A New Fortress League

[Word]

We are interested in a fresh start, it's no secret that a lot of teamwork seems to be stagnated or got worse in the months that followed the FPL. Many teams are interested in this, especially those who are currently on the downswing.
There are some things we have to organize better; we need to have clear guidelines for forfeits and such, but of course we need teams that don't drop out after the first small problem occurs. Some clans didn't have the chance to take part there so they don't know all the 'drama' resulting from it. I hope that these clans realize that losing some matches is the price they have to pay in order to get better. This league depends on every team's commitment.

Here's the old page. Can we use this site again (that question is mainly directed at Concord because he's the one that started it - i don't know if the structure of the site was one of the reasons that people didn't like the FPL)?

Each month, each team is responsible for completing two matches. if the matches are not played, both teams are penalized. these matches can be played at anytime but must be in a FPL server. The server is only used for FPL, its locked down other times. The teams must notify league admins before the match is played, that it is being played. "Before" could mean irc 3 minutes beforehand, the league admin then unlocks the server for play. The server is only available for matches because there will be a full ladder of player statistics (ctwf style). Matches are 20 minute time limit, 7v7.

Perhaps we can even use a script to get the scores updated automatically, that's what Flex suggested last time. I don't know about the current state of this, i'll try to get more info. I think we should simplify the sign up and challenge process, and we need more transparent rules for server mods and admins so they don't mess everything up whenever they interfere (and of course, we will need servers). At the same time we have to ensure that all players have read and agreed on the rules.
IMO we need another rule for the starting time so that nobody complains afterwards that he hasn't been notified properly and didn't take the match seriously because of that.
Here's the old cfg:
http://crazy-tronners.com/resource/Conc ... ss/fpl.cfg

And I like what PsYkO proposed:

Some other options (lets call to it a vote since it is the most important question)
...
My personal favorite... ONE MATCH @ 30 min, with the chat time @ 0. Alternates between 1 match and 2 matches per month.

So Speeders will play 1 match in sept, 2 matches in oct, 1 match in november, 2 matches in december. If you had 7 teams, everyone would play everyone ONE time and then seeds would be handed out.

Speeders are highest so they have a bye first round. Then from there work it like an 8 team bracket until the final (all of these matches can be played within one month...so a team tentatively will play 3 matches...The finals would be on a scheduled date, hopefully the last sunday in the month. That way the first and second round would not interfere with the ladle.

Total time = 5 months. Possibility of two seasons/year with a break of 1 month in between each season

We didn't need a lot of servers last time, 2 for each continent should be enough. Tourneys like the Fort Cup or the WST are a nice diversion, but i doubt they ever help anyone of us to win a Ladle. We could also think about making the seeds of the Ladle dependent on the League's result so that the teams have a true benefit from their efforts.

[INW]

I never participated in the previous league but this is something I would like to try.

I will be able to donate a USA Dedicated server for this if 1 is needed.

[Titanoboa]

I like the idea, and basically everything (I skimmed through it for now)
except this:

We could also think about making the seeds of the Ladle dependent on the League's result so that the teams have a true benefit from their efforts.

It takes too much effort and extra rules to make it balanced and fully functional. We don't want extra rules, and we don't want to mess up the current ladle seeding which works fine. Simpler is better.


I like the idea as a whole though.

[Hoax]

This needs the right balance of structure & flexibility
Build it & they will come

[Gonzap]

gogogo i'm ready for a second try

[Concord]

I'm interested in trying league play again, as well.

Here are my thoughts on the whole thing.

The league needs people involved in it whose only interest is the success of the league, and not the team. A little hierarchy helps, a bit of systemization, one might recall that the FPL had no hierarchy at all. That person needs to be invested in the success of the league, the league needs to be a self-promoter, these things can "run themselves," just not as well, and without a direction.
The direction of this league should be the following: 1.) more competitive matches with meaning 2.) more meaningful competition 3.) more accessible to the spectator.

The first I think is critical to the continued development of fortress teams. Something that people rarely talk about is that good teams primarily play each other, simply because they always end up meeting in later Ladle rounds. Every Ladle, half of the teams play one round. That's just a result of the tournament format. In a game that is so participation-based, so player-based this strikes me as odd. Why should players accept the possibility of having one meaningful match a month.

The second is important for keeping things interesting. Currently a few different teams conquer and reconquer the same title every month. With these armies marching back and forth over the same piece of land, that land becomes something no longer worth fighting for. That's the Ladle, winning is no longer so meaningful (winning back-to-back-to-back is, though). So we need something that is more meaningful. We need all the teams that have a stake in winning- and that ought to be all the teams, period- to compete against each other, and more than once. This is league play.

The third is something that few seem to be talking about anymore, but is quite important. Accessibility to the spectator is how the game grows. Think of how we teach players to play fortress in the first place. We ask them to watch a couple rounds. Most players witness a Ladle before playing in one. But witnessing a Ladle is not all that rewarding. It just happens, the storylines are short, there is no time between rounds for someone to make entertainment out of it. Now, the players need not do more in terms of "making entertainment," in the end they are the entertainment, they play the game, don't they? But for as a spectator, you need an access point, you need a storyline worth following. The fortress players who don't play in Ladles are rarely involving themselves in the Ladle, rather they are being asked to join in, i.e. being recruited. We ought to try, and by we I mean the league administrators, to turn this on its head. Spectators ought to be the one's taking the act of getting involved, rather than being reached out to.

That third point is something most players don't really care about, and that's ok. But is a benefit of a league.

Anyway, on format. The logistics must be such that the league is not too long, but not too much of a time commitment. Ideally we want 100% attendance. The key is figure how to make that happen. Here's an idea of mine.

•Three divisions; Old World/Europe/Eastern, New World/Americas/Western, and Open. Divisions should significantly reduce some of the time-zone conflicts, because divisional games concern two or three time-zones, rather than eight. They also make server allocation easier. Open teams have no restrictions, for those players who are used to making compromises on time zones or teams that are spread across continents and want to play together (though it seems few teams have heavy involvement from different continents).
•The league in its entirety would be played over 12 weeks. These would become Ladle-less months.
•1 Divisional game every other wednesday/thursday night. Open division plays Sunday at standard time.
•1 Divisional game every other sunday. 1 non-divisional game that same day.

This makes for
I attached a sample calendar below (just example of weekly basis, ignore actual dates).

Here's a sample schedule.
Week 1: 1 Thursday or Saturday match
Week 2: nothing
Week 3: 2 Sunday matches
Week 4: 1 Thursday/Saturday match
Week 5: nothing
Week 6: 2 Sunday matches
Week 7: 1 Thursday/Saturday match
Week 8: nothing
Week 9: 2 Sunday matches
Week 10: 1 Thursday/Saturday match
Week 11: 2 Sunday matches
Week 12: Playoffs

That makes for 8 divisional games and 4 non-divisional games. Ideally, that's divisions of 5 teams, for 15 teams total.

•Playoffs would occur on the last sunday of the two month period. Each division winner (3 of them) gets a seed based on record.
•A wild card is the non-division winner with best record. Tie breaker is non-divisional record.

Regular season matches would be two matches period. 6v6. Standard settings. 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss. Post-season would be best of 3, as usual.

Thoughts? Is it too much? There's a 10/11 day break between games, that felt like a good compromise between every weekend, which is tough, and every other, which makes for a long season during which people lose interest. I also think roster caps of 7-9 is a must.

[Word]

thanks for your support Concord

2 things:
1. When you say 'teams' and "divisions" you're still talking about clans' teams and teams like unk, right?
I got confused because of this part:

Three divisions; Old World/Europe/Eastern, New World/Americas/Western, and Open.

which reminds me of the Fort Cup/the US vs EU thing...
Could you please care to explain that once more?


2. The Open part could cause problems, i think it would need at least two or three core players who fullfill a teamleader's job sufficiently and make sure their team is organized enough. (edit: what i say here is dumb, please read Concord's reply below and don't quote this )

[Concord]

something else that I think would be fun, but not as important, would be a 4v4 league.

edit: @word

Divisions are groupings of teams. For example, CT, TU, PRU, DS, and SP might be in a division. The Eastern and Western divisions would be based on continent, so that timing is a bit easier.

The Open division is not open teams, it is just without geographic specialization. For example if a team had 3 europeans and 3 americans, it might choose to play in open division.

[Word]

ah, thank you for the explication

[Desolate]

These would become Ladle-less months.

This can work around ladle, not other way around.

[syllabear]

what is a non divisional match? If it doesn't count, why bother playing it?

also, you say "1 Divisional game every other wednesday/thursday night. Open division plays Sunday at standard time."

But then later you say "Week x: 1 Thursday or Saturday match". Where does saturday come in to all of this?

How would clans/teams be assorted into divsions? I'd probably be for a USA division for Tu, but (and no offence) a USA division would probably be easier, if it was filled with ID, Una, CD and oracle than an EU division with CT, SP, PRU, DS, R and UNK.

Then again, most of the EU clans I've listed are mixed anyway, so hows that gonna work?

Other than that, if this went along, definately would get my support.

[ppotter]

I think it'd have more longevity if it was less structured, it's hard for teams to commit to a match at a specific time multiple times per month/week.

[Concord]

what is a non divisional match? If it doesn't count, why bother playing it?

It counts, teams have both a divisional and non-divisional record. Many US sports have this, I understand it is absent from the various football (soccer) leagues of Europe. Both records count, the divisional record is used as a tiebreaker for divisional champions, and games are played against non-divisional teams in order not to punish strong teams for being in strong divisions or to reward weak teams for being in weak divisions.

also, you say "1 Divisional game every other wednesday/thursday night. Open division plays Sunday at standard time."

But then later you say "Week x: 1 Thursday or Saturday match". Where does saturday come in to all of this?

My mistake. I meant the saturday&sunday to be the same day, it doesn't really matter which, it's all just provisional.

How would clans/teams be assorted into divsions? I'd probably be for a USA division for Tu, but (and no offence) a USA division would probably be easier, if it was filled with ID, Una, CD and oracle than an EU division with CT, SP, PRU, DS, R and UNK.

I don't know how. I also wouldn't necessarily lock teams into their clans, teams might choose to form along non-clan lines for this specific competition. Especially if running parallel to Ladle.

Then again, most of the EU clans I've listed are mixed anyway, so hows that gonna work?

In a case like R (I'll speak for my own, here) the team could choose to play in the Open division, or to play in the European division and sacrifice the possibility of myself, Poke and free kill playing on it's roster. We might then play elsewhere. But with that many conflicts, the Open division may be the better choice. In another hypothetical, SP might choose to do a European squad without insa, and an Open squad with him, or something.

My main apprehension is the timing of matches on weeknights. How do people feel about that?

[Desolate]

The division idea you posted makes sense now, I never really understood you meant it in that sort of way. It does seem like a pretty good idea, but I doubt the matches on weekdays will work outside of all european or all american teams against each other.

[INW]

USA division would probably be easier, if it was filled with ID, Una, CD and oracle than an EU division with CT, SP, PRU, DS, R and UNK.

You said to not take offense but you can't put Oracle in the same group as ID UNA and CD and say it sucks
I can see however that ID UNA and CD are extremely easy clans but Oracle...really? We gunna win ha next ladle!

<3