|
Post by punkska on Oct 29, 2017 12:41:56 GMT 1
Half a bug, half a game improvement kinda thing.
Do any of the new guys running the site have insight into how teams are assigned to divisions? If you look at Division 4 it's really uneven. 4:8 has no active teams, 4:7 just one, 4:6 - 1.5?, the others are more full.
This is obviously unfair for prize money/competition, etc. so wondering if there's any plan to try to improve the formula? (or manually assign teams to divisions at the end of seasons instead?)
|
|
|
Post by Poekie on Oct 30, 2017 17:03:04 GMT 1
Why do you think the assignment is uneven? Did you consider that some new managers stop playing?
|
|
|
Post by ElGringo on Oct 30, 2017 21:54:26 GMT 1
Half a bug, half a game improvement kinda thing. Do any of the new guys running the site have insight into how teams are assigned to divisions? If you look at Division 4 it's really uneven. 4:8 has no active teams, 4:7 just one, 4:6 - 1.5?, the others are more full. This is obviously unfair for prize money/competition, etc. so wondering if there's any plan to try to improve the formula? (or manually assign teams to divisions at the end of seasons instead?) Every season we manually add the teams in div 4 and div 5. In div 5 we only open some divisions from 1 to 5 and if the number of new manager grow we open the others division by division. Some new manager keep playin but the majority stop so we cannot predict whitch division will have more active managers. If you look to 4.8 any of the teams there played this season because managers left the game, but we cannot predict who will stop playing. We already consider to close div 5 but in unfair for new teams.
|
|
|
Post by JoeLag on Nov 15, 2017 8:28:57 GMT 1
By the way (actually being in the wrong forum for a question ;-)
How are the remaining slots for promotion filled? If there is no team promoting from 4.8 (because it's all bots) there are at least 2 slots more for entering div 3. Is it filled by teams that technically have demoted from div 3 or is it filled with the 3rd placed of div 4?
Actually I'm asking because I only started playing in the middle of this season again and I only made it to 3rd in div 4 so far (and there's now way to change it in the last 2 weeks).
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on Nov 15, 2017 11:38:16 GMT 1
We dont interfere with promotions to division 3, so there will be some extra BOT-teams in 3rd.
Only in 4th (where we want to keep all the human teams that ended up in 4th after promotion/relegation together with the remaining human teams with a ranking still in 5th)
|
|
|
Post by naspa on Nov 26, 2017 16:10:38 GMT 1
It's years like uneven -I raised my hand in the past, but sort of accept it now (as for the higher division is is not so much a matter of luck). Is there an algorithm now active that makes the distribution or is it manual labor? (I suspected a algorithm based on team value -but that doesn't cover the bill.) Either option can be improved quite easily tough.
|
|
|
Post by dustin on Nov 26, 2017 19:05:58 GMT 1
Last years all active teams at the end of the season were going to division 4. Also that ones who were new for a while.
So the best ones of division 5 came together, the second ones came together and so on. By the start in division 4 the teams were quiet egual in each division which came from division 5. But as known a lot stopped, certainly the ones which played short.
It is not total fair, I know, but I think this is the best way.
|
|
|
Post by naspa on Nov 26, 2017 19:21:57 GMT 1
I do not really know what happend in 3-5 division. But in the old days, many times, strong teams promoted to the same division.
You can look at it in different ways. The division gets more interesting, if a single strong team dominates a division than it will get worse and worse.
But on the other hand, the battle for second place might be a good challenge for the lesser teams. With 2-3 dominating teams, some of the other teams might not have chance to learn from their mistakes. They just do not survive.
|
|
|
Post by Stinus1986 on Dec 8, 2017 15:26:35 GMT 1
Last years all active teams at the end of the season were going to division 4. Also that ones who were new for a while. So the best ones of division 5 came together, the second ones came together and so on. By the start in division 4 the teams were quiet egual in each division which came from division 5. But as known a lot stopped, certainly the ones which played short. It is not total fair, I know, but I think this is the best way. Well I guass this is what happend again for this season. Div 4:4 has 6 champions from div 5, with cyclist that can already compete in div 3. Why aren't they distributed evenly? I really do not understand the logic behind it. I would think the goal is to have the best teams promote after every season and not the teams that were "lucky" to be in an easier division. Now some teams which finished second last season, will be in div 3 before the team they lost from in div 5. This only creates frustration for the managers. You can perfectly create balanced divisions, which are challanging for all managers.
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on Dec 9, 2017 15:43:02 GMT 1
I used a mix of ranking and date created this time after I created 3 groups of teams (those who were already in 4th (or 3rd), new teams in 4th and teams who where in 5th but already participated in races)
I believe this system is an (small) improvement on that used previously but agree that it is still far from perfect. The idea is to give newer teams an extra season where they can compete to teams that are more or less similar in strength.
I have to disagree that it is easy to create a fair and balanced system for the reassignement of the divisions. The small amount of active teams at the end of last season in some 4th division seems to prove that.
|
|
|
Post by naspa on Dec 10, 2017 11:23:22 GMT 1
Is it not better to use a transparant scheme so everybody knows what will happen? E.g. champion from 4:1 and champion of 4:2 will go to 3:1 together withe the number 2's of 4:5 and 4:6, etc.? Of course one can still have bad luck, but at least you avoid having 4-5 of the best promoted teams in one division many times also meeting again the same number twos! One can battle against teams promoted from other divisions.
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on Dec 10, 2017 11:52:20 GMT 1
The highest 3 levels always have the same automatic random system, which I think we should keep.
Only 4th and 5th are managed because we want the bottom division to be all about discovering the game and building a team. Therefor I believe having those who did not automatically promote to 4th together is a good system.
|
|
|
Post by Stinus1986 on Dec 12, 2017 15:12:10 GMT 1
Only 4th and 5th are managed because we want the bottom division to be all about discovering the game and building a team. Therefor I believe having those who did not automatically promote to 4th together is a good system. Ok, but is this really the best solution for these teams? Doesn't this result in other teams quitting which had more potential? For example, previous season we had a team in our league which started playing before me. He didn't bought additional cyclist and hired a trainer with 2 on every skill. So naturally he had no chance of winning a race and finished last of the non-bot teams. Now he is in division 4 with only 1 real active team in his league. He is however still placed 3th behind a bot team at the moment , but makes a valuable chance to go to div 3 next season. Is it beneficial to have this team in div 3? Will he not just quite next season, when he notices his team will never be good because of his mistakes at the start? The current system punishes the managers who did the effort to create a good team from the beginning. This results in frustration and a higher change that these managers will quite, who probably had more potential to play this game for a longer time.
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on Dec 14, 2017 13:06:34 GMT 1
So the problem is not division assignment (may I remind you that if we don't rearrange 4th you would end up with teams who were already 4th plus those who demoted from 3th, this would mean you would end up in a much stronger division (theoretically atleast)) , but that some teams that were forced to go to 4th can promote to 3rd to early ?
Maybe we should have a look at that indeed, but who do we promote instead of those teams ?
|
|
|
Post by Ab Normaal on Dec 14, 2017 13:18:13 GMT 1
Only 4th and 5th are managed because we want the bottom division to be all about discovering the game and building a team. Therefor I believe having those who did not automatically promote to 4th together is a good system. Ok, but is this really the best solution for these teams? Doesn't this result in other teams quitting which had more potential? For example, previous season we had a team in our league which started playing before me. He didn't bought additional cyclist and hired a trainer with 2 on every skill. So naturally he had no chance of winning a race and finished last of the non-bot teams. Now he is in division 4 with only 1 real active team in his league. He is however still placed 3th behind a bot team at the moment , but makes a valuable chance to go to div 3 next season. Is it beneficial to have this team in div 3? Will he not just quite next season, when he notices his team will never be good because of his mistakes at the start? The current system punishes the managers who did the effort to create a good team from the beginning. This results in frustration and a higher change that these managers will quite, who probably had more potential to play this game for a longer time. That is something we have tried a few things on. Prevent new managers from making capital mistakes. We have sent e-mails when registering, we have had experienced managers messaging these new players to offer help. But they hardly got answer back. Managers who hire a trainer with a skill of 2 are doomed if they don't change that. Not be promoted doesn't help on that one.
|
|