TDC - Archive

[stockwellpete]

I appreciate Pete has said he doesn't want a copy and paste successor to the DL (though it is hardly a copyright issue ) but just adopting the simple and uncomplicated existing system of scoring would seem reasonable wouldn't it ?

The reason that I asked whoever comes next not to "pillage wholesale" from the FOG2DL is because the ruleset that I have developed over 7/8 years was already substantially nicked for the WTC without even the courtesy of asking me if I minded. The FOG2DL ratings were similarly used without any prior mention to myself or Anders (hidde). This was extremely rude. I am about 99% certain at the moment that there will not be another FOG2DL season or KO Tournament but, who knows, I might decide to do one more once all the DLC's are out. But, for all intents and purposes, the FOG2DL is now closed. I think I am entitled to that 1% of ambiguity.

If you look at Eric's totally misplaced contribution in the "Farewell" thread, he writes that I was merely "looking after the tournament" and that it "should not end". I find this a bit rich, to be honest. The FOGDL evolved over 16 seasons actually, 4 for the FOG1DL, which ended 5 or 6 years ago, and then 12 for the FOG2DL over the past 4 years. I wasn't looking after the FOGDL, I made the FOGDL (along with important organising contributions from other players, including Turk1964, voskarp, hidde and ianiow, without which it probably would not have survived), although of course, some of the ideas included in the ruleset built on pantherboy's excellent League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's series of tournaments. The less said about the heroically-named Temporary League the better.

Having said all this, I am not saying that new organisers cannot take elements from the FOG2DL ruleset, including the scoring system, and adapt them for their own. Write them in your own words, don't just copy and paste the FOG2DL ruleset. Similarly, new organisers may use the final player ratings (being worked on by Anders at the moment) to help set up their new divisions. But then start new ratings of your own when the first season of the new tournament is completed. Please do not carry on using the FOG2DL ratings system because I am saying that they have finished at the end of Season 12.

I don't think any of this is unreasonable and good luck with whatever comes next. I have already read some very refreshing new ideas from tyronec and you have players like kronenblatt and Karvon who have shown they have what it takes to consistently run high quality campaigns and tournaments. Please have some imagination. Go beyond the FOG2DL, don't just reproduce it. Its format is worn out. Make something better.

[SpeedyCM]

With regard to the desire for smaller numbers/divisions I would suggest a two stage sign up period for the tournament with the initial period (a week or so) having players only able to sign up for one period then in the second stage allow players that have already signed up to one period to sign up to others to fill up the divisions - this would give the opportunity for a wider range of people to participate in at least one period.

[devoncop]

Pete, what on earth would you gain ( or lose) from seeing your scoring system adopted in the new League ?

Nothing. What on earth are you talking about?

Surely if anything it would be a nice legacy for everything you accomplished with the iterations of the FoGDL .... ?

It looks like those who are thinking of taking it on are looking at a more complex (they would say nuanced ) system but I really liked your system so wanted to give it a shout out

The scoring system worked OK, but it can be improved I think. If you look at rugby union in the UK they give 4pts for a win, 2pts for a draw and 0pts for a loss. Then there are bonus points - 1 point if you score 4 tries or more (win draw or lose), 1 point if you lose the match but stay within 7 points of the winning team. The FOG2DL sort of covered the losing bonus point idea with the 3-1 results for 60-50 type matches, but it had nothing for the 4 try situation, which usually rewards sides who win big. So I think there might be scope for a bonus (fifth) point if a player stopped their defeated opponent reaching 10% - so winning match 40-9 would get you 5 points, while winning 40-10 would get you the standard 4 points. Something like that anyway would spice things up a bit and increase excitement at both ends of a table.

[stockwellpete]

Sorry devoncop, I meant to post separately, but I pressed the wrong button at the outset.

[devoncop]

No worries......it did confuse me a bit wondering if I had a doppleganger posting in my name..........though why anyone would want their thoughts to be identified with me is beyond comprehension

All I was getting at was where you said you didn't want mechanics you had developed being adopted as a "cut and paste" into the new League. I just saw such a move as a nice legacy in the context of the scoring system.

The Rugby bonus point system (County cricket in the UK has the same) has some merit but I just think it is added complexity...maybe I am just a bit slow

[ericdoman1]

I appreciate Pete has said he doesn't want a copy and paste successor to the DL (though it is hardly a copyright issue ) but just adopting the simple and uncomplicated existing system of scoring would seem reasonable wouldn't it ?

The reason that I asked whoever comes next not to "pillage wholesale" from the FOG2DL is because the ruleset that I have developed over 7/8 years was already substantially nicked for the WTC without even the courtesy of asking me if I minded. The FOG2DL ratings were similarly used without any prior mention to myself or Anders (hidde). This was extremely rude. I am about 99% certain at the moment that there will not be another FOG2DL season or KO Tournament but, who knows, I might decide to do one more once all the DLC's are out. But, for all intents and purposes, the FOG2DL is now closed. I think I am entitled to that 1% of ambiguity.

If you look at Eric's totally misplaced contribution in the "Farewell" thread, he writes that I was merely "looking after the tournament" and that it "should not end". I find this a bit rich, to be honest. The FOGDL evolved over 16 seasons actually, 4 for the FOG1DL, which ended 5 or 6 years ago, and then 12 for the FOG2DL over the past 4 years. I wasn't looking after the FOGDL, I made the FOGDL (along with important organising contributions from other players, including Turk1964, voskarp, hidde and ianiow, without which it probably would not have survived), although of course, some of the ideas included in the ruleset built on pantherboy's excellent League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's series of tournaments. The less said about the heroically-named Temporary League the better.

Having said all this, I am not saying that new organisers cannot take elements from the FOG2DL ruleset, including the scoring system, and adapt them for their own. Write them in your own words, don't just copy and paste the FOG2DL ruleset. Similarly, new organisers may use the final player ratings (being worked on by Anders at the moment) to help set up their new divisions. But then start new ratings of your own when the first season of the new tournament is completed. Please do not carry on using the FOG2DL ratings system because I am saying that they have finished at the end of Season 12.

I don't think any of this is unreasonable and good luck with whatever comes next. I have already read some very refreshing new ideas from tyronec and you have players like kronenblatt and Karvon who have shown they have what it takes to consistently run high quality campaigns and tournaments. Please have some imagination. Go beyond the FOG2DL, don't just reproduce it. Its format is worn out. Make something better.

Many apologies then Pete but I thought I had asked you, it was way back at the end of July and you hadn't mentioned anything until now so I suspect I had asked and you agreed. Private messages from that time are deleted for me so I have no way of knowing. I had customized about 30% of the rules, keeping the majority that would be familiar to most players. Likewise with reference to the ratings, I can remember mentioning it to you and that I had put together a very basic Slitherine tournament rating as well, which I believe I had suggested you could use for your league. I noticed you hadn't mentioned that I ran one season of the LOEG and co-run the next one. I even found a possible provisional set of LOEG rules, that I may have helped create that has a few similarities to the FOG II DL rules. I also think it would have been a good idea to inform the FOG II community that you were going to end FOG II DL, a few weeks ago. It was a major surprise. Furthermore your comment he writes that I was merely "Thanks very much for looking after the tournament" and that it "Yes it has been the heart and soul of the FOG Gaming Community and should not end", you should have added everything I posted (in bold). I also feel that anything used within the FOG II Community should be shared, that is the idea of a community

[stockwellpete]

All I was getting at was where you said you didn't want mechanics you had developed being adopted as a "cut and paste" into the new League. I just saw such a move as a nice legacy in the context of the scoring system.

Yes, OK. But there are unprincipled grave-diggers about.

The Rugby bonus point system (County cricket in the UK has the same) has some merit but I just think it is added complexity...maybe I am just a bit slow

I watch a bit of rugby and it increases the variety of interesting situations for me. Teams that are being well-beaten still have incentives to score tries and come away with something if the other team eases off towards the end. Someone losing badly in a FOG battle might have an incentive to carry on fighting hard to reach the 10% to deny the bonus point to the winning player. It is all very well coming up with these ideas though, it is another thing to get them accepted by a clear majority of players.

[stockwellpete]

Many apologies then Pete but I thought I had asked you, it was way back at the end of July and you hadn't mentioned anything until now so I suspect I had asked and you agreed. Private messages from that time are deleted for me so I have no way of knowing. I had customized about 30% of the rules, keeping the majority that would be familiar to most players. Likewise with reference to the ratings, I can remember mentioning it to you and that I had put together a very basic Slitherine tournament rating as well, which I believe I had suggested you could use for your league. I noticed you hadn't mentioned that I ran one season of the LOEG and co-run the next one. I even found a possible provisional set of LOEG rules, that I may have helped create that has a few similarities to the FOG II DL rules. I also think it would have been a good idea to inform the FOG II community that you were going to end FOG II DL, a few weeks ago. It was a major surprise. Furthermore your comment he writes that I was merely "Thanks very much for looking after the tournament" and that it "Yes it has been the heart and soul of the FOG Gaming Community and should not end", you should have added everything I posted (in bold). I also feel that anything used within the FOG II Community should be shared, that is the idea of a community

You banned me? Moi? And I am still banned, am I? (Eric has deleted that bit now) I cannot remember any of this apart from there being a big tear up at one point. And you remember every detail? Oh bless. You have obviously taken it very personally. I shouldn't have let you enter the FOG2DL then. I do love to reciprocate.

No, I definitely do not remember you asking for permission to use the FOG2DL rules or ratings for the WTC, although obviously you can read them on the forum and adapt them to suit your own purposes just like anyone else. My memory does still go back as far as July I am (fairly) certain. I do remember talking to XLegione and sending him a link for the old FOG1 Companions Cup, which I think he found was very helpful.

No, it would not have been a good idea to tell people the FOG2DL was ending a few weeks ago. First of all, I have only decided in the last week or so that I am going to stop. It is a full week's work to wrap a tournament up (25 hours+ even after it has finished) and about 2 weeks work to get it started all over again and I have run out of gas. Secondly, to prematurely tell players it was ending ran the risk of increasing the number of players going AWOL, or not completing matches, to the detriment of players who wanted to finish properly. So I decided to wait for the end of the season to make the announcement.

I am not against sharing, Eric. It is just thieving that I object to.

[rexhurley]

My 2 cents...you copied a lot of the Digi League from Panths excellent LOEG as you rightly acknowledge but why be so precious this has beena group effort with lots of surveys etc to get players buy in then a lot of rules were adopted from that. You did NOT originate it NOR any of the core fundamentals plus you DONOT own a copyright so stop ranting that no one can use what is in a public forum. You chose to be the cretaker and did a wonderful job, or in some our opinions you were rather onerous but overall you kept it running out of passion nothing else so you have no ownership what happens in the future as you have chosen to step down.

[stockwellpete]

My 2 cents...you copied a lot of the Digi League from Panths excellent LOEG as you rightly acknowledge but why be so precious this has beena group effort with lots of surveys etc to get players buy in then a lot of rules were adopted from that. You did NOT originate it NOR any of the core fundamentals plus you DONOT own a copyright so stop ranting that no one can use what is in a public forum. You chose to be the cretaker and did a wonderful job, or in some our opinions you were rather onerous but overall you kept it running out of passion nothing else so you have no ownership what happens in the future as you have chosen to step down.

Hmm . . . "precious", "ranting", "onerous". I wouldn't have had to say of any of this if the rules and ratings had not been nicked for the WTC. Take a running jump, Rex.

[stockwellpete]

Btw, I have spoken to tyronec this morning about transitioning from FOG2DL to his new tournament and he will be using the FOG2DL ratings to help set up his new divisions. That horse is definitely running, it seems. A polite request, politely accepted. There's a lesson there.

[snooky51]

Why not a simple pure % scoring system? -> Player A beats Player B 50%-20% -> then the scoring table has Player A scoring 30 points and Player B scoring -30. After all matches played the table should reflect who had the most quality wins and most closely contested losses. I would hope it would cut down on non-engagement in battles because a draw is hardly beneficial unless one predicts an absolute smacking will happen if they come out and fight. In either case if someone sits back and lets a few of their units get picked off, then then could still lose points if they cannot rout any of their opponent's units.

[ericdoman1]

Many apologies then Pete but I thought I had asked you, it was way back at the end of July and you hadn't mentioned anything until now so I suspect I had asked and you agreed. Private messages from that time are deleted for me so I have no way of knowing. I had customized about 30% of the rules, keeping the majority that would be familiar to most players. Likewise with reference to the ratings, I can remember mentioning it to you and that I had put together a very basic Slitherine tournament rating as well, which I believe I had suggested you could use for your league. I noticed you hadn't mentioned that I ran one season of the LOEG and co-run the next one. I even found a possible provisional set of LOEG rules, that I may have helped create that has a few similarities to the FOG II DL rules. I also think it would have been a good idea to inform the FOG II community that you were going to end FOG II DL, a few weeks ago. It was a major surprise. Furthermore your comment he writes that I was merely "Thanks very much for looking after the tournament" and that it "Yes it has been the heart and soul of the FOG Gaming Community and should not end", you should have added everything I posted (in bold). I also feel that anything used within the FOG II Community should be shared, that is the idea of a community

You banned me? Moi? And I am still banned, am I? (Eric has deleted that bit now) I cannot remember any of this apart from there being a big tear up at one point. And you remember every detail? Oh bless. You have obviously taken it very personally. I shouldn't have let you enter the FOG2DL then. I do love to reciprocate.

No, I definitely do not remember you asking for permission to use the FOG2DL rules or ratings for the WTC, although obviously you can read them on the forum and adapt them to suit your own purposes just like anyone else. My memory does still go back as far as July I am (fairly) certain. I do remember talking to XLegione and sending him a link for the old FOG1 Companions Cup, which I think he found was very helpful.

No, it would not have been a good idea to tell people the FOG2DL was ending a few weeks ago. First of all, I have only decided in the last week or so that I am going to stop. It is a full week's work to wrap a tournament up (25 hours+ even after it has finished) and about 2 weeks work to get it started all over again and I have run out of gas. Secondly, to prematurely tell players it was ending ran the risk of increasing the number of players going AWOL, or not completing matches, to the detriment of players who wanted to finish properly. So I decided to wait for the end of the season to make the announcement.

I am not against sharing, Eric. It is just thieving that I object to.

So why bring it up now, it was 4 and a half months ago to me that justifies I had asked. Originally the WTC was XLegione, Triarii and I, they too had helped with amending the rules. If you look at a pm I sent you I had included the posts about the incident. It was quite by chance I found them, as I had been looking for rules used in LOEG, of which I found one.

Anyways let's just leave it be Pete. To have run FOG2DL by yourself for such a long time is truly incredible, I can empathise slightly as I ran LOEG for one season and at the end of that I realised I needed help

[ericdoman1]

This is open to the community about what your preferences would be.

The 5 periods suggested are:-

Classical 700 to 25 BC
Imperial and Early Dark Ages 25 BC to 600 AD
Dark Ages 600 AD to 1000 AD
Early Medieval (no heavy armoured troops) 1000 to 1200 AD
Later Medieval 1200 to 1500 AD

The idea here is not to include a post showing all of the armies allowed but to indicate that all armies and allies can be used within the time period so a slight difference to the DL. A player cannot use the same army twice though. I wanted to include the "Biblical" armies and another suggestion is to include the armies from the Silk Road Modules?

I have thought of 1600, 1600, 1400, 1200 and 1200 point armies respectively. 40W x 32H, 40W x 32H, 36W x 32H, 32W x 32H maps respectively. All - 24 turns, open battles and pot luck terrain. Even toying with 1600, 1500, 1400, 1300, 1200 points respectively 40x32, 38x32, 36x32 34x32 and 32x32 maps. Trying to keep it simple for the first season. 10 players a division, hopefully 3 divisions per period, top 2 are promoted, bottom 2 are relegated or 8 players a division, 1 or 2 promoted and relegated.

Themed event, maybe use some of the Slitherine tournament games, making all X Agricultural. I haven't looked at creating scenarios yet, heck I started creating FOG I scenarios abut 9 years after I had started. I have created a number of FOG I campaigns and converted them into FOG II so possibly the armies included in these historical campaigns may be used in a themed event. Stew101 had come up with a few ideas as well. I do like the mirror match concept now. Not very keen on it in the past.

Although I am thinking of giving it a miss for season 1 and see if players can come forward over the next few months with new scenarios?

There are a few possibilities but I would like it simple at the beginning and see what happens

[ericdoman1]

The simplest scoring system would be using football's 3 pts for a win, 1 pt for a draw and 0 points for a loss

Otherwise use the scores top left, include bonus points, found below, for the difference in scores

15 to 20% = +5%
21 to 25% = +10%
26 to 30% = +15%
35% + = +20%

So a 61 - 51 result = 61-51; 33 - 10 = 43 - 10; 64 - 28 = 84 - 28

I had looked at just using the top left score but occasionally a player who had scored less points (using the DL system) would win.

I do like both tyroneC's and Karvon's scoring system. If a new league is formed, I cannot see a problem using different scoring systems for the different periods.

I have been in contact with Slitherine about continued support for a new league. I will pm a few players about asking if they would help co-run it. They must be committed though and after season 1 other players could take over.

So far harveylh, GaryS and I have agreed. I think we may have 6 periods

The 5 periods I have suggested are:-

Classical 700 to 25 BC
Imperial and Early Dark Ages 25 BC to 600 AD
Dark Ages 600 AD to 1000 AD
Early Medieval (no heavy armoured troops) 1000 to 1200 AD
Later Medieval 1200 to 1500 AD

The idea here is not to include a post showing all of the armies allowed but to indicate that all armies and allies can be used within the time period so a slight difference to the DL. A player cannot use the same army twice though. I wanted to include the "Biblical" armies and another suggestion is to include the armies from the Silk Road Modules?

I have thought of 1600, 1600, 1400, 1200 and 1200 point armies respectively. 40W x 32H, 40W x 32H, 36W x 32H, 32W x 32H maps respectively. All - 24 turns, open battles and pot luck terrain. Even toying with 1600, 1500, 1400, 1300, 1200 points respectively 40x32, 38x32, 36x32 34x32 and 32x32 maps. Trying to keep it simple for the first season. 10 players a division, hopefully 3 divisions per period, top 2 are promoted, bottom 2 are relegated or 8 players a division, 1 or 2 promoted and relegated.

Themed event, maybe use some of the Slitherine tournament games, making all X Agricultural. I haven't looked at creating scenarios yet, heck I started creating FOG I scenarios abut 9 years after I had started. I have created a number of FOG I campaigns and converted them into FOG II so possibly the armies included in these historical campaigns may be used in a themed event. Stew101 had come up with a few ideas as well. I do like the mirror match concept now. Not very keen on it in the past.

Although I am thinking of giving it a miss for season 1 and see if players can come forward over the next few months with new scenarios?

There are a few possibilities but I would like it simple at the beginning and see what happens.

I have opened a new topic of discussion viewtopic.php?f=494&t=107866 this is for army points, map sizes and how many players in divisions.

I have also received this pm form RBS

Hi Eric,

Pete had been planning to start the next FOG2DL season on 1st February, so we are scheduled to release an Ancients update before then. (Between 12th and 27th January)

The next Medieval update will be with the release of the Storm of arrows DLC on 10th February. Unfortunately that will be mid-season, but that cannot be helped.

Cheers,

Richard

[stockwellpete]

So why bring it up now, it was 4 and a half months ago to me that justifies I had asked. Originally the WTC was XLegione, Triarii and I, they too had helped with amending the rules. If you look at a pm I sent you I had included the posts about the incident. It was quite by chance I found them, as I had been looking for rules used in LOEG, of which I found one.

You did not ask. Please don't lie. We didn't bring it up with you at the time as you had already taken the FOG2DL rules and put them on the forum. And we didn't want to spoil the launch of your new tournament either. So we let it go. I wouldn't have said anything even now either, except for your intervention in the "Farewell" thread where you proclaimed that the FOG2DL was not ending and then you started canvassing for new ideas! A cardboard box would have realised that was completely inappropriate.

Actually, originally the WTC was me being bombarded with requests to be the organiser for it, and then an organiser for it, but . . . hello . . . I was already running the FOG2DL. At some point I sent a PM to XLegione with a link for the old Companions Cup, which seemed to me to be very similar in concept to what you were discussing for the WTC. I was supportive from the outset, but could not spare any more time to help organise it. So let's not write that out of the story, shall we?

[ericdoman1]

So why bring it up now, it was 4 and a half months ago to me that justifies I had asked. Originally the WTC was XLegione, Triarii and I, they too had helped with amending the rules. If you look at a pm I sent you I had included the posts about the incident. It was quite by chance I found them, as I had been looking for rules used in LOEG, of which I found one.

You did not ask. Please don't lie. We didn't bring it up with you at the time as you had already taken the FOG2DL rules and put them on the forum. And we didn't want to spoil the launch of your new tournament either. So we let it go. I wouldn't have said anything even now either, except for your intervention in the "Farewell" thread where you proclaimed that the FOG2DL was not ending and then you started canvassing for new ideas! A cardboard box would have realised that was completely inappropriate.

Actually, originally the WTC was me being bombarded with requests to be the organiser for it, and then an organiser for it, but . . . hello . . . I was already running the FOG2DL. At some point I sent a PM to XLegione with a link for the old Companions Cup, which seemed to me to be very similar in concept to what you were discussing for the WTC. I was supportive from the outset, but could not spare any more time to help organise it. So let's not write that out of the story, shall we?

I simply cannot remember if you agreed so I am not lying and it was 6 months ago.

XLegione
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 469
Joined: 28 Nov 2017 19:54
Location: Italy
Contact: Contact XLegione
World team Championship (WTC)
Post by XLegione » 07 Jun 2021 20:40

Dear gamers this post to announce a special event planned for September 2021, World Team Championship (WTC).
Below you find the content and how will be organised the event.

Teams from across the world will take part
UK and possibly Americas will be represented by two or three teams due to the high presence of players

From 2 to 4 qualification groups
Groups of of 4 teams playing each other in a single round-robin system
The first 2 teams for each group proceed to the knock-out phase that culminates in the final match

In case of a high subscription of players, a second and third from each nation may be admitted
8 to 16 national teams participate
each team is composed by 4 players + 1 or 2 reserves
each player is assigned to a specific period
Biblical, Classical, Early Middle Ages, Medieval

Possibility for the players to choose their army from the list for each period
Players from different teams can play with the same army

WTC will use the Digital League rules and scoring
WTC is getting the approval from Slitherine

Estimated start date of the WTC will be September 2021

I do remember us discussing rankings but once more I cannot remember if we agreed upon that. Again Triarii and XLegione were involved as well. As for my farewell thingy, I am not a very well person (violins:)) and am house bound (yes a district nurse come to my home for injections) probably means my social skills are not very good so apologies if I have offended you, it was not intentional. Which is why I do not wish to run anything by myself and would need some help.

As for us bombarding you with requests to be an organiser for the WTC, I think that's a bit extreme. I believe we asked for your support and you agreed. I certainly wouldn't have asked you, as I knew you had too much to do. I know XLegione had asked you but not sure how many times.

So once more just leave it be and move on.

[Flockaveli]

Perhaps we could argue about the new league instead of fighting over the old? I came late to the game and was never in the DL but am excited to participate in what's next.

My 2 cents on the scoring system is that as for a draw being worth 1 point in football, there is a difference in that often FOG draws are both players agreeing not to play because the terrain is unfavorable. I dislike the idea of someone getting a point when they didn't play the match.

I would prefer a modified Karvon's system (which i think is the simplest to adjudicate) where a win is 6, and everything else is 0, or 1 or 2 if the loser/drawer inflict 20% or 40% losses. This could incentivize someone to play an unfavorable map rather than draw if the 1 or 2 points could be meaningful, even if they will ultimately lose. It wouldn't in all cases, but moreso than if both draws and losses were 0. It also rewards draws that occur when players fight it out and nobody can secure the victory, while not rewarding mutually agreed draws where nobody plays.

I personally wouldn't give the winner an extra +20% point because then a 60% win gets 7 points and a 40% win gets 6. It feels fundamentally off to me to have a 60-59 bloodbath worth more than a 40-0 decisive victory.

At least how I see it, seems to me that the ideal win is 40-0. With an extra point for reaching 60, later in the season, if a contender is playing someone mathematically eliminated from contention, it will objectively be in the contender's interest to try and engineer a 60% win by intentionally playing poorly and keeping it closer. All wins being 6 points means it will always be in your interest to try to win as decisively as possible if nothing else to save time and for your own ego.

[carpenkm]

As a long time wargamer, this was my first foray into online person vs person matches. And how fantastic it has been! I really appreciate how much effort it has been for Pete and others to run the league (and really appreciate it) and I have no history with the discussions. Let's not loose sight of what has been achieved and how much pleasure it has given to so many of us. If we can keep a global league going it would be great, but if there are several leagues then that's good too. People can choose which leagues to join and which to miss. Although i would miss fighting to the last last man with Random 27 season after season if i couldn't do that again !!! If we have multiple leagues then what about a knock out champions league at the end of each season?

From my perspective as a mid-ranking player (being kind!!!):
I like the idea of a global league even if that means games will take a little longer due to time differences
I like Tyronec's mirror match league with home and away - very good and a lot fun
I like the idea of bonus points - i always hate loosing 60 -49 and getting nothing. How about 4 pts for a win with bonus points at 20% and 40% for both winners and losers (2 pts for a draw with bonus points)
I am not convinced about % loss scoring -looking in the tournaments i regularly see people getting 100 + points (how?)i think it might encourage "gamey" play, which i think just frustrates players (it does me!). Need to encourage positive play!
I like clarity over the map re-roll rules - one each on the first turn - no arguments
Dont forget about the rest of us average players who just want a bit of edge to our matches, a bit of chat and mostly the opportunity to meet some new players and play this great game!

[stockwellpete]

Another of the ideas that I had for scoring in the DL that never went further than the drawing board was this . . .

Winner of match gets 5 points.
Loser of match gets 1 point if inflicting 15% or more damage on winner, 2 points if inflicting 30% and 3 points if inflicting 45%.

To give some examples . . .
A 40-10 win would be scored 5-0
A 42-17 win would be scored 5-1
A 56-30 win would be scored 5-2
A 60-46 win would be scored 5-3

You could consider giving +1 winning bonus point if the losing player did not reach 10% e.g. 42-8 would be scored 6-0.

Note: giving 5 points for a win and keeping 2 points for a score-draw where a player had inflicted 25% damage on an opponent (0 points for inflicting less than 25% in a drawn game) further reduces the value of a draw against the win.

I think scoring systems are more powerful if they set players incremental targets. So you might be a mid-table player playing someone at the top and you might be expecting to get beaten, but can you get to 10% to deny the bonus point? Can you then get to 15% to get a point for yourself? What about 30%? And so on.