I'm new to Clan League. Maybe I don't understand certain things. But here are some ideas for League A Season 8, based on my impressions of Season 7...

I. Disappearing Players

1) Maximum of THREE tournaments per player: max. of two 1v1s, one 2v2 & one 3v3.
2) Maximum of TWO tournaments for players who have never participated in CL with his/her new clan.

II. Boots on Picks

1) Add banked boot times of at least 1 day.
2) Allow each clan to use replacement players.
3) Games with a boot on picks must be remade ASAP, either with the original players or a replacement player. The team or player that denies playing a replacement game loses.

III. Comments

Clan League is supposed to determine the best clan. Winning on boots doesn't determine anything about skill. If the clan has other players willing and able to represent the clan, let them replace the booted player. In any non-tournament setting, proper sportsmanship would require a Vote to End when there is a boot on picks. A replacement game is good sportsmanship. And since not all players understand this, making it a requirement for Clan League games could avoid unnecessary conflict.

In general, League A is comprised of the top players and top clans. They generally have lower boot rates and are more active. Therefore, it is rare for a player to disappear without notice, yet the effects are devastating, especially since many players participate in 4 tournaments, banked time isn't used, and rules on replacement games are loose. The cumulative effects of disappearing players can be minimized if we minimize the importance of each player to the group effort. Clan League should be about the clan, not individuals. If each player is in fewer games (especially team games, since they count for more), fewer replacement games would be needed.

Most of the top players are students or have jobs. We are busy. In team games, different time zones and real life schedules get in the way of cooperating. Boots often happen because players are waiting to talk about picks or moves. I suspect that most boots not involving disappearing players could be avoided if there was a banked boot time of at least 1 day.

New players shouldn't over-represent an old clan. This is part of a theme many of my suggested rules underscore: Clan League should be more about the clan, and less about individuals. When I joined the French Community, I was asked to participate in a 1v1. I had already agreed to play two team tournaments, so I didn't think it was fair to other players in the FC (many wanted to play) or to other clans in general if I played more. I had only just joined the FC and wanted to limit my tournaments to two. In contrast, Gnuffone had also just joined WG. I'm sure he maxed out his game count without a second thought. The rules should discourage carpetbagging and encourage clan continuity. Hypothetically, with players able to participate in 4 tournaments, a dominant team-game player could play all four team games, puppet his team, and drastically alter the rankings; likewise, a hypothetically dominant 1v1 player could play 4 1v1 tournaments, and influence the rankings in a less dramatic fashion (team games are worth more points).

If a clan doesn't have enough players to play only 3 tournaments per player, recruit! Based on the rules suggested above, a minimum of 6 players are needed to play: two 3v3 teams (6), two 2v2 teams (4 of 6), six 1v1 games (4-6 of 6).

The advantages of 3 tournaments per player (max. of two 1v1s, one 2v2, one 3v3!) outweigh the disadvantages...

ADVANTAGES:

1. Minimize effects of disappearing players.
2. Restrict an "MVP" from over-representing a clan.
3. Eliminate the possibility of an "MVP" puppeting two 2v2 teams and two 3v3 teams.
4. Eliminate the possibility of a dominant 1v1 player over-representing his clan in 1v1s.
5. Enable more players from the clan to participate, which better reflects the clans' average skill level. Clan > Individuals.

DISADVANTAGES:

1. Smaller clans would have to recruit, bring dormant players back to life, or stop participating. Look at the top 20 clans (in terms of skill). Probably only two or three clans have a few players. The word "clan" in almost every non-WL context implies a relatively large group, not 4-8 people. In any case, Masters has more than enough players. Add some alts to your clan and let them play. And if this is really a problem for WG and Apex (Lolowut and Chris seem to make the rules for Clan League), another option is to decrease the number of 1v1 tournaments from 6 to 5, to put less stress on clan members' game counts.
2. Is there any other disadvantage?

Edited 1/27/2016 12:02:05

I would welcome a limitatipn of 3 tournaments for each player of course. But i think it might destroy the competition if apex had to invite worse players just to participate on the league.

Beeing part of a topclan doesn't only mean you play good. You have to be reliable. It's no bad sportmanship if a clan doesn't allow a replacement game. But i agree, a banked boot time of 1 day might help for all those players who get booted cause they commit on the limit.

A limitation of tournaments for new members of a clan might make sense. However, i feel like it's a risk a clan takes, letting a player join so many tournaments when they don't know him well enough. When i join a clan, i expect to be a part of it exactly like everyone else in this clan. Also it would be extra work for the league runners to make sure, nobody breaks this rule

There seems to be some confusion between Lynx and the French Community, due to the lack of rules on remakes.

A simple system for Season 7: If your clan wants a remake, have your CL representative talk to the other clan's CL representative. If they agree to the remake, it can count. If we have to kowtow to the Clan League Supreme Council of Supremely Exalted Ones on minor details, then proper protocol would be for CL representatives to address each other for all issues that the Clan League Supreme Council of Supremely Exalted Ones leaves open for interpretation.

Edited 1/28/2016 12:37:02

One of the most competitive arenas on Warlight has been reduced to a joke. I'm not really saying A or B is in the wrong here. But this season is such a farce :/

Really hope for a better season 8 with clear rules.

when is season 8?

After 50% of the games this season have been remade and then counter claims are filed declaring them null and void :P

Yeah, as French clan says they will not allow makeups to Lynx, I have no problem with not counting the game between General Charles and Dom365. I made all makeup games at the same time; I didn't consider which clans these players were in, just based them off of who Darkpie had been booted against off of picks. I tried to make it clear they were makeup games for the clan league.

Since French doesn't wish to count any makeup games with Lynx, the game against General Charles and Dom doesn't need to be counted. Dom clearly said in his post that here's the game IF IT COUNTS. He was just linking it here in case it did count. We had never discussed as a clan, and I had made the makeup game, so Dom posted it here, not knowing whether or not it counts, as he said in his post. There is no issue here. If French clan doesn't want remakes to count with Lynx, we don't need to count it then.

Like I said, it is fair if neither the French clan nor Lynx makes up games for the other. I just wasn't ok with it if we made up a game for them, but they didn't make one up for us. Oh sure, they say they will allow it if we use the same players. How is that fair on any level? Do they really think a 2v3 would be fair on any level? Now that we are no longer making up the 3v3 with the French clan, I have no issue with them not wanting to makeup games for us.

In conclusion: The French clan does not want General Charles vs Dom replacement game to count. They were the clan giving the remake, therefore they have the choice whether or not it counts.

There's a pecking order (or so it appears to me) for rules and official clan policies (when the rules require interpretation):

1. Clan League Supreme Council of Supremely Exalted Ones
2. Clan Reps
3. Individual Players

It's like the US Constitution:

1. Constitution
2. Power devolves to states
3. Remaining power devolves to citizens

Edited 1/27/2016 17:36:40

Why do people keep writing things in here second hand that they have not confirmed? The discussion on an official ruling was done there, everything else are just suggestions.

The current council is: Lolowut/Kenny, ChrisCMU, Pushover, Phaeril, Ollie. If your name is not on that list, then you were not part of the official vote. You can have an opinion, but please don't state that something was decided or not without actually knowing.

Here is what happened in that discussion:

Ollie - Allow for a clan to makeup/replace 3 games from boots on picks only. If a player retires, someone else can control their account if they do not violate any other rules (like format amount, etc).

Pushover - In favor of no replacement games. Retirements replacements allowed if does not violate other rules and public known.

Lolowut- Makeups can be offered by non-boot team at any stage if they want, but not required. replacements allowed for inactive player if game not past boot stage.

ChrisCMU - replacement players allowed as long as declared and does not violate other rules.

Phaeril - Replacement players for retirement IF that player was already on the CL team (to avoid FAs). Fine with Ollie proposal on makeup games but prefer none unless both teams booted on picks.

...SO, the rulings for THIS SEASON were:
-makeups are only allowed if a boot happens on pick stage. All agreed they should not be required post pick stage, regardless of scenario.
-no limit on makeups as we did not agree there.
-a player who retires/goes inactive can be replaced with another participant in that clan's team, provided they do not go over 4 formats. It must be declared/known to score keeper and both clans who is playing.


There really should not be any confusion after seeing these. I realize that we did not post an official ruling, and I am sorry for that. But here it is now for all to read. We need to count/not count any games played for this season based on those rulings. If you have questions about a particular scenario, post it here and we can help clarify.

CL8 rules are not decided. I am sure we'll start with CL7 rules and discuss if changes need to be made to any rules for CL8.

As far as Gui's comments, that is not correct. IF a leader/player assumes that is the case...they are wrong. ALL rules come from the clan league council (5 members). We discuss and vote on them. Period. No clan leader can make their own rules or exceptions. Of course we ask for input from everyone on the forums, so that every angle is looked at. But ultimately the council decides.

I set it up that way, and have been doing it that way the last 3 seasons...because I did not want the JSA scenario from previous seasons (single person ruling with input from many, everyone criticizing his decision because you can't please everyone). The people have changed as some go inactive, but the way it has run has not changed recently.

Edited 1/27/2016 17:49:39

Please help me out here and post ANY/ALL makeups and/or replacements that have happened (or been requested) so far in CL7. I will start with all WG related games:

- Tenshi went inactive. I played his account for 2v2 Guiroma and surrendered his game that was active in 1v1 Guiroma (since I was already playing 3 formats on my account). This was discussed/accepted by the panel up front, and I let the players in games know I was controlling his account.

- Muten was booted in 3v3 EU vs WG between turns 3 and 4, then a few turns later after he had taken control back. There has been a request from GG for a makeup but none has been done.

Edited 1/27/2016 17:54:33

- Apex allowed a 3v3 makeup game when Darkpie was booted on picks. Arkanton was the replacement. Apex won. The result will show in the tournament still.

- GG allowed a 3v3 makeup game in which Darkpie was booted around turn 10. We were winning the game easily before he got booted, which is why they allowed the makeup game. Arkanton was the replacement. GG replaced Mike with JV for the replacement game. GG won the replacement game. The result will show in the tournament.

- AHOL allowed a 1v1 Turkey makeup game in which Darkpie was booted at picks. Dom365 replaced Darkpie, and defeated lawm. 3 extra points for Lynx; 3 less for AHOL.

- French clan was booted in a 3v3 EU vs Lynx. Lynx was booted from a 1v1 and a 2v2 vs French. No makeup games for either clan after we discussed.

- A 3v3 between Blitz and Lynx has been made. Waiting on Quicksand to join. We expect Darkpie to be booted on picks in the real game, so we made this makeup early, so we don't have to make it up later. We replaced with Arkanton. Result will be shown later.

- A 3v3 between Lynx and AHOL has been made. Darkpie was booted on picks. AHOL fears that they may be booted, and said we could just have the points. I know this is not fair, and we are discussing with them what they want to do about it. Result will be shown later.

- A Strategic 2v2 between GG and Lynx has been made. Darkpie was booted on picks. The replacement is GreenTea. Game currently in progress. Result will be shown later.

- A Strategic 2v2 between AHOL and Lynx has been made. Waiting on CONQUISTADORS to join. Darkpie was booted on picks; replacement is GreenTea. Result will be shown later.

- A strategic 1v1 between GG and Lynx has been made. Darkpie was booted on picks. Replacement is andy. Result will be shown later.

- A strategic 1v1 between AHOl and Lynx has been made. Darkpie was booted on picks. Replacement is andy. Result will be shown later.

So, you made a ruling:

- Makeups are only allowed if a boot happens on pick stage.
- No limits on makeups.
- It must be declared/known to score keeper and both clans who is playing.
- ...a player who retires/goes inactive can be replaced...

Can is the operative word. It denotes something is possible, not that something is required. "Makeups are allowed." So who decides whether the clan does what is possible but not required? I interpret the Clan League as having a hierarchical system:

1. Council
2. Clan Rep
3. Players

The Council made a ruling with possibilities but no requirements. Players CAN be replaced. Ok. Phaeril decided for the FC that remakes will be with original players only. He CAN decide that too, based on the wording of your ruling.

And based on the wording of your ruling, my interpretation of this hierarchical system is correct: "It must be declared...to both clans who is playing." Makeup games involving both clans CAN be made, but they have to be declared to both clans. Thus, the JSA example: JSA made a makeup game, but he didn't declare the game to the FC. Only de Gaulle knew about it; he didn't tell anyone else in the FC about the game. Based on your wording the game being "declared to both clans" means de Gaulle knowing about it is not enough. Why, because de Gaulle obviously knows about any game he is invited to join! When he clicks join or decline, he shows he is aware of the game!

But "declare to both clans" implies that the clans also MUST know about the game. De Gaulle is not enough. If he were, then you wouldn't need to declare anything. Just make the game and de Gaulle would know that the game was made because he would see it.

"Clan" here clearly means clan rep. If the clan rep knows something, it is assumed that the clan has been informed. So if your sentence read, "declare to both clan reps" the spirit of the council's ruling would not change in the slightest.

Finally, after the game is made and declared, then and only then the players have a choice: join or don't join.

You see the pecking order?

1. Council: Guidelines on makeup games.
2. Clan Rep: (1) Our clan CAN arrange makeup games: Should we? (2) There CAN be replacement players: Should we use them? Or only makeup games with original players? (3) Games have to be declared to the "clan."
3. Players: Oh, another game to play. Should I play it? Ok, I think I should. No, I don't think I will. We don't have to play just because the Council and Clan Rep decide it. We have a choice to play or not, just as the Clan Rep has a choice (based on voting within the clan or his own decision) whether or not the clan WILL makeup games with replacement players, which CAN be done but is not required. And if it isn't required, then it is optional.

Either you miswrote your sentences or you are confused by my deeper meaning. If your ruling does not involve a requirement (CAN is not a requirement), then the ruling itself is merely optional. If it is optional, somebody has to make a decision (what WILL the clan do?). And since the Council has passed on this power (CAN = optional), it must naturally devolve to the clan rep, as is implicit in your phrasing and the general Clan League structures themselves.

Council <--> CL Rep <--> Players

Of course, the Council can make a new ruling at any time. But based on my observations, if CL is going to be an orderly system, we should all know and accept the structures in place. Now, if I am incorrect in how I view the CL hierarchy, maybe this is the source of all the confusion in the first place. If nobody knows how optional rulings are to be interpreted, different people will do different things.

Edited 1/27/2016 19:14:57

Ok, wait a minute, are rematch allowed?, then I ask for some rematch as well in The D1 or this is unfair, I got booted in most games 1v1 and teams games due an accident and actually don't want a rematch as they should not be done if you lose due boot we can't do anything for you and do a rematch so one clan can stay in the group a is a joke for sure ;in one word you booted deal with it simple as thator all clans deserve to get a rematch as right now

Well, yes, a makeup game is not required. You cannot force the teammates of a booted player to play a new game. Maybe they just say forget it and take the loss. But, it is required to ALLOW a makeup game from boot on picks. Meaning, it cannot be denied by another clan leader. Makeup games MUST be with the same players, everyone agreed to that. Phaeril did not decide anything there. As far as who initiates that, does not matter. Usually the players ask, they ask me or the clan leader and it trickles up the ladder. The reality is there should be a chat/mail thread with all clan leaders so the communication is there, but Fizzer's crappy mail system makes that really hard. Not everybody knows the rules because of that. At the very least we needed a new thread here, I apologize for not doing that, but discussions were still ongoing as well.

As far as replacement player, it is allowed if someone retires/goes inactive only (for example, darkpie or tenshi retiring). You can't just replace players otherwise. That also cannot be denied, but must be communicated so that the clans know. By 'clans', I mean leader or rep (whoever gave me their rosters at least) from both sides. The scorekeeper (for whatever division must also know), and ideally I should know as I am running the league. There was a replacement by someone in Illuminati (I'd have to check my mail) and they asked me first, then I told them they need to notify all parties mentioned above for it to be allowed.

Replacement players can take over the game immediately (if they are controlling that account), regardless of what turn, as I did with Tenshi and GG did with Latnox. That is the best method. If that can't happen (player just disappears), then a makeup game(s) would be needed with that replacement player invited and the scoring updated accordingly with results. In those cases, since it requires a makeup game, it is subject to makeup game rules listed above (cannot happen mid game, they would only be able to replace the player in a new game from the start).

Edited 1/27/2016 18:47:34

@JSA - the rest look good but these two concern me:

- GG allowed a 3v3 makeup game in which Darkpie was booted around turn 10. We were winning the game easily before he got booted, which is why they allowed the makeup game. Arkanton was the replacement. GG replaced Mike with JV for the replacement game. GG won the replacement game. The result will show in the tournament.

- French clan was booted in a 3v3 EU vs Lynx. Lynx was booted from a 1v1 and a 2v2 vs French. No makeup games for either clan after we discussed.

In scenario 1, there should not have been a makeup at all (was post boots), unless GG offered it. If you were winning the game easily, you could have played it out with AI. On the replacement, it should have been Mike still as he is not retired. But it is what it is and the end result is the same as a loss with AI would have been for you. I say leave that one as it ended up, since we did not declare the rules here for you to know.

In scenario 2, when did the boots occur and by who?

Scenerio 1: I can give you more details on it if you need them, but the end result is what matters, and GG won. If we had won, I could understand looking at this more, but no matter what happens with it, its a GG win.

Scenerio 2: General Charles was booted on picks; Darkpie was booted on picks in both of his as well.

Edited 1/27/2016 19:13:17

"Don't eat my brain!"

Edited 1/28/2016 12:32:00

ChrisCMU : Please be clear. Are you saying we must play all remake this season or not ? If yes you come too late for exige this in my opinion.

Let's finish this season like rules was put by all : If the 2 clan are agree to play the remake let's play it, if not don't play it.
And you need to have clear rules before the start of the CL8, not during the season.