League rules discussion

[Ice Cream Emperor]

One of the advantages of keeping playoff qualification at top 4 is that -- assuming we have similar numbers next season -- it makes for symmetrical Playoff/Failoff numbers.

[Comstar]

I think having the top 4 out of 8 go to the play offs was good - most people had a chance right up to the second last round, and even the last place was up for grabs on the last round. Not to mention I wouldn't have got in without it.

And all the play off's have been very close and tense, no matter what the TV difference.

[Sky]

I'm about of the mind of Haem's position. If I were entering with a new team, I'd want a few skills and I think allowing a couple extra skill-ups would help those who need it. And those who don't, well, they'll stomp us anyway.

I know it's been a long two-season road just to get some skills on my Black Orcs, str4 doesn't go far without any skills. And I still have one level 1 BO!

I liked the failoff idea for this season and I'm looking forward to Eld's swiss experiment.

[IainC]

I think you either want people to start each season with fresh teams (which makes a lot of teams frankly unplayable) or you accept that some level of twinking is inevitable. There's not really any rules you can put in place that will stop determined twinking that won't also make slow-burning teams like Chaos worthless.

As for the playoffs, I like the  four up/four down playoff/failoff divide but I'd like to see them (or at least the failoffs) as a regular tournament rather than a knockout so that every one gets the benefit of a bunch of extra post-season games.

[Sky]

That's why I like Eld's idea. Too late to implement this play/failoff season, but something to think about. The losers probably need the TV more than the winners :) The failoffs gave a BO block and my thrower accurate, so I'd say mission accomplished as far as having them at least close a bit of the gap for non-playoff teams.

Couple more years and we should have this down to a science! 

[Ulysees]

In terms of the feeder league transferring to main league I don't mind what TV is set, the main point for me is people enjoying their matches and  while being at a TV disadvantage for a brand new coach can be intimidating it shouldn't be so much of an issue for an experienced player, so unless the admin was a major headache I would be in favour of people who have partaken in the league being restricted to a 1250 TV limit if they change teams but anyone who joins fresh and wants to take the time to level up a team via the feeder league is allowed a higher limit but for their first team only.

I think the main issue is the fact that in the current format it can take a long time to level a bashy team in the main league since you are really limited by the randomness of SPP accumulation plus the fact that you only get 1 match every 10 day period so with only 7 games guaranteed plus however long you last in the play-offs in a regular season it will most likely take 2-3 seasons of games to get something that will be a real threat in the playoffs. The passing teams have a slightly different issue with the fact that trying to level a team with such fragility can mean that they run into money issues trying to keep pace with the rate of their injuries if they get unlucky but that's the name of the game in my eyes.

So I would like to see Eldaecs' idea for a round of matches being played for teams in the fail offs giving them more chance to grow while the playoffs proper remain a straight knockout since in theory the coaches and teams who managed to make the play-offs obviously don't need the team development so much and one off winner take all matches are always more exciting in my own experience.

[eldaec]

I'm ok with the TV limit being bumped a little. Though I'm unconvinced that it will have a huge impact. The more important rule is the zero cash rule. I don't see great value in limiting match count.

On playoffs, the thing I dislike about conventional playoffs is that half the teams only get one match, plus it is a lot of fuss to determine 1st place, which usually is not the most interesting thing going on. Maybe if we just make a particular point of kicking off close season activity as soon as people start getting eliminated it won't matter so much.

Swiss failoffs make a lot of sense though, looking at the failoff quarter and semi finals, it is almost entirely well developed teams that didn't quite make the playoffs, the teams that need matches are almost all out of it. With a swiss failoff system you could even have the playoff losers fall back into the failoffs as they are eliminated, treat the prior rounds as wins for pairing. The point being to get people playing matches.

[Falconeer]

Loving the discussion.

At the moment, I would go this way:

- The Feeder Team limit to join the Main League will be raised to 1300TV for Season #5. This does not mean it will be raised to 1350 or anything else for Season #6.

- The Main League will stay at 32 for Season #5. This is, of course, assuming we can gather 32 coaches again, and assuming we won't have 50 total applicants. If we can't make it to 32 some rethinking will be necessary, and if we get a lots more than 32 we'll see what to do in order to give everyone a fair chance to participate.

- Assuming things will stay at 32, priority to join Season #5 and skip the Qualification Round! will be like this, from first to last:
* All those who participated in S#4.
* f13 Regulars who participated in S#1, S#2 or S#3.
* f13 Regulars who didn't participate in any previous Season.
* Non-regulars who participated in any previous Season (except S#4, of course. That bumps everyone in the first bracket).
* All non-regular new applicants.

- So yeah, The Qualification Round! will stay (if needed) and the formula will depend on the number of players involved. The formula has to be quick, but the more chances we can give to players to prove their value the better it is for everyone. Teams can apply to the Qualification Round! from the Feeder League the same way they apply to the Main League. The Qualification Round! is by all means part of the Main League, just not as cool.

- While I like promotions and relegations in some professional sports, I don't see why we should change a formula that has worked fine so far for our League. I like that everyone has a shot at everyone else, and while there's very few chances a low TV team with an unexperienced coach will be able to score much against someone with a very high rating, Blood Bowl always has room for upsets, unexpected killings and comedy in general. Also, I like to preserve a bit of the "American Football" tradition that is obviously at the root of Blood Bowl. Removing the playoffs would just feel wrong to me. So...

- The Playoff/Failoff formula is succesful, so it stays in, untouched. Assuming a 32 teams Season #5, it will be our traditional 4 Divisions, with best 4 to the Playoffs and worst 4 to the Failoffs.

- Finally, and in order to keep some sort of balance, the sortings for Season #5 Divisions will be arranged according to the Official f13 Ranking , same way I dealt with Season #4 (so no change here). But it is important to notice that each coach will be sorted according the Coach ranking, regardless of his or her team. So, if Strazos wins Season #5 and decides to start over with a 1000 TV team of noob hobbits, he will be still Top Tier. DO NOT FORGET THIS.

- I think we'll change the way tiebreakers are decided too:
* As of now it is TD Difference >> TD For >> Head to Head >> Best TV >> Most Casualties inflicted >> coin toss.
* New rule will be: Head to Head >> TD Difference >> TD For >> WORST TV considering one team's eleven bests including injured ones >> coin toss.


Sorry for all the colour coding.

[eldaec]

Ick, head to head.

We'd better clarify what happens when three or more teams are inevitably tied.

Best points in the matches between the teams tied?

If a 2 of 3 teams in that situation are tied on points in matches between the 3, do we go to head to head on the match between the 2?

If a three way head to head is even on points do we go to TD diff or TD for within the cluster of tied teams?

Someone is going to do themselves an injury attempting to work out the permutations in Stormbringer.

(I dislike head to head but the rest is fine)


Also number of casualties inflicted ON ELVES should count before coin toss.

[lamaros]

I dislike the top 4 finals as they don't really reward finishing higher in the group all that much, and knockout is sometimes a lucky dip.

If we want more games in I'd go to larger groups with only the top couple in playoffs. But I don't really care much, if things stay the same I'll still be happy playing.

[HaemishM]

But I don't really care much, if things stay the same I'll still be happy playing.

Just got to say this is a testament to the great job not only Falc has done in setting the league up, but in the way we've all been playing - i.e. very little drama, bullshit, whinging or other annoying public snit shit fits. The f13 league has lasted longer than any f13 Bat Country guild as a going concern.

[ezrast]

What's the reasoning on the tiebreaker change? I thought we had a majority against head-to-head as first tiebreaker in a previous discussion, and the new TV thing seems arbitrary. Other than that, everything looks good. Even if almost none of it is the way I would do it.

[Ice Cream Emperor]

The f13 league has lasted longer than any f13 Bat Country guild as a going concern.

Damning with faint praise, but yeah -- congrats and thanks to Falc for the great job. 

I like head-to-head for tiebreakers only because it can add drama to individual matches, not because I think it's actually the best tiebreaking notion.

[Hoax]

I'm fine with head to head but I can see why its stupid.

Playoff > Promotion/Relegation, that was a landslide vote when we did it waybackwhen.

[Comstar]

Instead of Head-to-Head, what about TD difference + Casualty difference?

I am somewhat biases in this because I wouldn't have made the semi-finals as head-to-head, but I prefer a value that's been built up through the course of the season, rather than just a single game.

[Ingmar]

Casualties being part of the tiebreaker would make me  .

EDIT: Also I still prefer head-to-head as a tiebreaker personally but I think I'm in the minority.

[Sir T]

The problem with the failoffs being a regular tournament Idea is that those who have had frankly miserable seasons (like me) still have to go on an on getting hammered for longer. I was really glad I had just one more game to play and it helped a lot with my relative good humour during that game despite the dice mashing my ass as usual. (What, you thought I felt for a single second I could win? heh) If I had yep more crap to look forward to I could have potentially just conceded all my games and dumped the team.

Sometimes you just want to get a bad thing over and done with. I know people who nave occasionally won game or scored 2 touchdowns a season might disagree but...

[Sjofn]

Also, I like to preserve a bit of the "American Football" tradition that is obviously at the root of Blood Bowl.

Obvious to people who've only vaguely heard that Americans have their own version of a game called football, maybe.   Actually, that might be my favorite thing about Blood Bowl. It was obviously created by people who sort of, kind of know American Football exists, but have only seen soccer and rugby.

[Falconeer]

kind of know American Football exists, but have only seen soccer football and rugby

Fixed it for you.

[Sjofn]

I used "soccer" specifically because using "football" for two very different sports within two sentences is idiotic.    Plus I am pretty sure most people know what "soccer" is.

[Ingmar]

FIGHT

[Falconeer]

I might.

[IainC]

The problem with the failoffs being a regular tournament Idea is that those who have had frankly miserable seasons (like me) still have to go on an on getting hammered for longer. I was really glad I had just one more game to play and it helped a lot with my relative good humour during that game despite the dice mashing my ass as usual. (What, you thought I felt for a single second I could win? heh) If I had yep more crap to look forward to I could have potentially just conceded all my games and dumped the team.

Sometimes you just want to get a bad thing over and done with. I know people who nave occasionally won game or scored 2 touchdowns a season might disagree but...

You have to set things up with the assumption that everyone who says they wanted to play Bloodbowl actually, y'know, wants to play Bloodbowl. I know you didn't enjoy playing but most of the rest of us signed up to play some Bloodbowl.

Making league rules to accommodate people who don't want to play any more is missing the point of the exercise.

[eldaec]

A better way of making SirT's point is that we don't want to commit people to too many matches with the same team. 7 round robin matches and 4 failoff matches is probably on the limit of what we want to ask people to commit to.

Also in practice, people are much less bothered by Failoff dropouts than round robin dropouts.

[Falconeer]

A better way of making SirT's point is that we don't want to commit people to too many matches with the same team. 7 round robin matches and 4 failoff matches is probably on the limit of what we want to ask people to commit to.

Yes, that's important and that's the argument that led to fairly short seasons, and I'd say it worked well so far. Short Attention Span is a beast we'd prefer to leave asleep.

[Sir T]

A better way of making SirT's point is that we don't want to commit people to too many matches with the same team. 7 round robin matches and 4 failoff matches is probably on the limit of what we want to ask people to commit to.

Also in practice, people are much less bothered by Failoff dropouts than round robin dropouts.

Yeah thats a much better way of saying to tbh.

[Megrim]

On that note, I actually wanted to (gently) put forward the idea regarding dual rotation rounds in the League. Instead of having a single rotation whereby everyone plays each other once, what do people think about having two rounds, with everyone having a second go. This would not only help clear-up any "how do we deal with tie-breakers" affairs, but also give the slower teams some more time to ramp up their game, while also giving everyone another shot at the guy who beat them last time.

Obviously for players like Sir T who aren't enjoying themselves, playing for twice as long would be a detriment, so I don't really want to push this forward very strongly, but I do think it's worth mentioning.

[Ingmar]

I'm not bothered by it but it would make for really, really long seasons unless we went to 8 divisions of 4 teams.

[Sir T]

To be honest I think its fine the way it is. Everyone gets a game with everyone else and things move along at a fairt clip. If you are doing 2 passes it also is more of an administration headache to remamber who has played who. I cant see much advantage to playing twice as such, the only reason they do it in real life is that the team playing at home is percieved to have an advantage, so playing twice negaters that, and lengtens the season. Thers no advantage to playing "at home" in the computer game.

Me not enjoying the season is kind of outside the point, really. you cant legislate for people not enjoying something and a person always has a choice to just walk away.

[Megrim]

Yes of course, but we want to be inclusive so that people don't walk away like that.

Anyway, it's not a big thing as the system is working fine as it is.

[Sjofn]

I feel like with the pace we complete days, it would make the seasons way too long to play everyone in your division twice. But maybe that's just me.

[Hoax]

Playing twice is a terrible idea.