Revamping the league

Moderators: pantherboy, Slitherine Core, NewRoSoft

Morbio
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1931
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Wokingham, UK

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Morbio » Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:02 pm

I like the proposal, it seems well thought out and has good counter-balancing factors built in. It might not be perfect, but that's the same with a lot of new games and competitions and I'm sure a bit of tweaking at the end of the first couple of seasons will make it great.
Turk1964 wrote:Hi Steve
I tend to agree with Pete here as i cant see very much educational about a Top player anihilating a beginer. What this generally does is cause the "Newbie" to become totally disallusioned and not bother playing any further games. I do agree with a restriction on armies,which are agreed by the majority.I would though increase this to between 15 or 20 armies that players agree have reasonable chances of victory.What i have noticed is that B players who make the jump to As will probably be back down to Bs the following season. The difference betwen the top A players and the Top B players is quite substantial and if an A player were to play a C then the outcome would be very decisive.About all this will do is boost the ego of a AAA player and totally humiliate the C.
I'm not an expert, but I'd consider myself better than average, and whenever I've played a beginner I've offered advice (if they wanted it) and explained my moves and why certain unit match-ups will or won't work. It doesn't boost my ego to win comfortably against a new player, but it does make me feel good to help someone develop. Similarly, I learn a lot when I play the elite players and get a beaten comfortably!

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9459
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Revamping the league

Post by stockwellpete » Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:39 pm

Morbio wrote:I'm not an expert, but I'd consider myself better than average, and whenever I've played a beginner I've offered advice (if they wanted it) and explained my moves and why certain unit match-ups will or won't work. It doesn't boost my ego to win comfortably against a new player, but it does make me feel good to help someone develop. Similarly, I learn a lot when I play the elite players and get a beaten comfortably!
But you wouldn't offer advice in a competition, would you? The concern here is the number of drop-outs that might occur under Steve's proposals. The first phase should proceed OK because players will be mostly playing against opponents of a similar standard. The first problem will come at the half-way stage when players are switched into new groups - there are almost certainly bound to be some drop outs at this stage of people who are not doing well, or who are not enjoying the competition because of the restrictions on the armies available. And, because of the structure of the competition (points won in the first phase are carried forward to the second phase) these players cannot be replaced for the second phase. And then, because the second phase will see players of much wider differences in skill playing each other, it is likely that there will be drop outs here too, particularly if some less experienced and skilful players are getting badly beaten by the veterans. This has been the reported experience of players who have played in competitions with similar structures to what Steve is proposing (i.e. separate phases).

Earlier in this thread I gave a statistic showing that between a quarter and a third players do not return for the next season of LOEG and that most of these players who drop out come from the "B" and "C" divisions. None of us can be exactly certain why this is happening - almost certainly some of these players just stop playing FOG and go onto a different computer game but some players must surely end their involvement with LOEG because they do not do very well, even though they are not required to play "A" division players under the current structure. Under Steve's new proposals "C" standard players will be required to play "A" standard players in the second phase and they are quite likely to suffer really heavy defeats. This will inevitably lead to more drop-outs.

pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 896
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Revamping the league

Post by pantherboy » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:09 am

Pete, I really think you are fixated on the current system and as such are imagining scenarios with no basis and misrepresenting the rules intended as it fits with your desires. Please understand I mean this on the unconscious level and obviously you desire the best for the league.

I've noticed that you often leap to conclusions. As for advice by top players unless you've gathered some specific data you are guessing something happens which you guess will make something else happen. From my experience I've always extended advice to any player under any circumstances if asked. I don't proffer advice since some players may feel offended or desire to learn by experience but then I've only ever played in the A division.

Next you've made an assumption that players will drop out after 5 games because they are losing or they are dissatisfied with the spread of armies to select from due to the format. I pointed out to Turk some stats of players that have lost almost all their matches. None of them have dropped so it would be reasonable to assume that this may hold true in the new format. Currently players may disappear at any point for any reason and the current format doesn't prevent this so it isn't a strength. You also imply that the army selection process will turn them away at the midpoint. You have nothing to substantiate that fact and I would counter with that if they really don't like it I suspect they won't sign up in the first place. Also you are ignoring the point of the senate which will vote upon the new armies each season as presented by the top and bottom players. This will occur during the administrative downtime and if a player is really concerned they simply don't sign up for the next season (though they will still be part of the senate). Also the new army selection process means that players will be using a new army in the second stage so effectively a fresh start without plodding through 5 more matches with an army they may of changed their opinion on. This happens in the league currently with players regretting their choice once competition has started.

Now your concern about what will happen in the advent of a player dropping is a good one. If they drop in the first stage then it will pose few issues since they can be replaced as they do now from a reserve list. If they drop out in the second then to be honest I wasn't imaging replacing them. Remember we don't always replace players since it depends on how far into the season it is. I'm hoping there will be less instances because of the new format and even if it does occur it maybe limited because of the groupings resulting in only 1 of the 5 going which means each player still will have played a total of 9 games rather than some of the smaller divisions in the current league. But certainly this is a point to examine though nothing will be conclusive till the end of the first season under the revamp.

You talk about the second stage having a diverse range of skill. I've already addressed this issue on the page earlier but once again the point of the new format is to create dynamic opportunities in the first stage with players matching up versus equally qualified opponents in the second. Remember each group will have a player from each class in it and in the second stage based on success they will meet 5 new opponents who to that date will have had roughly equal success. In general I imagine top players grouping together for the second stage in the top two classes then the next level of player overlapping but one further down and so on. What will be possible though is for a lower ranked player to do well as an underdog and make it into a higher class. They may get killed in the next stage but they probably will end the season on a 5/5 or 4/6 split for wins. Not too shabby and earn the right to vote as a senator.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9459
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Revamping the league

Post by stockwellpete » Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:06 am

pantherboy wrote:Pete, I really think you are fixated on the current system and as such are imagining scenarios with no basis and misrepresenting the rules intended as it fits with your desires. Please understand I mean this on the unconscious level and obviously you desire the best for the league.

I've noticed that you often leap to conclusions. As for advice by top players unless you've gathered some specific data you are guessing something happens which you guess will make something else happen. From my experience I've always extended advice to any player under any circumstances if asked. I don't proffer advice since some players may feel offended or desire to learn by experience but then I've only ever played in the A division.
I have actually made a mistake in my post above, Steve. It is the first round ("Alea Acta Est") that is going to be the most uneven in terms of players who constitute the divisions, isn't it? So that will, if anything, exacerbate the problems that I think will occur at the half-way stage. I wouldn't have said I was "fixated" with the current system - I just don't agree with you that it is broken. It just needs running properly. And I think what you are offering is not really LOEG at all, but a completely new competition. I also think it might have been better if you had trialled a smaller version of your idea as a separate competition first before suggesting that it was appropriate for LOEG. In that way players would understand much more about the system and any teething problems could have been addressed. I think a lot of players are very uncertain right now about how this will all play out (myself included) and that is why the polling is quite low. Regarding giving advice I think it is fairly obvious that this is more likely to happen in friendly games than in competitions - I don't think you have to jump very far to come to that conclusion. :wink:
Next you've made an assumption that players will drop out after 5 games because they are losing or they are dissatisfied with the spread of armies to select from due to the format. I pointed out to Turk some stats of players that have lost almost all their matches. None of them have dropped so it would be reasonable to assume that this may hold true in the new format. Currently players may disappear at any point for any reason and the current format doesn't prevent this so it isn't a strength. You also imply that the army selection process will turn them away at the midpoint. You have nothing to substantiate that fact and I would counter with that if they really don't like it I suspect they won't sign up in the first place. Also you are ignoring the point of the senate which will vote upon the new armies each season as presented by the top and bottom players. This will occur during the administrative downtime and if a player is really concerned they simply don't sign up for the next season (though they will still be part of the senate). Also the new army selection process means that players will be using a new army in the second stage so effectively a fresh start without plodding through 5 more matches with an army they may of changed their opinion on. This happens in the league currently with players regretting their choice once competition has started.
I am suggesting that it is quite likely that some players will drop out at the half-way stage. This is what happens in any competition that has separate phases. LOEG only has one phase so players who are doing poorly will tend to drop out at the end of the season and maybe will not finish their last two or three matches. The statistics I have given do bear this out. I also think some players will not like the fact that army selection is going to be so restricted under your proposals. Not only are Classical/Imperial and Dark Ages/Medieval going to be merged but then players are going to be offered the choice of just 6 or 7 armies from these combined lists. So it is likely that 2 or 3 players in each division will not get the army they have chosen and this may contribute to some of them dropping out.

The drop out rate of LOEG at the end of each season is currently somewhere between 25% and 33%. I think that is quite a high figure. Some of it will due to "natural wastage" as people move onto new games, but I think a certain proportion of it will be either because a player has not done well or because they are frustrated with slow play/opponents going AWOL and the lack of adjudication. I think there are some things organisers can do to mitigate these problems but putting players in more uneven divisions in the first phase is likely to make matters a bit worse rather than improve them.
Now your concern about what will happen in the advent of a player dropping is a good one. If they drop in the first stage then it will pose few issues since they can be replaced as they do now from a reserve list. If they drop out in the second then to be honest I wasn't imaging replacing them. Remember we don't always replace players since it depends on how far into the season it is. I'm hoping there will be less instances because of the new format and even if it does occur it maybe limited because of the groupings resulting in only 1 of the 5 going which means each player still will have played a total of 9 games rather than some of the smaller divisions in the current league. But certainly this is a point to examine though nothing will be conclusive till the end of the first season under the revamp.
If players drop-out very early on then, yes, they can be replaced from a reserve list, but how can players be replaced if they drop out at the half-way stage? Their points total from the first phase is to be carried forward, isn't it? So if you have, say, 4 players of the 36 drop out at half-way then that means that 4 of the 6 groups will be a player short from the outset of the second phase. So two-third of the participants will be affected by this.

If I can finish by repeating what I said much earlier in this thread - I think your ideas would be superb for historical theming in LOEG, maybe one season focussing on armies associated with the "Rise of Rome", the next season on the "Decline of the Western Empire". But I just don't think that a Roman theme is appropriate for the whole competition - it is a matter of taste, I know. :wink:

Morbio
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1931
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Wokingham, UK

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Morbio » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:03 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
Morbio wrote:I'm not an expert, but I'd consider myself better than average, and whenever I've played a beginner I've offered advice (if they wanted it) and explained my moves and why certain unit match-ups will or won't work. It doesn't boost my ego to win comfortably against a new player, but it does make me feel good to help someone develop. Similarly, I learn a lot when I play the elite players and get a beaten comfortably!
But you wouldn't offer advice in a competition, would you?
Simple answer: Yes, I have done on more than one occasion, the situation doesn't matter.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9459
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Revamping the league

Post by stockwellpete » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:34 pm

Morbio wrote:
stockwellpete wrote:
Morbio wrote:I'm not an expert, but I'd consider myself better than average, and whenever I've played a beginner I've offered advice (if they wanted it) and explained my moves and why certain unit match-ups will or won't work. It doesn't boost my ego to win comfortably against a new player, but it does make me feel good to help someone develop. Similarly, I learn a lot when I play the elite players and get a beaten comfortably!
But you wouldn't offer advice in a competition, would you?
Simple answer: Yes, I have done on more than one occasion, the situation doesn't matter.
OK then, fair enough. :wink: (nobody ever gives me advice!)

Aristides
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 413
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:08 pm
Location: Imladris, Ch'ang-an, Delphi

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Aristides » Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:12 pm

I like much of the new proposal, it has an almost role-playing edge to it and obviously is highly structured (which i think is a reaction to the perceived implosion that recently occurred).

But i think the old format would be missed.

Is there not room for both? A freer, more simple old-school loeg (with a few clarifications [only] of the current system, e.g. for slow play and perhaps taking some armies out), plus this new more structured system?

I do think getting new players is a vital aspect, and picking (almost) any army and playing 8 or 9 guys with armies from roughly the same period is probably more attractive than the somewhat involved and complex proposed idea, which has a whiff of aficionadoism.
‘I go North, to the swords and the siege,
That yet for a while rivers may run clean and birds build their nests,
Ere Night comes.’

voskarp
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:47 pm
Location: Uppsala, Sweden

Re: Revamping the league

Post by voskarp » Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:42 am

I pretty much agree with what Aristides says. (The new league format is interesting, but I'd like to eat the cake and have it too.)

Maybe some ambitious players can restart the old style league. I could volunteer for a smaller part if needed. (It could be called LoEC, League of Extraordinary Conservatives! :wink:)

Lysimachos
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1171
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Lysimachos » Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:13 am

In my opinion Steve proposal seems OK.
I particularly like the idea of splitting up the season in two distinct phases, giving to all players the chance of competing in some games vs players of different rank.

Maybe the allowed number of players (36) is a bit small, but shrinking the possibility of recruitment to only one division until a fixed date, in order to view how many players have enrolled, could solve the problem, then allowing who likes between the players already listed in one division to fill the vacant spots in the other.

About the Status system only one remark about Ancestry. Taking the example of Steve a player twice Senator, once Equites and Twice Servus, would be termed a Servus as Ancestry. This seems a bit unfair and, in my opinion, it would be better to insert him midway as a Plebeus. In other words every player should earn from 1 to 6 pts. every season and the average of the pts. should insert him in the appropriate Ancestry Class. So, continuing with the above mentioned example, the player should have 19 pts (6-6-5-1-1), with an average of 3.8, inserting hin metween the Plebs. (Senate should include players with an average from 5.5 to 6, Equites from 4.5 to 5.4, Plebs from 3.5 to 4.4, Peregrini from 2.5 to 3.4, Libertini from 1.5 to 2.4, Servi from 1 to 1.4).

About Awards, IMHO the three more important should be appointed to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd best player of the Senatores class, then taking into consideration the winner of the lower classes (adding the Corona Castrensis, Corona Obsidionalis and Corona Ovalis)
"Audentis fortuna iuvat"
- Virgilius

(Good luck favours the brave)

Lysimachos
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1171
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Lysimachos » Sun Jun 23, 2013 8:52 am

After a bit more thinking I believe now that the Ancestry system may well work anyway as envisaged by Steve.

To be clear I took literally his example and showed what seemed to be a flaw.
But the example is misleading.

In fact it's quite impossible that a very good player, earning twice the rank of Senator, could suddenly fall twice in the Servi class.
Being instead much usual that player's rank tends to remain substantially unaltered during the seasons or that only slowly increases or decreases Steve's mechanism still seems suitable to control the Ancestry system.
"Audentis fortuna iuvat"
- Virgilius

(Good luck favours the brave)

Turk1964
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 1:14 pm
Location: Victor Harbor South Australia

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Turk1964 » Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:36 am

Honestly i find this new revamped League very confusing and all this talk of this rank and that rank deciding whats to be ,sounds like parliment house . Are we to become politicians now? Its only a game for heavens sake and all that was wrong with the old league is slow play and players dropping out. How do you counter that well its impossible because unless there is a rule stating how long a game is to take then players will be as fast or as slow as they like.Changing the League to all this Roman Senate role playing is a bit silly as far as im conserned. Does anyone else feel this way or am i alone in my consern?

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9459
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Revamping the league

Post by stockwellpete » Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:27 pm

Turk1964 wrote:Honestly i find this new revamped League very confusing and all this talk of this rank and that rank deciding whats to be ,sounds like parliment house . Are we to become politicians now? Its only a game for heavens sake and all that was wrong with the old league is slow play and players dropping out. How do you counter that well its impossible because unless there is a rule stating how long a game is to take then players will be as fast or as slow as they like.Changing the League to all this Roman Senate role playing is a bit silly as far as im conserned. Does anyone else feel this way or am i alone in my consern?
I agree entirely, Mark. Some players will find the Senate and the various social strata ideas interesting, but it will leave others (like me) completely cold. What we do know is that Steve (pantherboy) knows how to run a tournament so it will be successful to a certain extent. Whether it satisfies the majority of LOEG players, particularly the "hard-core" players who enter all four sections, remains to be seen. Players will get far fewer games in this competition if each division consists of just 6 players.The other thing is - will the novelty of being in the Senate wear out quite quickly? Then the Roman theme could become a bit suffocating.

There was an earlier tournament, run by Guido (Lysimachos), that contained some of the elements that now appear in Steve's proposal. Two phases; and players of different skill levels playing each other in the first phase and then being scheduled to play against opponents of a similar standard in the second phase - then, the drop-out rate was quite high among players who struggled in the first phase. Some players even "no-showed" in the first phase when they realised that they were required to play one of the top players. It seems likely to me that something like this will happen again, to a certain extent anyway, and I am not sure right now how this might be mitigated by the tournament organiser. . .

http://www.slitherine.co.uk/forum/viewt ... 95&t=29066

hidde
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Posts: 1701
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:31 am

Re: Revamping the league

Post by hidde » Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:26 pm

I found the tables I did for that tournament by Guido. As I remembered, quite a lot of players bailed out after the first round. It turns out that it wasn't really so.
From a quick look I estimate that three players either didn't show up or didn't finish their games in the first round.
All quarter-finals but those in the fourth group were played. Since the three no-shows from the first round were part of that group it's not very surprising.
All but two of the semi-finals were finished. It was the finals that for some reason were abandoned by almost all participants. I didn't play or finished my final game even though it was for third place! Can't remember why we didn't finished it...
Image

pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 896
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Revamping the league

Post by pantherboy » Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:13 pm

Lysimachos wrote:After a bit more thinking I believe now that the Ancestry system may well work anyway as envisaged by Steve.

To be clear I took literally his example and showed what seemed to be a flaw.
But the example is misleading.

In fact it's quite impossible that a very good player, earning twice the rank of Senator, could suddenly fall twice in the Servi class.
Being instead much usual that player's rank tends to remain substantially unaltered during the seasons or that only slowly increases or decreases Steve's mechanism still seems suitable to control the Ancestry system.
I think so Lysimachos. I want to eliminate the current ratings with something simpler to calculate and almost visual in nature. Eliminating the necessity of a formula aides in administration and will lessen the competitive contrast since players will be grouped rather than individually rated. Also what I suggest will closely reflect a players current ability. A player overtime should gravitate to a particular class but if they improve it will be a simple process to track and once they've performed consistently well enough at a higher level then that level will kick in.

pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 896
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Revamping the league

Post by pantherboy » Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:21 pm

hidde wrote:I found the tables I did for that tournament by Guido. As I remembered, quite a lot of players bailed out after the first round. It turns out that it wasn't really so.
From a quick look I estimate that three players either didn't show up or didn't finish their games in the first round.
All quarter-finals but those in the fourth group were played. Since the three no-shows from the first round were part of that group it's not very surprising.
All but two of the semi-finals were finished. It was the finals that for some reason were abandoned by almost all participants. I didn't play or finished my final game even though it was for third place! Can't remember why we didn't finished it...
I don't think the drop outs had much to do with the format. Those first round drops also dropped from the league without finishing there season and also were often tardy in completing their games.

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Revamping the league

Post by flatsix518 » Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:58 pm

I think the new format is worth a go. Perhaps some of the player problems we've been having are due to the old format becoming stale. A new format may attract new players and encourage better sportsmanship and behavior -- and move the focus away from politics and towards playing.

One thought. One of the best planners I ever met said, "if you plan for that which is going to happen anyway, your plan will always succeed". Steve, you may want to bake into the format that some number of players are always going to drop out and some are going to play slowly. Perhaps a tournament structure that expects and accommodates this will be better than a rules heavy, disciplinary approach to manage these inevitable aspects of player behavior.

John
flatsix518

Lysimachos
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1171
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Lysimachos » Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:54 pm

There was an earlier tournament, run by Guido (Lysimachos), that contained some of the elements that now appear in Steve's proposal. Two phases; and players of different skill levels playing each other in the first phase and then being scheduled to play against opponents of a similar standard in the second phase - then, the drop-out rate was quite high among players who struggled in the first phase. Some players even "no-showed" in the first phase when they realised that they were required to play one of the top players. It seems likely to me that something like this will happen again, to a certain extent anyway, and I am not sure right now how this might be mitigated by the tournament organiser. . .
Stockwellpete
I think the example is misleading because:
1) the torunament was divided in 4th rounds, which is much more than Steve's idea foresees
2) the players were obliged to play with preset army composition (which, in my posthumous opinion, was a great mistake, depriving each one of the freedom of customizing the army as he liked)
3) it interferred with the beginning of a new LOEG season
4) during the last phases of it I incurred in great job problems and wasn't able to stimulate the players in completing the games.

Steve's idea seems simpler and more direct and has also the advantage of covering with some role playing the phases between one season and the other.
I like it.
"Audentis fortuna iuvat"
- Virgilius

(Good luck favours the brave)

Turk1964
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 1:14 pm
Location: Victor Harbor South Australia

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Turk1964 » Sun Jun 23, 2013 10:51 pm

Ok so at the start of the season who will decide what armies are to be used in each period? Second season the Tin Lords get to have a say and if they get the last pick you can bet there wont be any Dud armies.I would like to see an example, Steve of what armies you would have in the six Hypothetically speaking. Will you announce the armies before or after recruitment?

pantherboy
Tournament 3rd Place
Tournament 3rd Place
Posts: 896
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:30 pm

Re: Revamping the league

Post by pantherboy » Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:56 am

Turk1964 wrote:Ok so at the start of the season who will decide what armies are to be used in each period? Second season the Tin Lords get to have a say and if they get the last pick you can bet there wont be any Dud armies.I would like to see an example, Steve of what armies you would have in the six Hypothetically speaking. Will you announce the armies before or after recruitment?
For season 11, once I'm satisfied that there isn't enough opposition to my idea, I will set up a thread to do the following; collate player suggestions for what lists to use, vote on how many lists to be used, whether any preconditions will apply (Number of generals, FOW, etc.), and if army lists should be designed and fixed at start of each phase of the season (like in the super league of old). Anyone will be eligible to contribute whether a new or old player. Whether going to play or not.

I will also ask for opinion on mirror matches but won't necessarily apply what players request since it substantially lengthens the time required to finish a season. I used mirror matches in season 1 and maybe 2 when the pool of players was smaller and there was only a single league (before the advent of storm of arrows).

On a peronal note I like the idea of designing my list first and using it for all matches after. This mitigates the advantage of some power lists who have so many great options with allies and troop types that they can almost counter every threat. It also aides in preventing draws since a player can't specifically build a list to draw with a specific army. And finally it prompts a quicker set up of matches as players don't have to design their armies before each battle.

Lastly recruitment for season 11 will occur only after the army lists and season rules have been completed and posted. Once the senate system is working then recruitment in the future will always occur after that in between season phase which will mean players will always be aware of their potential choices.

Cheers,

Steve

Turk1964
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1138
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 1:14 pm
Location: Victor Harbor South Australia

Re: Revamping the league

Post by Turk1964 » Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:19 am

Hi Steve
Thanks for you reply .Yes i think thats a good idea to have players opinions on what armies to use :) There after the Lords will have imput into what armies are to be used in future tournaments,that is acceptable.The current season still has a way to go but i think personally its plodding along very slowly now . Most of the Cgraders have finished and majority of the Bgraders are drawing close to an end. There are still players that havent started and will probably be adjudicated.I will Pm you with my thoughts on ending the current season.

Cheers Turk

Post Reply

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