Sorry to say, after discussion and roster inquiries, Apex is dropping out. <3 all of you and wish you all the best luck

The deadline for clan sign-ups has now passed and no other clans will be considered for CL9.

The composition of the groups will be as follows. This reflects all clans that have signed up and those who have dropped out. However, it could change between now and the start of the league if any other clans drop out or fail to submit lineups. If that were to happen, the next clan in line would be bumped up.

Also, as a reminder, once the template panel decides on the shortlist of templates, all clans in Divisions A & B will vote on clans to be included in CL9, and all qualifier clans will be able to vote on their preferences with respect to templates being in Stage 1 or Stage 2.

Group A:

Blitz
French Community
Icelandic Turtles
Lynx
Masters
ONE
Outlaws

Group B:

BIA
GG
M'Hunters
SNinja
VIW
VS
WG

Qualifier Seeds:

1  REGL
2  Hydra
3  CORP
4  TJC
5  Hawks
6  Dutch [NL]
7  LEA
8  TLW

Unseeded Qualifiers:

Poon Squad
Acme
7th Heaven
FBG
Olympus
Preußen Garde
Apprentice
FCC
World League
101st
Divided We Fall
Statisticians
German Warlords
ILLUMINATI ▲
LuFredd
  

Sees TLW seeded. dies laughing
I may be the best player we field.

Apologies if this has been asked before, but I'd like to ask some clarification on the rosters for the C groups. So, there are two stages:

• Stage 1
  3 1v1 (3 slots)
  1 2v2 (2 slots)
  1 3v3 (3 slots)
  Total = 8 slots
  
• Stage 2 (optional, right, only when finishing in top 2 of stage 1)
  3 1v1 (3 slots)
  2 2v2 (4 slots)
  1 3v3 (3 slots)
  Total = 10 slots

Now, in the rules, everything is about 3 slots in total per player for the 18 slots in total, but in C there obviously not "18 slots", there are "8+10 slots", not created equal at all.

What are the specific group C rules in respect to this? So if a player is in 3 slots in stage 1, he cannot play in stage 2 I presume (or can he play 3 slots again in stage 2?)

However, 3 slots out of 8 is a lot, you could basically fill the first stage with only 3 people in that case, and for example handily win the first stage based on the skill of only 3 members, and then have 3 different people in the second stage, having your ass kicked horribly there. (Note: I'm not asking this because my clan happens to have exactly 3 known good strategic players and we are considering this, but rather because I was thinking forward about the roster building.)

No matter what the rule would be, I assume clan leaders in the C division have to think forward about the second stage. But when do rosters of the second stage have to be finalised? At the start of the first stage or after the first stage ended (or somewhere halfway)?

So, if there are not specific rules about this, I would like to "propose" the following (or rather, bring up the following ideas of additional rules that may benefit the league but which would be up to the committee to possibly consider)

• A max of 2 slots for the same player per stage (with 3 slots in total over the 2 stages). Or, alternatively, a minimum of 5 different players within each stage.
  
• Some leniency with respect to when the final roster for part 2 has to be decided (e.g. a tentative roster at the start of stage 1, but which can be updated until the end of stage 1)
  
• A possible stage 2 also for the non-top 2 finishers of stage 1. Otherwise these clans have only 8 slots to fill over the season, which seems like not all that much? (This could be used for seeding after 8th for example and could even be optional only for those clans interested.)

A possible stage 2 also for the non-top 2 finishers of stage 1. Otherwise these clans have only 8 slots to fill over the season, which seems like not all that much? (This could be used for seeding after 8th for example and could even be optional only for those clans interested.)

I think I proposed this idea before when the new league format was being proposed and it didn't gain much interest as it only entailed more work with no one really wanting to take it on.

A max of 2 slots for the same player per stage (with 3 slots in total over the 2 stages). Or, alternatively, a minimum of 5 different players within each stage.

We did state that there would be a max limit of 2 slots for the same player per stage. I seemed to have missed it in the doc, which I will update shortly. This also requires a minimum of 4 players for Stage 1, which should prevent a few strong players from storming into Stage 2.

Some leniency with respect to when the final roster for part 2 has to be decided (e.g. a tentative roster at the start of stage 1, but which can be updated until the end of stage 1)

This was also discussed, but is missing from the doc. The only reason we're asking for the entire roster+line-up at the beginning is to avoid the hassle of reaching out to 24 clan leaders twice. Every clan can make unlimited changes(as long as they do not violate the slot rules) before Stage 2 begins. But the onus is on the clan to reach out to us. If we receive no communication before Stage 2 begins, we assume that the clan intends to keep the originally submitted line-up.

MW - "A possible stage 2 also for the non-top 2 finishers of stage 1. Otherwise these clans have only 8 slots to fill over the season, which seems like not all that much? (This could be used for seeding after 8th for example and could even be optional only for those clans interested.)"

GE - "I think I proposed this idea before when the new league format was being proposed and it didn't gain much interest as it only entailed more work with no one really wanting to take it on."

We're not opposed to the idea due to the extra work involved. However, we're not sure what incentives can be provided to keep this interesting. We were thinking of pairing the 3rd and 4th clans of each group into one group of 8, and the 5th and 6th clans into another group of 8. Using the finishes here to determine seeds for the next season is an option, but we fear a group of death hurting some clan for the next season as well. Another option could be to use these results to declare the final standing in CL9, but only have 8 seeds(which are determined by Stage 2). We'd like to hear what others think of these options.

Edited 12/13/2016 05:29:01

To clarify what MotD said, we will definitely have a stage 2 for all Division C clans. The only open question is whether or not it will influence seeing for the next season, or whether we will have some other incentive.

Thanks for those responses, that clarifies a lot!

Just because I care too much about these kinds of things, I had a partial idea. For the stage 2 competition for lower clans, what if you the format had the clans competing for maybe 4 'seeds'.

I was thinking, all the lower clans are randomized into 4 groups of 4 clans. The top clan of each group will be part of a so called '9th seed'. Of these 4 clans, one would each be randomly put into each of the 4 groups of stage 1 next season. So then you have in each group two seeded clans (1-8th seeds), one of these clans from the lower stage 2 (9th seeds) It reduces the number of randomized clans per group, spreading out talent a bit more and giving practice to all clans in Clan League.

I had a partial idea. For the stage 2 competition for lower clans, what if you the format had the clans competing for maybe 4 'seeds'.

I was thinking, all the lower clans are randomized into 4 groups of 4 clans. The top clan of each group will be part of a so called '9th seed'. Of these 4 clans, one would each be randomly put into each of the 4 groups of stage 1 next season. So then you have in each group two seeded clans (1-8th seeds), one of these clans from the lower stage 2 (9th seeds) It reduces the number of randomized clans per group, spreading out talent a bit more and giving practice to all clans in Clan League.

Sounds like a great idea! I'd suggest a minor change though. Instead of having 4 groups of 4 clans, I'd propose two groups of 8 each. These groups will feel similar to the main "Stage 2" group. Another advantage is that the players will play 7 games in each tourney instead of 3, which would give everyone more games as well.

The top 2 clans in both these groups can be part of "9th seeds". These 4 clans would then be randomly dispersed among all the Stage 1 groups in CL10, as you proposed.

We should probably have better names for all these groups as well. Maybe Q1,Q2,Q3,Q4 for the four Stage 1 groups, C for the main Stage 2 group, D1,D2 for these two groups of 8 in Stage 2 for clans which didn't finish top 2 in their groups in Stage 1.

We can also ensure that D1, D2 have an even split of clans (two 3rd, two 4th, two 5th, two 6th placed clans each).

Sees TLW seeded. dies laughing
I may be the best player we field.

I am not sure if it is an advanatge to be seeded right now. I think some unseeded clans are way stronger than some seeded ones. There will be a high random factor how strong your group will be. If we are really unlucky in stage 1, one group will be like stage 2 and another group will be easy as fuck. But every system has to balance, we will see...

There will be a high random factor how strong your group will be.

Jup, some clans could get completely fucked.

In some way it is unfortunate but on the other hand it'll be more fun for spectators. I expect the draw stream will be hilarious.

Would it be possible to change the second point of contact of LuFredd? Or maybe add a third point of contact? Max will manage the CL9 for our clan, so could you remove "Arigal" and add Max instead? Would be nice. Here is his link : https://www.warlight.net/Profile?p=672579932

I can't wait to see theses "unseeded" clans like 7th Heaven, Apprentices, 101st, ACME, Divided we fall, etc. end up lol. Like Krunx said, some of theses unseeded clans are by far better than some seeded clans.

Looking at the seeds as of right, they aren't the worst. There are 4 clans of similar strength in seeds 1-4, same with 5-8. So while they don't accurately reflect the best 8 clans, the groups are all reasonably balenced going into the randomization. Hopefully, we avoid a group of death and the best 8 clans will promote to stage 2.

We absolutely want to avoid a situation where many of the best clans end up in the same group. If anyone has a good idea of how to do avoid that without involving some subjective ranking of clans we'd love to hear them.

You could let the seeded clans take turns picking who else is in their group (probably in an ABCDDCBA pattern).

This has the usual disadvantages of picking teams, though, in that it sucks for whoever is picked last (or first, in this case). Also, there's nothing to stop a seeded clan with a vendetta (or a troll) from intentionally screwing over another clan. And it's still a subjective ranking of clans; you're just throwing it on the players rather than the committee. :P

I think seeding the top 8 then implementing 4 more seeds from the lower part of stage 2 is sufficient enough to allow differentiation of the clans throughout the season. If you somehow miss moving onto the stage 2, a good clan should still get the '9th seed'. If you miss both, then maybe the fault is the clan's, not the system.

We could put the clans in different lottery pots:

1st pot (4 clans):
1st-4th seed
2nd pot (4 clans):
5th-8th seed

3rd pot (4 clans):
Expert guess: Lets vote the clan leaders of group C on the unseeded clans and rank them. May be not precise on ranking but at least it should be fair for everyone.

...

x pot (rest):
all the rest

Edited 12/16/2016 13:19:28