TheBro wrote:..
He is e_i_pi. Can't you read?
i think Scotty meant: "what is your stake in this conversation and why the inflammatory tone?", Bro (heh he can say a lot in a couple of words
Moderator: Clan Directors
TheBro wrote:..
He is e_i_pi. Can't you read?
Yeah what he said-- too bad Liz doesn't get me like you do Jimi.jiminski wrote:TheBro wrote:..
He is e_i_pi. Can't you read?
i think Scotty meant: "what is your stake in this conversation and why the inflammatory tone?", Bro (heh he can say a lot in a couple of words) ... Eip has no avatar up, so it's not immediately obvious that he's a LOWarrior.
Scott-Land wrote:Yeah what he said-- too bad Liz doesn't get me like you do Jimi.jiminski wrote:TheBro wrote:..
He is e_i_pi. Can't you read?
i think Scotty meant: "what is your stake in this conversation and why the inflammatory tone?", Bro (heh he can say a lot in a couple of words) ... Eip has no avatar up, so it's not immediately obvious that he's a LOWarrior.
Why do you have to be so literal Bro? And yes I can I read. I can play non-hasbro risk too-- pm me if you have more personal questions.



Hi jp, thanks for organising this league, it's good fun, and is a very good way of getting clans to play each other.jpcloet wrote:After the league is done, the CLA will look at #1. I think part of what is happening is that games are being made on Saturday for many clans, and then being delivered on Sundays or later. That means leaders then spend 2 or 3 weekdays waiting for players to sign up and then assign out. Very few have timed out, but some have. I'm definitely going to ask for feedback on the clan league contacts on that one. Some other changes in the league setup might help that as well. Eg if we went from 10 home to 5and5 as suggested for cross-overs. Although cross-overs might be gone, but 5and5 would still work.
Trips and Quads are definitely on the table and is probably the most likely situation even though no vote has been taken on season 2 ideas as we are still gathering all ideas. A separate league for trip and quads was also suggested.
I realise that it couldn't be averted, but even if the clans were seeded in some way, it still would not necessarily prevent the problem - people join and leave clans, and one clan may always have the edge over another clan for some reason. If that weakness in the second clan is something all other clans can exploit, then it imbalances the playfield a little bit if only 4 clans (the clans in that group) have the chance of gaining points in that manner.Incandenza wrote:I think pi may be on to something. It might be interesting to have the current tourney format become the "regular season", then the 3 division winners and 1 wild card proceed to the playoffs... as far as the fact that there's clearly a Group of Death, well, I'm not sure how that could have been averted given the randomized creation of divisions, but perhaps in the future teams could be seeded according to their ladder rank (tho even that's no magic bullet, as the monkis are currently 10th in the ladder, a rank that certainly doesn't reflect their play).
Oh, I'm right there with ya, tho it's worth noting that we're only about halfway thru the season, and what looks like a Group of Death now might be a bit softer by the end of the season...e_i_pi wrote:I don't know what the solution is, and really it's not a -huge- problem, but it is a case where more balance could be introduced to keep the playfield level
Agreed, ID's crossover games against that group tells me it is a very tough group.Incandenza wrote:At this point in the season it's 3.
To settle ties, and to truly test versatility of clans, you could make a further 5 games with random settings (excluding of course speed, freestyle, and anything other than 4p dubs). That would make it an odd number of games, meaning ties wouldn't happen, and would mean that clans have to have skills in more than one area to be competitive to the last.jpcloet wrote:Playoffs seem to be gaining momentum with people. Expand on that one, if we are playing 10 games a week, would you go to say 15 (7+7+1 neutral map) or go (5+5 and if tie?)
I can understand how sets of maps would not be well received. Perhaps a middle-ground could be made... have a pool of maps (say 25-30 for instance), and each week the home team has to choose 5 maps from that pool, and 5 games on anything else. Still, I can't see a great benefit to this. I think it is reasonable for clans to be able to choose any map they want, with the current rule in place of no more than one instance of a map in one week. I think that works well, and forces calsn to diversify, yet still affords clans the option of choosing their favourite maps.jpcloet wrote:The idea of "sets of maps"or standard maps has not been well received
I'll try to show the stats for the groups as a whole in today's update. Group 3 is certainly shaping up to be a real dog-fight.Incandenza wrote:At this point in the season it's 3.
games behind.ahunda wrote:Maybe a stupid question: What does GB in the table stand for ?

Corrected.waseemalim wrote:LOW vs. LOD -- should be 6-3 so far. Not 5-4. Please correct.