LDX
04-24-2015, 02:14 AM
Hey there.
I'll try to be as short as possible, as the brainstorm tonight was hard on the mind. My playgroup wants to have a Magic League this summer, Legacy format. However, we're facing one problem: we have no idea how many people will show up to our regular weekly events. Sometimes, we could be 6-7, some other times (mostly for tournaments), 12-13. We need a system to find a balance between win ratio & skill vs participation.
We are trying to build around this issue. So far, we thought of this.
June
5, weekly event
12, weekly event
19, weekly event
26, first tournament
July
3, weekly event
10, weekly event
17, weekly event
24, weekly event
31, second tournament
August
7, weekly event
14, third tournament
Total of 8 weekly events and 3 tournaments. To win the league, you have to accumulate as many points as possible until a winner shows up. Weekly events and tournaments aren't submitted to the same rule. They give different amount of points all together. We want players to hopefully show at both events.
That means, a player winning all 3 tournaments shouldn't be able to win the league right away, but should have a very strong advance that only a few match in a weekly event could transform into a win.
On the opposite, a ''grinder'' in the weekly, having mixed results and lacking a few points, should show at a tournament because winning it could be a huge boost, enough for him or her to win the grand prize. This would help prevent a player dropping the league when he or she has no chances of coming back in the race.
With that settled, the first issue is finding the right amount of points for each event.*However, to even think of a solution for that, we must fix the*second issue: what kind of match making to use in the weekly events.*We thought of many:
Round Robin would be great as we could simply give points for every wins, but could cause some issue if someone had to leave early and a player was taking too long. A scenario in which a single player took one hour per match and had to play 7 matches would cause a line of player waiting. Some other might have to leave, and it would be unfair for them not to have a chance to face this player, thus making sure they get 0 points. I mean, someone could just slow the game on purpose. Of course, we could have a time limit, but then, the same thing happens after the delay. Having a judge telling a friend to hurry seems a bit harsh too, but I it was the best solution we had. We thought about draws, but I don't see how it would help anything. Even if you gave one point for a draw game, the same comment ''it's unfair that I only get one point, he slowed the game down so I couldn't win!'' would rise.*
Swiss pairing doesn't seem to work with less than 17 players, or so that's what I understood. I could be wrong. But even if it can run with 7- players, we don't want a top 8 round in our weeklies, we just want to play some matches, accumulate points, and move on. Someone would have to show me how it could works.
Random Single/Double elimination would just feel too much as a tournament event, and we want players to play all the rounds in a weekly.*
In other words, we were stuck with Round Robin by default. We had that system written as a draft, and need corrections on it.
2 points per match won in a weekly, so we can estimate between 8 to 18 maximum points for a single night.*
0 points per loss
0 points per incompleted match
no draws*
Tournaments are an other thing, but we ran some with success before. We had to use byes sometimes and had no issues with them. Always worked in double elimination. We could just add a flat amount of points depending on the standings:
First tournament
15, 10, 5
Second tournament
20, 10, 5
Third tournament*
30, 15, 10
Someone suggested that these numbers should be dynamic. Winning a 20 players tournament should be more prestigious than a 8 players one. He had on his mind, let's say, 5, 10 and 15 points for the first place of each tournaments, +2 per player participating. I haven't done the math and I need an external advice on such a system.
We know at some points we'll have to displease somebody but we want to have clear rules from the start so everyone knows what they're jumping into.
Oh my. Sorry, it's getting late, and I might as well stop now as it's getting really confusing. Has anyone run such a league before? What rules were you using, what was the matchmaking system? We're open to all criticism.
Thanks a bunch!!!
I'll try to be as short as possible, as the brainstorm tonight was hard on the mind. My playgroup wants to have a Magic League this summer, Legacy format. However, we're facing one problem: we have no idea how many people will show up to our regular weekly events. Sometimes, we could be 6-7, some other times (mostly for tournaments), 12-13. We need a system to find a balance between win ratio & skill vs participation.
We are trying to build around this issue. So far, we thought of this.
June
5, weekly event
12, weekly event
19, weekly event
26, first tournament
July
3, weekly event
10, weekly event
17, weekly event
24, weekly event
31, second tournament
August
7, weekly event
14, third tournament
Total of 8 weekly events and 3 tournaments. To win the league, you have to accumulate as many points as possible until a winner shows up. Weekly events and tournaments aren't submitted to the same rule. They give different amount of points all together. We want players to hopefully show at both events.
That means, a player winning all 3 tournaments shouldn't be able to win the league right away, but should have a very strong advance that only a few match in a weekly event could transform into a win.
On the opposite, a ''grinder'' in the weekly, having mixed results and lacking a few points, should show at a tournament because winning it could be a huge boost, enough for him or her to win the grand prize. This would help prevent a player dropping the league when he or she has no chances of coming back in the race.
With that settled, the first issue is finding the right amount of points for each event.*However, to even think of a solution for that, we must fix the*second issue: what kind of match making to use in the weekly events.*We thought of many:
Round Robin would be great as we could simply give points for every wins, but could cause some issue if someone had to leave early and a player was taking too long. A scenario in which a single player took one hour per match and had to play 7 matches would cause a line of player waiting. Some other might have to leave, and it would be unfair for them not to have a chance to face this player, thus making sure they get 0 points. I mean, someone could just slow the game on purpose. Of course, we could have a time limit, but then, the same thing happens after the delay. Having a judge telling a friend to hurry seems a bit harsh too, but I it was the best solution we had. We thought about draws, but I don't see how it would help anything. Even if you gave one point for a draw game, the same comment ''it's unfair that I only get one point, he slowed the game down so I couldn't win!'' would rise.*
Swiss pairing doesn't seem to work with less than 17 players, or so that's what I understood. I could be wrong. But even if it can run with 7- players, we don't want a top 8 round in our weeklies, we just want to play some matches, accumulate points, and move on. Someone would have to show me how it could works.
Random Single/Double elimination would just feel too much as a tournament event, and we want players to play all the rounds in a weekly.*
In other words, we were stuck with Round Robin by default. We had that system written as a draft, and need corrections on it.
2 points per match won in a weekly, so we can estimate between 8 to 18 maximum points for a single night.*
0 points per loss
0 points per incompleted match
no draws*
Tournaments are an other thing, but we ran some with success before. We had to use byes sometimes and had no issues with them. Always worked in double elimination. We could just add a flat amount of points depending on the standings:
First tournament
15, 10, 5
Second tournament
20, 10, 5
Third tournament*
30, 15, 10
Someone suggested that these numbers should be dynamic. Winning a 20 players tournament should be more prestigious than a 8 players one. He had on his mind, let's say, 5, 10 and 15 points for the first place of each tournaments, +2 per player participating. I haven't done the math and I need an external advice on such a system.
We know at some points we'll have to displease somebody but we want to have clear rules from the start so everyone knows what they're jumping into.
Oh my. Sorry, it's getting late, and I might as well stop now as it's getting really confusing. Has anyone run such a league before? What rules were you using, what was the matchmaking system? We're open to all criticism.
Thanks a bunch!!!