Author |
Topic: Second Season (Read 7295 times) |
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender: 
Posts: 5928
|
 |
Second Season
« on: Jul 4th, 2010, 11:33am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
The first season of AWL was a massive success, far better than I imagined possible. Next time around (hopefully soon), the only changes I would ask for are
1. One round per week
2. Slightly lower budget
The budget calculation was fine, but as the season progressed, new players joined with a lower average rating than the original rosters.
Does anyone else want another season? If so, how much the same or different?
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Korhil
Forum Senior Member
Arimaa player #5160
Gender:
Posts: 27
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #1 on: Jul 4th, 2010, 2:17pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Would it be possible to put some ratings brackets around each board, rather than a budget?
Example brackets for purpose of discussion:
Board 1: 1950+
Board 2: 1650 - 2000
Board 3: 1700 or Lower
The objective of this would be to try promote players of closer ratings to face off more often.
Cheers,
Korhil
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sconibulus
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4633
Gender:
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #2 on: Jul 4th, 2010, 2:41pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I found that most of the games were fairly close, ratings-wise, while only 14 of them were within 100 points, only one or two of those happened at the top table, your proposed 1950+ region.
Your idea would reduce a captain's flexibility, he'd have to field his top player on the first board if he could, there would be no advantage to fielding anyone else, and he'd be doing the same on the other two boards as well, playing his best player that fits under the cap.
I think that Fritz' idea of reducing the budget is a good one, although I'd like to hear the captains weigh in. I know we calculated that the Atlantics could only have used all of their current budget had they used substitutions.
For myself, I'd like a longer season, so that individual matches have less impact in the final standings (although it will still probably come down to the last match, this is more to give a club that gets swept more time to recover) this could be readily accomplished by adding extra teams (if there's support), or by running three circuits rather than two.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Korhil
Forum Senior Member
Arimaa player #5160
Gender:
Posts: 27
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #3 on: Jul 4th, 2010, 3:32pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 4th, 2010, 2:41pm, Sconibulus wrote:| Your idea would reduce a captain's flexibility, he'd have to field his top player on the first board if he could, there would be no advantage to fielding anyone else, and he'd be doing the same on the other two boards as well, playing his best player that fits under the cap. |
|
The rating value for the top board should be modified to allow for each team to have a few options.
What I like to see change, is that currently a team could field players with ratings 2200, 1900, & 1900. Many teams have lower rated players (sub 1700) and I think it would be nice to promote more games between these player against each other at board 3.
Against that line up, a team would need to field a 2400 &, 2100 player to go with their 1500 board 3, hoping to win the match 2-1. It seems that currently from an objective point of winning, it is difficult to field lower rated players. I would like to see that change.
Cheers,
Martin
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
knarl
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1648
Gender:
Posts: 104
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #4 on: Jul 4th, 2010, 10:42pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 4th, 2010, 3:32pm, Korhil wrote:
The rating value for the top board should be modified to allow for each team to have a few options.
What I like to see change, is that currently a team could field players with ratings 2200, 1900, & 1900. Many teams have lower rated players (sub 1700) and I think it would be nice to promote more games between these player against each other at board 3.
Against that line up, a team would need to field a 2400 &, 2100 player to go with their 1500 board 3, hoping to win the match 2-1. It seems that currently from an objective point of winning, it is difficult to field lower rated players. I would like to see that change.
Cheers,
Martin |
|
When I filled out my survey, I also said that we shouldn't change anything much, other than maybe more tables if there's enough players.
Martin, I think the concerns you raise will be less apparent with a tuned budget, and hopefully more tables, but I'm just postulating.
Personally I think the rating budget has done a great job of giving higher and lower rated players the opportunity to play in a competative event.
Cheers,
knarl.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
novacat
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #751
Gender:
Posts: 119
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #5 on: Jul 5th, 2010, 8:45am » |
Quote Modify
|
I don't think the Atlantics have enough available players to play once a week for an immediate second season. I think it is a great idea with better player availability and/or more players on the team.
Likewise, dividing the tables by rating may leave me with no one to play at a table as the availability of our players under 1700 is really low. As the number of players grows, I could be convinced to divide groups of tables to certain ratings (i.e. table 1 & 2 like the current rules, and 3 & 4 must be below 'X' rating).
On a side note, I think the best place for evenly matched games is something like the continuous tournament.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Nombril
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4509
Gender:
Posts: 292
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #6 on: Jul 5th, 2010, 10:03am » |
Quote Modify
|
Here is my 2cents:
1 week vs. 2 week rotations:
I think 2 weeks is best, especially if we want the captains (and players) to have a chance to reflect on the results before choosing the next group of players to field. (I also think the Continuous Tournament would be good to run in the alternate weeks - it could give us an idea if more/different people prefer playing individual vs. league games.)
Budget:
Would this just be recalculated according to the rosters at the beginning of the season? (It seems Fritz's comment is directed towards the fact that players joining the league affected the average, not that the original formula was off.)
"Even" match ups - more games per match:
I understand the concern with having some lopsided games. But I expect that a ratings limit for each table won't be affective (What if you are just over the breakpoint - do you need to lose on purpose to play a lower table?) I think the solution to have more "even" games is to change to 4 or 5 games per match. I think we should do this before adding teams or playing more frequently. (Hopefully Megajester can post the survey results to know if this is feasible.)
Bots:
I've seen a few people discussing adding a bot team in the chat room. I think a bot team would be interesting. Or should we allow bots to join a regular team? Or was one of the purposes of the league to promote H vs H games? I wonder if a bot team would have a hard time competing, since it seems even if both Marwin and Clueless played, most teams could still win table 1 and 2.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #7 on: Jul 8th, 2010, 11:17am » |
Quote Modify
|
Apologies to everybody, there was a convention over the weekend and the mushroom cloud has yet to settle. I'll be updating the wiki on the final League results as soon as I can. Congratulations Ring of Fire for a hard-earned title.
Now for the 2010 League Sequel! There has been a fairly strong response to the survey. It's certainly enough to have a Sequel, but I fear not enough for teams to be able to field rosters every week. Sorry Fritz.
Our start date needs to be pretty soon. Week 1 of the Sequel needs to be this Monday. Which means Europa needs a new captain to step up to the plate. Would any volunteers for the post (from any team) make a post in the Europa Clubhouse thread.
If there is to be a bot team we need a captain and some players to step forward ASAP. I'll start a new thread now.
The rules will remain essentially as they are, although I will be making superficial changes to make them easier to understand. The only material changes will be:
- LD will make final decisions in cases of dispute
- There will be a limit to how much a team can go overbudget in a single round
- Forfeits will be automatic and not subject to the other player's consent
- Budget will be recalculated using the same formula as in the League Rules
By the way, if anybody wants to switch teams now is the time to do so. All you need to do is make a post in your chosen team. Once the League gets started everybody has to stick to whichever team they're in.
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 8th, 2010, 11:19am by megajester » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #8 on: Jul 8th, 2010, 2:02pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Yay, another season! Thank you megajester!
Are we going to have the same four clubs plus a bot team? If so does that mean the season will consist of ten rounds or five? Or if there is a bot team, will we consolidate down to three human teams in order to keep the same six-round structure?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Sconibulus
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #4633
Gender:
Posts: 116
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #9 on: Jul 8th, 2010, 2:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Fritz, it'd be eight rounds, teams can't play themselves : () )
Personally, I'm not sure about two weeks per round, and an odd number of teams, that means about a month-long wait between rounds for a team that gets a bye.
I'm a little curious as to why we'd have a per-round budget in addition to a total budget, that seems as if it would reduce a captain's flexibility in a few ways, one, it might be much more prone to incurring penalties because there is insufficient availability in one round, also, it seems as if it doesn't allow a captain to play what it thinks will be a weak opponent light, and use the saved points to try to defeat a stronger opponent.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #10 on: Jul 8th, 2010, 3:34pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 8th, 2010, 2:07pm, Sconibulus wrote:Fritz, it'd be eight rounds, teams can't play themselves : () )
Personally, I'm not sure about two weeks per round, and an odd number of teams, that means about a month-long wait between rounds for a team that gets a bye. |
|
And, when you factor in those byes, it makes ten rounds, not eight.  I agree with you about the undesirability of an odd number of teams. The extra team does not increase the number of games played per week, because one team is always sitting out. Therefore, if we do have a bot team, we should disband one human team (the Rockies?) and let the players join whichever other human team they would like to.
Quote:| I'm a little curious as to why we'd have a per-round budget in addition to a total budget |
|
I'm sure this relates to the discussion of overspending against a particular team to hurt that team even if it is a bad strategy. The full solution was to transfer penalty points to the team against whom you overspent, but it would be a bookkeeping pain. Having a limit is a partial solution that is easier to implement.
What would be the limit for overspending in one round? 500 points? The Rockies in the last round overspent by 475 points, which was not at all spiteful, but was the cost of the only three volunteers. The only larger overspend was by Europa in the first round by 542 points, but it would have been only 342 points over if not for the substitution.
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 8th, 2010, 3:37pm by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
novacat
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #751
Gender:
Posts: 119
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #11 on: Jul 8th, 2010, 8:29pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 8th, 2010, 3:34pm, Fritzlein wrote:
I'm sure this relates to the discussion of overspending against a particular team to hurt that team even if it is a bad strategy.
|
|
What if that team wanted to hurt the opponents they weren't playing against and fielded a really weak team instead? 
While I don't think it's a big deal, I do think setting a lower limit actually has as much merit as setting an upper limit per round. How much that merit is remains to be seen.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #12 on: Jul 9th, 2010, 1:14am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 8th, 2010, 8:29pm, novacat wrote:| What if that team wanted to hurt the opponents they weren't playing against and fielded a really weak team instead? . |
|
Or fielded a strong team and lost all of their games on purpose? Losing intentionally is a much easier way to favor one opposing team over another than any we have discussed so far.
In any round-robin situation there is the possibility of collusion, which is why all championship tournaments should be elimination tournaments. For AWL, though, a great spirit of sportsmanship has reigned insofar as player selection is concerned. For example, I noticed that every team captain made opportunities for every volunteer on his team to play rather than selecting to try to maximize points. This first season was about maximizing participation instead, and I expect the same for the second season as well, whether or not per round limits are imposed.
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 9th, 2010, 1:17am by Fritzlein » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
megajester
Forum Moderator
Forum Guru
Istanbul, Turkey
Gender:
Posts: 710
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #13 on: Jul 10th, 2010, 3:15am » |
Quote Modify
|
OK, we will set a reasonable lower limit as well. Also, if there's no objection, I'd like to round official ratings up or down to the nearest 100. In the last season everybody's ratings were chaging by something silly like one or two points each round, which created a LOT of work for me.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Arimabuff
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2764
Gender:
Posts: 589
|
|
Re: Second Season
« Reply #14 on: Jul 10th, 2010, 4:15am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 9th, 2010, 1:14am, Fritzlein wrote:
Or fielded a strong team and lost all of their games on purpose? Losing intentionally is a much easier way to favor one opposing team over another than any we have discussed so far... |
|
I hear Oliver Stone is planning to make a movie about it. 
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print