New league forming, "The SEIV PBW League"

[Roanon]

You have too much time Geo

Great idea, though, and settings I like - even if I don't mind a little diplomacy from time to time I really prefer playing as lone wolf.

[Slynky]

Suggestions/Questions [edit]:

Surrender IS allowed but only in 1 vs 1 games (what's the harm, right?)

Should standard game settings be established in the event the players (team or otherwise) can't agree on settings?

Should there be an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators to settle problems and disagreements?

Should any penalties be specified for anyone breaking the rules?

Should there be a standard turnaround time specified?

How does one start a game with someone (or some team)? Invitation? Challenge? What if someone refuses the challenge? What if, say, #2 on the ladder continually refuses to play (saying he's busy with too many other games or something...which could be legitimate)?

[ August 05, 2003, 19:52: Message edited by: Slynky ]

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Roanon:
You have too much time Geo

Great idea, though, and settings I like - even if I don't mind a little diplomacy from time to time I really prefer playing as lone wolf.

Well, if someone wants diplomacy they can join a team game. Those are allowed in the league as well. What I am trying to avoid is the normal progression of games where players get ganged up on and eliminated one at a time. I like that as well sometimes (Survivor tourney) but I don't think it's appropriate for a league where your standing is supposed to be determined by your own performance. By limiting the trading to team games we make sure there aren't players going as lone wolves up against wolf packs.

Geoschmo

[ August 05, 2003, 20:02: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Slynky:
Suggestions/Questions [edit]:

Surrender IS allowed but only in 1 vs 1 games (what's the harm, right?)

In a one on one game surrender ends the game, so it doesn't really matter if you say you allow it or not at that point.

Should standard game settings be established in the event the players (team or otherwise) can't agree on settings?

We needed that for KOTH, but it's not neccesary for this becuase if they can't agree they can always walk away and join another game.

Should there be an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators to settle problems and disagreements?

For now that will be me as league admin. Eventually if this takes off I will get some volunteers to help me as league admins.

Should any penalties be specified for anyone breaking the rules?

Not too many rules to be broken, but we can always kick someone out of the league if they do.

Should there be a standard turnaround time specified?

I think this is well covered by the game settings which all players need to agree to when joining and stick to.

Does one start a game with someone (or some team)? Invitation? Challenge? What if someone refuses the challenge? What if, say, #2 on the ladder continually refuses to play (saying he's busy with too many other games or something...which could be legitimate)?

There are rules for that in the standard MyLeague setups. I think most of those will carry over well. I will remove what doesn't. Eventually the special rules for top ten players will apply, but until the rankings get fleshed out some I don't think we need to worry about that too much.

[Slynky]

OK on the answers, Geo. It's just that, in my line of business and considering the losers I provide service for, EVERYTHING needs to be spelled out.

Otherwise, I was referring to people who failed to report losses, or reported them in the wrong order, or reported them late (after positions had changed due to a different game)...stuff like that. I wouldn't expect a lot of it, and surely 99% of the KOTH players have be great sports! I guess I just worry. (of course, the administrator can handle those on the fly, I guess... ).

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Slynky:
What if, say, #2 on the ladder continually refuses to play (saying he's busy with too many other games or something...which could be legitimate)?

This is something I should have addressed in more detail in my previous post. Let me elaborate. Eventually this will all be codifed in teh league rules.

The Myleague was designed for games that only take a few minutes ot a couple hours to play, involving two or just a few players. Board games, computer games, etc. So some of the stuff is going to need adjusting to fit our purposes, but most of it is flexible and applicable.

One of the main considerations in the Myleague rules is that of activity. The default for Myleague is that players must play at least one game every three weeks. This would be reflected either by them reporting a loss to someone or someone reporting a loss to them.

Since most SE4 games Last more then three weeks, and we want to have a format that allows games of any number of players, following the default Myleague rules to the letter would be difficult.

The first thing that will have to change is the required activity time. I can change this in the league admin settings. Secondly by changin gthe rule from reporting a loss to only the eventual winner, to reporting a loss to all the players remaining, players will generate a lot more activity.

If you have a game with 20 players for example, every time someone gets knocked out of the game that goes as an activity for that plaeyr and every player still in that game. If players have two or three games running simultaneoulsy they should be able to keep up a decent level of activity just from players getting knocked out and reporting losses to them.

If a player is in only one game and it is a satble game or one with slow turns, they might have problems. If that is all a person can handle though they might want to consider whether a league is a good idea for them.

Geoschmo

[Stone Mill]

Could you please elaborate on how matches come together?

Is it the challenge system?

What if multiple players pose a challenge to a higher rung person at the same time?

Rank #100 has much more to gain than Rank#1... he would climb 50 ranks!