatever race??

How about the scoring system? Should that be changed?

And, the most important question: Will there be enough of you reliable coaches of season 1 ready to compete in season 2?

Thx for your help.
When I return, I will start advertising the group and search for more coaches.

P.S.: All coaches who read this and did not play in season 1, but are interested in plaing in Stable League, can offer their ideas and post when they would like to join for season 2.
sk8bcn



Joined: Apr 13, 2004

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 14:42 Reply with quote Back to top

First:
-redline/deadline rule is of a great help to decide who earns the win and who doesn't. For me, the answer is pretty clear 95% of the time.

-Pairings: A good solution could be to decide that if no pairing is choosen in 5 days then the opposing stable can selects the matchups in the 2 last games. So at least if one stable care matchups are given. I also think everybody in the stable can send the matchups: after all, they are supposed to be a team. Don't reduce too much the pick up length: our satble need time to discuss from the games.

-Dropouts: the stable captain is in charge of his team. IMO HE has to take guys out, add new ones to replace. That's an essential part of his job. Maybe should they belong to reliable coaches. Team member have not to be known that much: if the captain does his job, it will run smoothly.

-no reduces to 3 guys! noootttt gooooddddd.
Tinkywinky



Joined: Aug 25, 2003

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 15:03 Reply with quote Back to top

The main reason for the failure of the league is that there were an unusually large number of coaches that just didn't play there matches. Some didn't even play their first match!!

I think it is good to be hard when it comes to deadlines. It's rarely hard to see who is trying to get the game in.

For me to consider a second season there really has top be reliable coaches in the tourney.

_________________
Do you play ranked and wonder where all the good coaches are? Are you also from Sweden? Then join the Swedish league!
Treefinger



Joined: Mar 09, 2004

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 18:09 Reply with quote Back to top

I think most things have worked good except for coach-reliability, though I have no great ideas on how to increase reliability except for having the proposed redline/deadline system and throwing out people known to be unreliable instead of giving small minuses.

How fun is it to play a stable that has a player that hasn't been online for 55 days which still hasn't been replaced?

Otherwise, keep deadlines as deadlines and don't extend.

Btw. Logain, if you're ever online, please answer my pm about our game...
sk8bcn



Joined: Apr 13, 2004

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 19:17 Reply with quote Back to top

mmm well I did a lot of replacements as a tournament organizer but I really think replacement in stable should be searched by the stable captain.

after I made my stable of friends. If the organizer introduce my JoeTheBloodbowl I say no.

55days offline? What is just doing that stable?

A stable should keep links between them
Arthur



Joined: Mar 06, 2005

Post   Posted: Jul 12, 2005 - 22:57 Reply with quote Back to top

Hi, I just joined the stable since I am a replacement Smile.
Anyway ... I think that a good way to avoid the problem of coach-reliability is to increas the penalty for games those are not played ...
I mean.. if a player miss a game he/she gets the -1 ... if the following game the player miss again then he/she gets -2 .. at the third game -3 .. and so on ..
so the players have to play at least one game every two and also the decision to not to play the game just because it's a good strategy is not so good.
And you could also introduce a rule in order to not let choose the opponent for the player who didn't play the last game.
So people have to play to gain the possibility to use every skill given by the rules.
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic