Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
 Posted:
May 13, 2005 - 19:46 |
 
|
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
DEADLINES
i do agree with the general idea of giving a tweak to the season format.
but i do not agree with the idea of instituzionalizing the difference between high speed tournaments for low TR and "low?" speed high TR ones
i have to point out that nobody can guarantee that the 7-14 tournaments will be longer than the "noredline" ones.
AND i do not like to complicate the "out of suspension of disbelief" part.
i have an agenda for my real life, i have dates and strict, changing deadlines. here i'd like not having to use an agenda, and to have one simple rule to remember, easy and simple for as many team or tournament i play and indipendent on the fact i have success or not with my teams (thus havig to seel players-lower my TR, to play in lower ranked less flexible tournaments).
NUMBER OF GAMES AND TR
the idea of having the lower ranked teams need of playing more games to get on par isn't completely correct.
it is a fact that with raising TR the marginal SR gain of each match tends to go down.
and in time, playing the same number of matches will permit a lower ranked team to level the difference.
if we want to max the (possible, not guaranteed) leveling to the teams we will have to max out the tournaments that guarantee a number of games:
that is, round robin (preferred by me, but that's just personal like) and swiss.
AND the league already has a system of guaranteeng more games to the lesser TR teams, in the different TR requirements of the tournaments.
|
The equation behind my suggestion is as follows:
-People suggested we should have two tournies going on at the same time, one faster and one slower
-If both tournaments have the same amount of matches, the fast tournament will end much faster than the slow tournament, unless the fast tournament has more games
-Therefore, the easiest solution is to add some games to the fast tournament to make the tournaments' length equal
-If the fast tournament has more games, they get more spps and money
-Who needs most that extra spp and money? Teams with low TR!
-Therefore teams with low TR should the ones in the fast tournament
-If the slow tourney has less games and higher TR, how can we make more coaches to join the slow tournament, in which it is hard to get to the top?
-The answer is to give them more Grudge league points per game
Here's my original post on the subject:
| Karhumies wrote: | my comments on Suggestion E:
--
V) My favorite format. I planned this for some time!  Arrange the tournies by TR. Let teams in the lower TR tourney play 1-2 games more to get more spps and money=catch up with the more experienced teams. However, teams in the low TR tourney will be given much less Grudge League points per game because
a)they play more games
b)playing in high TR division should be encouraged by giving extra GL points
c)reducing TR to get to play versus the low tr teams instead of high tr teams should not be encouraged.
This naturally leads to the lower TR tourney having less time per game but if any coach feels he is not capable of playing fast rounds, no one will object if he/she decides to take on the high TR teams. If it was the other way around (=high TR has less time per game), this kind of arrangement would not be possible. |
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
TIME OF PLAY
i feared what i read about the different speed thing initially, but i like very much Khar's ability to plan about the number of days a season should do.
the point where i do not agree with him is this:
we have playoffs for the leagues! although that will be a fast and tense part, they will suck days.
--
|
In other words, you would like to skip the playoffs? That can be arranged.
As it is, there is a somewhat fixed amount of Grudge league points gained per match. Semis are in there because the more matches a team plays, the mroe GL points they get, no matter how the match ends. Not all teams make it to playoffs, so the ones who get to playoffs, get extra points.
If we were to leave out (some of) the playoffs, I'd like to see an increase in the "regular season" games played per tournament because otherwise the tournaments will be too short for anyone's taste. However, regular rounds take longer than playoff rounds and then we are not gaining many days by this change.
We would also have to change the points system somehow because tournament winners have to be rewarded with something. At the moment they are rewarded with extra matches = extra spps, extra money and extra Grudge League points. IMO this is a good system which should not be changed just to reduce the amount of time taken by a pathetic amount of days. It would just screw up the point balance.
Any comments on this one are welcome.
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
GRUDGE BOWL
i am quite against the idea of a so big KO for the grudge bowl:
if it is the earth of the league it seems to me it should have a divisioned round robin prologue prior to a big playoff seeded by results.
even a 16 (or a 1000, but we have a 25, 35 maximum of coaches!) teams playoff could be fine, but with a previous divisional ranking scrimmage:
it appeals to me the idea that what you have done before is not important for the GrudgeBowl, just what you do here.
i also hope excluding the chance of earlyer "win or get excluded from the final" games between prime favourites. |
At the moment, the idea is just an idea and it is not meant to replace Grudge Bowl. I included the big, fat KO structure to show people we can hold such a tournament (perhaps during season 2) if the coaches want to have one. I mainly wanted to hear some comments about the structure; if people like that kind of tournament or not. I also never meant to include that structure in all of the KO tournaments. I just thought it might fun to have a "different" KO tournament for a change. There are bloody many boring regular KO tournies in Unranked for anyone who likes them, no need to join Grudge League to play in one of those. 
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
--would be quite anticlimatic and would steal attention from the final: the idea of the teams progressively being bested by someone and having to keep their eyes on the finals is much more climatic than having (the chanche) to play 5th to 9th place finals.
that seems to me olympic and not foot-bloobowlist. let's use the NFL experience to build up climax, it works!
There will be only one to stand, at last!
all the others will end their tournament with a loss or (worse) out of the "real" playoffs of the season. |
I'm not American. I know nothing about the NFL or its structure and I could hardly care less. American football is not real football. Now, back on to topic.
I created a losers' bracket because if, for some odd reason, (This is just an example, guys!) a TR 299 Skaven is paired versus a TR 280 Lizardan team on the first round of a KO tourney and all the other teams are TR 100 Chaos. Then either the Skaven or Lizzies are out on round 1, and finish maybe on 30th place. However, many TR 100 Chaos teams will be much higher in rank, get more games= more spps, money and grudge league points than the Lizzie/Skaven that lost on round 1. Are those Chaos teams better than Lizzies? No. What made them rank higher? The fact Lizzies and Skaven were paired versus each other on round 1.
Using my format, if you lose the first match and then beat the crap out of everyone else who stands in your way, you finish fifth. In the example, if you lose your round one due to crappy pairing or maybe a tie and a coin toss, it's game over. 30th place. that just sucks and it is unfair for the coach. Teams should be ranked in a tourney according to their merits, not according to the pairings for round 1.
In most of the sports playoffs, the things are different. They had a huge regular season just to see who plays versus who in the playoffs. Normally it's no 1vs8, no 2vs7, no 3 vs 6 and no 4 vs5. It goes according to the teams' merits. The pairings are fair. If they were to use random pairings, as we will most likely do, the second worst team might win the worst team on round one and advance, while no 2 regular season team loses to no 1 reg season team, is out and gets ranked lower than the second worst team, who lost their second match 42-0.
Of course, we might arrange the pairings by GL points, in which case it might be possible to play with winners' bracket only. |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 13, 2005 - 20:34 |
|
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
FLUFF IS IMPORTANT
i feel that in every tournement we will have to try to prioritize the IN GAME difference between the tournaments and not simply divide in tournament that gives more or less grudge league points for the matches.
by the way: for how many people is the grudge league points part important?
to me, my team-teams will always be very competitive-minded, but i'm not here to see that i'm the coach that scores more GL points!
and with multiple teams playing per coach, what will we do? will we invent a system that divides the points gained by the teams owned, ponderated per the games played that does not inequally favor the most active coaches?
|
Grudge league points are the ranking sytem of Grudge league. According to those points the end of season awards are given. They show who was the most consistent in his/her matches throughout the whole season. They might not be worth much for you but for some other coaches they might be extremely important. It would be a mistake to state they are not of value for anyone. Having contests and measuring yourself comparing to others is human nature. We are giving this option for the coaches in Grudge league.
No one has to take the points seriously; they just illustrate who has played well and who hasn't. We try our best to make them represent the quality of the teams/players, ie. good players should get many points and bad players should get little points. Also, by giving points for CAS done in Orcbowl and TDs done in Elfbowl we are able to control what will happen in-game in those tournaments. No matter what the fluff might be, if the scoring table is always the same, coaches are MUCH more likely to play using their "regular" playing style. If we, e.g, give extra points for CAS, we can make even Elves try mangling. Extra points for TDs might lead to a ball-handling Khemri with very little stalling. People will have to adapt to the current ruleset in order to succeed. More playing styles, more variety, more fun.
Grudge League points will be given out per-team basis. Each team will have its own points on the group page.
It seems you favor this
IV) Arrange two tournies using the same format but make them have different themes (e.g. Elfbowl vs Orcbowl thingy planned for season one)
over this
V) Arrange the tournies by TR. Let teams in the lower TR tourney play 1-2 games more to get more spps and money=catch up with the more experienced teams. However, teams in the low TR tourney will be given much less Grudge League points per game
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
PROPOSALS AT LAST!
the league as it is has 6 dates:
the DOBC RR
the Kislev Classic KO
the Loren-Tribal KOs
the World Edge Mountain Challenge Swiss
the Grudge Bowl
the Skavenblight Invitational KO.
promotional match.
each starting after the previous final match(es).
i'd like to make the Kislev type KOs start as soon as the regular season of the great tournament they follow ends: they are meant for letting the low ranked teams (that did not reach the playoff) recover games in front of the already higher SR playoffing ones.
this would let the non-playoffing ones play something while the playoff go on, and the playoffing ones not having to wait for the whole kislev ko to end before starting the next step. they'd have to wait for just one turn (8 playoffing teams in DOBC, let's say 16 teams in kislev).
this would help us keeping the downtimes between the leagues short.
starting Kislev Classic during DOBC playoff would have the side effect of remarking the difference between DOBC and GrudgeBowl in fluff:
DOBC interests those who plays it. GrudgeBowl stops the continent breath!
|
I love the idea of a next tourney beginning when the previous one's playoffs are beginning. But your suggestion, as it is, will hinder the good players' performance. Instead of being rewarded with extra games = extra points, spps and money, they will rather miss the next tournament, regardless of their TR. If a coach wins Dawn of Blood with low TR, it means he is a good coach, not that he has a strong team which does not need more spps and money. He might even have only 9 guys in the roster, but miraculosly pull off a win. Letting him play less games because he is a good player...well...is exactly the opposite to having playoffs. It's like saying him "You are too good to play here. You will now have to wait for X weeks before anything happens. You should have let someone else win the DOBC, and that way you would have been able to join Kislev, get more spps, get more money and get more points than you did by winning DOBC. You are too good for Grudge league. GO AWAY."
In other words, your idea is good but it needs some of fine-tuning.
[edit]actually, it fits in quite well in the season structure you proposed, mainly because there is another tournament going on alongside DOBC. Good work! [/edit] |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague
Last edited by Karhumies on %b %13, %2005 - %21:%May; edited 3 times in total |
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 13, 2005 - 20:47 |
|
| ZevinzeNompardi wrote: |
not for the existing season, but for the future:
why not moving the WEMMC in the DOBC time?
this would take us to a 5 "steps" season, everyone in the 70-84 days area of which khar speaks of.
maybe the RR and Swiss will take longer (playoffs!) and the KO shorter, but that's it.
the calendar proposal itself
1-STARTS THE SEASON: start of DOBC RR and WEMMC Swiss regular seasons
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-start of the DOBC and WEMMC playoffs (maybe WEMMC won't have playoff as it is swiss, just some more turn!) AND start of Kislev KO
7-
8-
9-after 3 turns of playoff DOBC ends. contemporary end of WEMMC last turn or playoff.
10-last turn of Kislev KO (or last two if we have 32 teams here, not such probable)
11-start of the Loren KO and tribal KO with 16-32 (believe 16) teams each.
12-
13-
14-end of 16 teams KOs
15-eventual end of 32 team one(s)
16-start of Grudgebowl! say 5 games of regular season.
17-
18-
19-
20-
21-start of Grudge Bowl playoffs which all the leagues spectates in religious silence. let's say 4 turns of 12-16 teams playoff.
22-
23-
24-GRUDGEBOWL!
25-begins Skavenblight KO; 8-16 teams for the first league, let's say 16 teams -4 turns.
26-
27-
28-Skavenblight final
29-Protagonist Prowl Promotional
-STARTS NEXT SEASON
29 turns to play a season.
at 2 weeks a game means 58 weeks, something more than a year.
at the pace proposed by khar (we gain 2 weeks every 6 turns with the "7red-14dead lines" system) it would mean less than 50 weeks.
more or less and reserving to tyrant the right to give pauses for holidays.
this plans excludes the 10 days no-deadlines option because i personally (as written above) do not like the complication of having 2 systems for deadline.
what do you think? |
This is one option and a very good one.
If we were to divide the tournaments on some other basis than speed in days, I think this would be it. I made my plan bearing in mind that the most supported option appeared to be "make two tourneys at same time, let the other one be slightly faster." Then I created other methods and rules to make this possible.
I, myself, strongly favor the five tournaments, approx. 70 days each = 1 year per season structure. I think that has come to stay.
I will most likely soon hold a poll about the season structure. However, we still need more suggestions before that.
Maybe we could eventually make some kind of a compromise solution? |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 13, 2005 - 21:12 |
|
I hope I have not scared all the readers away with my loooong replies. 
If you have not got time to read all this or you just think tourney organizing stuff is boring, concentrate on the things written in BOLD and check the season schedule suggested by ZevinzeNompardi (I have quoted it on the post above). Then, post your opinions about ZevinzeNompardi's schedule! |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
sk8bcn
Joined: Apr 13, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 14, 2005 - 00:40 |
|
It already was a few guys discussion other guys having skipped the discuss. Now I am myself lost.
You know what we speak but what is Grudge bowl.
I think we are rather on different views about the thing.
We should need to some time to establish what is grudge ball.
Following answer should be answered:
tournaments names tend to show a fluff structure. But is it supposed to be centered around an more role bloodbowl game or a competitive group were goal is to prove to be best coach?
Is it supposed to be entry free or more closed?
What kind of game mentality players are supposed to devellop?
I may be wrong but I am in a fluff mood. I don't care playing less games to make tournament X instead of tournament Y maybe because it fits better to the team mentality. I would also see my orcs subscribing to an elf compettion to show these stupid pointed ears that "We are best". EVEN if I'll loose.
So I am on a fluff mood.
It seems to me Vince is halfway through fluff and competition and Khar sees it as a pure competitive group.
I wouldn't like that. I subscribed to Grudge at a time I was supposed not enter any more tournament. I retired a team for that. What was making it so attractive. The story line.
We can understand ourselves on what to do as long as we don't define what we do want. I am ready to think another way but we need to find that way. |
|
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 14, 2005 - 11:56 |
|
| sk8bcn wrote: | --
We should need to some time to establish what is grudge ball.
Following answer should be answered:
tournaments names tend to show a fluff structure. But is it supposed to be centered around an more role bloodbowl game or a competitive group were goal is to prove to be best coach?
Is it supposed to be entry free or more closed?
What kind of game mentality players are supposed to devellop?
|
These are good questions. I would like to add a few:
-What kind of tournaments are you guys willing to play? (structure, amount of rounds, amount of weeks, playoffs/no playoffs, ANYTHING!)
-Are there any specific themes you would like to suggest for a tournament? The more fluff, the better.
-Should there be alternative ways of transfering tournament themes and fluff from Grudge League group page onto the BB field besides giving extra GL points for certain actions? If so, give us examples!
-It seems like many coaches do not care about the point system at all. Is there someone who does? It is your time to speak out now.
| sk8bcn wrote: |
I may be wrong but I am in a fluff mood. I don't care playing less games to make tournament X instead of tournament Y maybe because it fits better to the team mentality. I would also see my orcs subscribing to an elf compettion to show these stupid pointed ears that "We are best". EVEN if I'll loose.
So I am on a fluff mood.
It seems to me Vince is halfway through fluff and competition and Khar sees it as a pure competitive group.
I wouldn't like that. I subscribed to Grudge at a time I was supposed not enter any more tournament. I retired a team for that. What was making it so attractive. The story line.
We can understand ourselves on what to do as long as we don't define what we do want. I am ready to think another way but we need to find that way. |
You got me a bit wrong. I am not here to make this into yet another fiery competition zone but to make this into a stable, balanced environment everyone can enjoy themselves in. My goal is to make Grudge League enjoyable for both a take-it-easy fluff coach and a more serious, competitive player. I personally feel these are both valid approaches to BB but if you guys think Grudge League should be much more fluffy than competitive, it is a good thing you say so. All feedback is good feedback, so I know what is going on.
The reason behind me creating a score/point structure is due to both my obsession for organising and perfectionism and the fact I might be willing to create my own group to FUMBBL one day. That group will need a reliable and fair point system and Grudge league seems for me the perfect environment for developing one. As I have said, the point system does not have to be taken seriously in Grudge League but I am aiming at creating a point system which can be taken seriously (in case I will create my own group someday).
Although I am unable to create nice fluff because I know nothing of the WH universe and could hardly care less (I play Confrontation and Rag'narok instead of WH FB), I support very much any and all the fluff created by everyone in the group. It shows the coach is dedicated and is interested in Grudge League. |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 14, 2005 - 12:00 |
|
I think I should soon make a new thread, to which I will squeeze in all the important things from here into the first post. That way people will be able to participate in the discussion without having to read too much. |
_________________
Main Organiser of
Grudge [L]eague, #GrudgeLeague @ irc.fumbbl.com
and Stunty Spinoff Series, #GrudgeLeague |
|
Karhumies
Joined: Oct 17, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 14, 2005 - 18:01 |
|
|
ZevinzeNompardi
Joined: Oct 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
May 16, 2005 - 18:12 |
|
i liked this thread, and having the debate shown was agradable.
the quotings sometimes are a problem.
bye thread? |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gnomes are trash
Search
