As to the problem Metatron brings up... yes this league has gotten much larger than in prior seasons, this is the most interest I've ever seen in it. This presents a big problem for new players joining the league, as they are by default not promoted very quickly. We only really see movement in the league when players drop out. Maybe we should discuss whether or not we want to implement changes that helps the issue of new players being stuck at the bottom?

I don't like Metatron's proposal, sorry.

Aura Guardian suggests having built-in super promotions, and/or increasing the number of players promoted

Another obvious thing I can do is raise the default group size from 7 players to 8 players or more.

What does everyone think?

I would think combine expanded group sizes& superpromotions
so something like this, given a 9 person group
1st superpromote
2nd,3rd promote
4th,5th, 6th stay
7th,8th relegate
9th double relegate

8 players per group, 1 super promotion, 2 promotions, 3 relegations (I don't like idea of super-relegations) sounds like an improvement, although more players in group mean even longer season.
Maybe more games at a time too? :P

the amount of players that want to participate has increased dramatically last seasons. Imo the Round robin system is perfect for small groups so increasing the number of people in a group will only lengthen each season. I doubt it will decrease the time that much to get to the highest divisions.

Best way to speed up the league imo is to let go of the round robin version of the league and change it to 16player double elimination tournaments. The champion will super promote while the 2 finalists of the redemption make a regular promotion.

For relegations its a bit more difficult but if I am correct only 4 people can loose first round AND first round in redemption. While the rest of the normal tourney finishes these 4 could play a small round robin (3 games at a time to make sure it ends fast) to determine the relegation spots.
Winner saves himself from relegation, places 2 and 3 relegate and place 4 super relegates.

This does make it harder to promote but also rewards the newcomers that have the skill to perform in the highest divisions

But in that case you don't play every player in your group.

I have no idea if my idea will work. What if the higher divisions kept the RR format with the same number of players, while all the noob groups used a single/double elimination tourney so then the groups can be bigger at the bottom and still progress at a similar speed as the RR's?

few ideas:
- more games at once would make it end a bit faster
- more parallel groups at lower levels, example:
group A (2 drop), group B (2 prom, 2 drop), group C1 and C2 (1 prom and 2 drop each) group D1, D2, D3, D4 (1 prom each)

No, forget the increase in group size that would just worsen the problem as some pointed out.

The smaller the size of the tournaments is, the faster it goes.

Min34 is right, the best concept of Pr league is the idea that u get to fight everyone, and that is what i like about it, to fight the best players.


Buns idea seems fine.

Groups A-F get decreased group size and the rest of the groups would have a different/faster format.
It should speed up the league quite drastically, and also filter the inactives much better.

Edited 7/24/2016 22:29:16

japan77 suggests codified super promotions and relegations along with a larger group size. I think this does a lot to address the issues raised. You will get longer seasons (8 games played instead of 6) but a great player should reach group A faster under this format for two reasons: forced super-promotions, and more players per group = fewer groups to ascend. The only thing that would need to be worked out is, what about group B? Can't super promote. Do we have fewer promotions only for group B? Doesn't that make group B a bottleneck?

A lot of people claim that large group sizes would "worsen" the problem and I just don't see it. Those who think the problem would get worse, what exactly would be worse? Just the length of the season? Is that enough to offset reduced number of tiers and increased promotions?

Ollie's idea is interesting... but then it wouldn't be promotion/relegation league. It would be a completely separate league essentially. Which... maybe should happen? We can make zero or more changes to this format and introduce a different format as a completely different league.

Buns147 has an interesting idea of having qualification tournaments for lower groups but again, i think this is best implemented as a separate league.

Krzysztof suggests increasing the number of concurrent games, I presume from 2 to 3. While the league would move a little bit quicker, this also means unplanned inactivity could be catastrophic and lead to 3 losses instead of just 2. (The boot count required to be removed from league would have to be raised to 4.) It also may discourage some top players from participating because they may deem 3 games as too many.

Krzysztof's other idea is a lot more interesting: more parallel groups at lower levels. However, this would make promotion even more difficult than it already is: instead of top 2 players promoting only the top player would promote. However this directly addresses the issue of promoting up the tiers, and in case of super hard groups they can just be randomized the following season. So then the real question is, how should the groups be distributed? There is a lot of room for subjective design here.

A note, right now we have enough players for 15 groups and if enough players join maybe a 16th.

So, ideas I am currently entertaining:

* Increase default group size from 7 to 8 or 9
* Increase number of promotions and relegations from 2 to 3
* Add a default super-promotion and super-relegation (3 total promotions and relegations except for movement between group A and B)
* Increase number of concurrent games from 2 to 3, and increase number of allowed boots from 3 to 4
* Have multiple groups at same level (ex. E1 and E2) for non-newbie groups

thoughts?

i wonder if it makes sense to attempt to poll all league participants.

Edited 7/25/2016 00:27:53

I joined in season 17 just under a year ago, and I've won each group I've been in, and I'm in D now, if I keep winning, I'd get to A in another 2 seasons probably. So it takes round 5 seasons with the current system, probably 6 for people joining now. I think super promotions, or even super super promotions for people sweeping there group might be a good idea.

Or even a fast-track entry into the league, for example, if you've got a 2100+ rating in the 1v1 ladder, you can fast-track to group C. 2000+ fast-track to group D etc. Only issue is it might mess up the promotions and relegations, (but you could always alter the fast track entry points), and it would make it even longer for a good player who isnt on the ladder to get to the top. But maybe an adaption of this, like fast tracking the winners of the newbie groups. e.g. So if someone joins and sweeps M2, you could fast track them to group D or something.

I am 100% opposed to fast tracking, I think it breaks the spirit of the league, which is: you must play the games to get ahead. Reputation should never influence group placement, only performance.

The problem with your super-promotion conditional on sweeping your group idea is that it's not mated with guaranteed relegations, which could make for unbalanced promotions and relegations. A group can't gain a player without losing one, and vice versa.

"Those who think the problem would get worse, what exactly would be worse?"

Think about it, if you increase the group size you are increasing the games per group just so you would have 1 or 2 less groups.
Do more groups stall or increase the speed of the tournament?
They make the tournament finish faster for the simple fact that each group has games running while you cannot have the same amount of games running with less groups.
Eg:
In a group of 6 players you can only have each player playing a max of 2 games, thus each player must play and finish 2 games to play the rest.(time of 3 games minimum to finish 5 games)

While if you have 2 groups of 3 players, the entire league can finish in the time of a single game.


3 times faster to finish just by having 2 smaller groups instead of 1 big one.


Also in a RR the smaller the groups the less games are played.
In a group of 10, each player has to play 9 games while in a group of 6 each player has to play only 5 games.(nearly half the time)

So not only you are reducing the groups= slower, but you are increasing the size of each group to make it even worse.(more games)

It is simple math.

More games are being played at one time the faster the league is.
The less games being played the faster the league is.

IT also helps with boots and people going on vacation.

Would you rather have a group of 10 being stalled by a player on vacation, or a group of 5 being stalled and another group of 5 finished?
+ when the guy comes back from vacation it be faster for him to finish 4 games rather then 9.

No matter from which angle you view it, if you do the math, small sized groups will always speed up the tournament much more then larger ones.


"Buns147 has an interesting idea of having qualification tournaments for lower groups but again, i think this is best implemented as a separate league."

Yes that is what i was proposing with my very first post here, where you have the bottom groups in another identical league.
Also things could be implemented to promote the guys who win groups to go to the first league.(like a qualification)
Though this would have to be done properly with a clear idea of how the relegated players will be moved back to the second league.
The advantage of it is that each league can start separately and winners do not need to be placed immediately for next season but be entitled to join the season which has not started yet.

The second league does not need to be RR either, this will maintain the classic PR league and also fix the overload of ppl joining an RR tournament.

Edited 7/25/2016 08:38:17

I want to be in,if you're not gonna ignore my messages as some other guys,add me.

I would be interested in joining but would like to know when the next season starts. It depends on the answer whether i'm able to join for the next season or just wait for 1 more season until i join.

I think Krzychu's idea (and others) is best.

There's no need to even explain why if you look around you. Every major promotion-relegation system in sports works like this. Soccer leagues, basketball leagues, volleyball leagues, they all have a structure where at the lower level, the number of groups increases quickly, close to doubling per level even. Typically, the first doubling starts at the 3rd tier (sometimes already 2nd) and very rarely will you find a competition with more than 10 tiers with most leagues that I know having 5 to 9 tiers. In most competitions, the number of teams per tier decreases slightly for lower tiers.

For this format, this would be exactly as Krzychu proposed
Tier A: 1 group of 7, 2 relegate
Tier B: 1 group of 7, 2 promote, 2 relegate
Tier C: 2 groups of 6, 1 promote, 2 relegate
Tier D: 4 groups of 6, 1 promote, 1 relegate
Tier E,F,G,H: as tier D, but with likely more promotions due to dropout

C or higher: 26 players (28 if 7 instead of 6)
D or higher: 50 players (56 if 7 instead of 6)
E or higher: 74 players (84 if 7 instead of 6)
F or higher: 98 players (108 if 7 instead of 6)
G or higher: 112 players (136 if 7 instead of 6)
(I used 6 instead of 7 for lower tiers because (A) this is somewhat typical in sports leagues and (B) with fewer promotions and relegations, you don't want more than 70% (5/7) to not move every season in the lower tiers).

So 7 tiers (up to G) should be enough. At the lowest level (where newbies are added), more groups than 4 could be created as enough promotion spots would be all but guaranteed due to dropouts. In this case, even 6 tiers could work. Good players effectively promote faster in this system because there are fewer tiers to jump. Even if you miss promotion once or twice because it is harder, you'll still get to the top tier quicker. For above average players, their speed rising up should be about the same.

The only point of discussion could be how to handle promotions with dropouts. If someone from group B drops out, which of the numbers 2 of group C promote?
I think a simple rule, decided in advance should work, something like: (1) head to head (or in case of 4 players single-elimination tournament) if there is enough time (2) better record in current season (3) better finish in previous season (higher tier or higher rank in same tier) (4) repeat (3) for earlier seasons. If always equal, first to join.

Note that (much) larger groups would basically offset this idea. If you want to keep the average promotion-relegation speed as it is while still allowing players to be sorted at their desired level quicker, then groups of 6-7, max 8 seems to be the best way. More than that would make it a very stable system with only a small fraction of players promoting/relegating every season (unless you increase the number of promotion/relegation spots again of course)



Postscript:

Just for fun, a large group promotion-relegation system could look like this (much longer seasons, fewer groups)
Tier A: 1 group of 16, 3 relegate
Tier B: 1 group of 16, 3 promote, 4 relegate
Tier C: 2 groups of 14, 2 promote, 4 relegate
Tier D: 4 groups of 12, 2 promote, 3 relegate
Tier E: 6 groups of 12, 2 promote, 5 relegate
Tier F: 10 groups of xx, 3 promote, no relegate
I don't think that's a good idea with a round robin though.

A 8/16-player double-elimination promotion-relegation system could make sense though.
Tier A: 1 group of 16, 4 relegate (first round loser brackets losers)
Tier B: 1 group of 16, 4 promote (2 finalists, 2 from last rounds loser bracket), 4 relegate (as Tier A)
Tier C: 2 groups of 16, 2 promote (finalists), 4 relegate (as Tier A)
Tier D: 4 groups of 16, 2 promote (as Tier C), 4 relegate (as Tier A)
Tier E: 8 groups of 8, 2 promote (finalists), 2 relegate (first round loser bracket losers)
Tier F: 16 RR's of xx players, winners promote

My main please, I was inactive for about a month :/ - also glad to be back dear :)

When is the next season starting roughly?

Bayern, don't be an ass. You are not in the league either because you never requested it, you booted too much, you didn't join a tournament, or some other reason involving your non-participation. I'll add you to the new players list, see that you stay active this time.

Edge/Maximo, I'm still waiting on a tiebreaker game to finish, and I still need to flesh out the group changes for season 20. It will start no sooner than 2 weeks after i create tournaments and invite people. Sorry I can't give you a more concrete start date.

Glam, your main is added.

Season 20 players:
kevin#1 https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=186244509
MarkusBM https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=725103081
Motoki https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=6862295334
Doc https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=5627835089
Doron Hoh https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=8847518898
KKND https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=2921525624
MisterT https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7714693552
[FCC] Aura Guardian https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=4127329486
Electric_Kitten https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=2614926786
BYG Jacob https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=8957617662
MIFRAN https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=4825272432
Njord https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7139233655
Izazovnog https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=5016951331
Semicedevine https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=4328709837
Dogberry https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7267714858
kroete https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7137002334
Naram-Sin https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=3940013870
Coronel Gavilan https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=5842796420
carlos12.0 https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=7218885952
dry-clean-only https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=4419488318
Glamorous❤ https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=2731867411
Bayern München is the best! https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=2132686256

Krzychu, Math Wolf, and MoTD (via skype) all like the parallel group idea, so I am tempted to adopt it. I would prefer to keep group size at 7 players, 8 if needed due to a tie or some such like I've already been doing. I'm tempted to have the following scheme for season 20, which would utilize all players:

A
B
C1 C2
D1 D2
E1 E2
F1 F2 F3 F4
G1 G2 G3 G4? <--- newbies

I notice that krzychu & math wolf suggest combining the D & E groups into a single tier, but I am tempted to make people work just a bit harder to reach the top. What do the rest of you think?

I propose the following constraints for group organization going forward:
* To make promotions easier, tiers will have 1, 2, or 4 groups
* Tiers A and B have no more than 1 group
* Tiers C and D have no more than 2 groups
* All other tiers have no more than 4 groups
* A two group tier promotes the top player from each group into a 1 group tier
* A four group tier promotes the top player from each group into a 2 group tier
* tiers with multiple groups are randomly determined, keeping approximately even (a) the number of players relegating into the tier, (b) the number of players remaining in the tier, and (c) the number of players promoting into the tier
* there will be no super-promotions; all league dropouts will be replaced by additional players from the tier immediately below
* all groups will always demote 2 players, no matter the group size, unless the group is in the bottom two tiers. this is to promote more movement between groups.
* When deciding which identically ranked players in different groups in a tier should promote, the following tiebreakers are used: (a) head-to-head tiebreaker game or tournament, (b) win-loss record (omitting games played against lowest ranked player when comparing groups of uneven size), (c) win-loss record against players ranked higher, (d) ratios of fizzer's metric in all games
* However, in the league admin's discretion, a group may swell to 8 players to avoid using a hacky promotion tiebreaker.

I am noticing one potential downside, and that is waiting for additional games to complete at the end of the season when we notice people leaving the league. But I guess this isn't too big a deal, won't inactive players show they are inactive before the end of the season?

Please let me know your feedback.

Edited 7/26/2016 03:29:00

Thx Pushover. Then i will just wait for Season 21.