S36 Round 13 Schedule (Reg. Season end)

[Caerbannog]

3pm:

BYE Round - BYE Round
Dropships - Backarrow -- 1293880
The Dark - Sterling -- 1293881
BYE Round - Symphony -- 1293882

4pm:
Assassins - Llamas -- 1293883
Outlaws - Critical Mass -- 1293884
Starfire Elite - Cosmic Rift -- 1293885

Adjusted standings (using play-off tiebreakers and with converted wins, K/D from all the dissolved squads still not in):
1 Assassins 11-1 84 0.465 (def. Outlaws 7-6)
2 OUTLAWS 11-1 90 0.449
^---- BYE into semis ---^
3 sterling 10-2 56 0.455
4 The Dark 9-3 66 0.451 (def. Critical Mass 12-5)
5 Critical Mass 9-3 58 0.469
6 Cosmic Rift 7-5 18 0.503 ( def. Backarrow 7-6, def. Llamas 6-5: Total 2/0 +2)
^---- PRO ----^
7 Backarrow 7-5 53 0.506 (12-0 over WTF?, def. Llamas 12-6, lost vs. CRift 7-6: Total 1/1+5)
8 Llamas 7-5 45 0.44 (lost vs. Backarrow 12-6, lost vs. CRift 6-5: Total 0/2 -7)
9 Symphony 4-8 -31 0.477 (def. SFE 12-6)
10 StarFire Elite 4-8 -32 0.457
11 Dropships 3-9 -48 0.491
^---- AML ----^

12 WTF? 1-6 -51 0.581
13 Slopships 1-7 -67 0.443
14 BYE Round 0-19 -228 0.537

So the top 2 squads will be Assassins and Outlaws. Outlaws can only finish #1 if they win while Assassins lose.
The next 4 squads will be Sterling, The Dark, Critical Mass and one of the 7-5 squads. Llamas can still make PRO if both Backarrow and Cosmic Rift lose.
The squads in the 3-6 range are playing for seedings into quarters:

"Playoff games are best of 1, up to semi-"finals". With 6 squads, the top two teams get a BYE in Pro while #3 plays #6 and #4 plays #5. #1 seed gets to choose which match-up they want their opponents from. Same goes for AML, varied to match in numbers."

EDIT NOTE: That best of 1 quarter-final round will be replaced by GAME 1 of a best-of-3 Quarter-Finals series on the 4th of January.


..hmm.. Also if those games were all played at 3pm we could play the first games of semis at 4. Which means we'd be finished the weekend before superbowl. Not the superbowl weekend or the week after. But that would be rather silly.

[Street]

(12-15-2014, 05:16 PM)Caerbannog Wrote:  NOTE: That best of 1 quarter-final round will be played on the 4th of January.

..hmm.. Also if those games were all played at 3pm we could play the first games of semis at 4. Which means we'd be finished the weekend before superbowl. Not the superbowl weekend or the week after. But that would be rather silly.

That's a good idea. Let's start the semis on Jan 4th as well.

[Peeking Duck?]

(12-15-2014, 05:16 PM)Caerbannog Wrote:  Adjusted standings (using play-off tiebreakers and with converted wins, K/D from all the dissolved squads still not in):

1 Assassins 11-1 84 0.465 (def. Outlaws 7-6)
2 OUTLAWS 11-1 90 0.449
^---- BYE into semis ---^
3 sterling 10-2 56 0.455
4 The Dark 9-3 66 0.451 (def. Critical Mass 12-5)
5 Critical Mass 9-3 58 0.469
6 Cosmic Rift 7-5 18 0.503 ( def. Backarrow 7-6, def. Llamas 6-5: Total 2/0 +2)

^---- PRO ----^

7 Backarrow 7-5 53 0.506 (12-0 over WTF?, def. Llamas 12-6, lost vs. CRift 7-6: Total 1/1+5)
8 Llamas 7-5 45 0.44 (lost vs. Backarrow 12-6, lost vs. CRift 6-5: Total 0/2 -7)
9 Symphony 4-8 -31 0.477 (def. SFE 12-6)
10 StarFire Elite 4-8 -32 0.457
11 Dropships 3-9 -48 0.491

^---- AML ----^

12 WTF? 1-6 -51 0.581
13 Slopships 1-7 -67 0.443
14 BYE Round 0-19 -228 0.537

Caer, can you explain why BA's record here is different from their record as per the stats page? ie, 7-5 rather than 6-6? Just curious as I've been away for a while.

[Street]

Even though they lost to WTF?, BA gets a 12-0 win because WTF? dissolved.

[Peeking Duck?]

(12-17-2014, 12:42 PM)Street Wrote:  Even though they lost to WTF?, BA gets a 12-0 win because WTF? dissolved.

Ahh fair enough then.

[Caerbannog]

(12-17-2014, 01:00 PM)Peeking Duck? Wrote:  

(12-17-2014, 12:42 PM)Street Wrote:  Even though they lost to WTF?, BA gets a 12-0 win because WTF? dissolved.

Ahh fair enough then.

It was hiding in the parentheses all along !

Also.. update:
I will abuse my dictatorship and change the dates around a bit to make it.. BO3 quarters. Indeed, Indeed.
This means Game 1 of quarters on the 4th. G2 and 3 (if necessary) on the 11th. Semis 1 on 18th, 2 and 3 on 25th. Superbowl break -> Finals using the same 1 game 2 game system. Yes it drags the season on a bit and might be even stranger for AML (pretty sure it's 1x quarters with 3 squads BYE into semis)

[Nude For Satan]

(12-17-2014, 04:26 PM)Caerbannog Wrote:  It was hiding in the parentheses all along

The score is shown in parentheses yes. But as you didn't specify what it means that that score is there in parentheses, I would forgive anybody for not processing what the significance is.

Am I right in thinking that all Slopships results also got converted from actual scorelines to 12-0? This would have given nominal boosts to the bottom line of a few teams' k/d - Llamas +2 kills, SFE, Dropships and Backarrow +1 kill each.

Yes, unless there is some radical alteration to the fixture, AML as a 5-team competition would have 1 Quarter-Final only to eliminate one team from #10 v #11 (SFE v Dropships), while all of teams #7, #8 & #9 would have a BYE.(currently its Backarrow, Llamas and Symph but the first 2 could change dependent on Rd 13 results)

[Caerbannog]

(12-17-2014, 06:11 PM)Nude For Satan Wrote:  

(12-17-2014, 04:26 PM)Caerbannog Wrote:  It was hiding in the parentheses all along

The score is shown in parentheses yes. But as you didn't specify what it means that that score is there in parentheses, I would forgive anybody for not processing what the significance is.

Am I right in thinking that all Slopships results also got converted from actual scorelines to 12-0? This would have given nominal boosts to the bottom line of a few teams' k/d - Llamas +2 kills, SFE, Dropships and Backarrow +1 kill each.

Yes, unless there is some radical alteration to the fixture, AML as a 5-team competition would have 1 Quarter-Final only to eliminate one team from #10 v #11 (SFE v Dropships), while all of teams #7, #8 & #9 would have a BYE.(currently its Backarrow, Llamas and Symph but the first 2 could change dependent on Rd 13 results)

Oh it was hiding in the other parentheses "Adjusted standings (using play-off tiebreakers and with converted wins, K/D from all the dissolved squads still not in):"
And yes, all the other dissolved squads' results should also all be 12-0, but if there are no tiebreaker situations I'm not going to figure out the actual K/Ds  There might be other slight errors in K/D rates from bot issues anyway.

[Surrey]

(12-17-2014, 04:26 PM)Caerbannog Wrote:  It was hiding in the parentheses all along !

Also.. update:
I will abuse my dictatorship and change the dates around a bit to make it.. BO3 quarters. Indeed, Indeed.
This means Game 1 of quarters on the 4th. G2 and 3 (if necessary) on the 11th. Semis 1 on 18th, 2 and 3 on 25th. Superbowl break -> Finals using the same 1 game 2 game system. Yes it drags the season on a bit and might be even stranger for AML (pretty sure it's 1x quarters with 3 squads BYE into semis)

Honestly, if we are going to do everything best of 3 can we at least go back to the old format where you play game 1 at 3pm and game 2 at 4pm and then if game 3 is needed it plays the next week? This would help cut down on unnecessary wasted time.  There is very little reason to prolong it this much. Game 3 being the following week at least leaves some sort of build up to a tough series. Game 2 being the following week really accomplishes nothing but delaying the inevitable in most cases. eg. Game 1: team A wins 12-2.... (wait a week).... game 2: Team A wins 12-0. Great, we wasted a week.

Game 1 and Game 2 should be forced to play back to back and game 3 if needed should be the following week. If all teams finish 2-0, then we move on to the next round. If not then we use the needed following week.

[Nude For Satan]

The most clever part of your grand plan was the bit where you waited til now to suggest it, instead of pushing your council rep to pass on your suggestion any time between Round 1 and Round 13.

[Surrey]

(12-23-2014, 11:51 PM)Nude For Satan Wrote:  The most clever part of your grand plan was the bit where you waited til now to suggest it, instead of pushing your council rep to pass on your suggestion any time between Round 1 and Round 13.

Me? Caer just changed it to best of 3 right now for quarters. How could I bring it up earlier?

[Nude For Satan]

Changes can be lobbied for all season long. :/ I just wish reps would communicate with their teams more readily and keep the information/opinions flowing before its too late to assess them.

1 Game on first weekend:
You're referring to blow- or shut-outs and forgetting that if a clash is tightly contested, carrying Game 2 over actually adds to the value of the fixture, rather than detracting. It also maintains the timeframe for future rounds and avoids other matchups being rescheduled.

By the way, re the change to best-of-3 qtrs :
- The change was made 6 days ago. It was more-or-less just fixing a forgotten consensus.
- It's in line with the setup from the season prior.
- Only one council rep disagreed with it, and they only disagreed last season, not this season (that was me btw). In September this year (as the season started to get underway) there was consensus with repeating the same style play-offs as the previous season.

[Nude For Satan]

With The Dark defeating SCOTT STERLING, does that mean that now The Dark would meet Cosmic Rift in Qtrs and Sterling meet Critical Mass?

And merry xmas.

[Surrey]

(12-24-2014, 01:27 AM)Nude For Satan Wrote:  Changes can be lobbied for all season long. :/ I just wish reps would communicate with their teams more readily and keep the information/opinions flowing before its too late to assess them.

1 Game on first weekend:
You're referring to blow- or shut-outs and forgetting that if a clash is tightly contested, carrying Game 2 over actually adds to the value of the fixture, rather than detracting. It also maintains the timeframe for future rounds and avoids other matchups being rescheduled.

By the way, re the change to best-of-3 qtrs :
- The change was made 6 days ago. It was more-or-less just fixing a forgotten consensus.
- It's in line with the setup from the season prior.
- Only one council rep disagreed with it, and they only disagreed last season, not this season (that was me btw). In September this year (as the season started to get underway) there was consensus with repeating the same style play-offs as the previous season.

Well maybe posts need to be made public but read-only and then the opinions/vote can be done privately in the council. Unless it's something more sensitive that needs to be private. But most of the stuff discussed there probably does not have a reason why it can't be public knowledge.  That might results in more opinion and people actually knowing WTF is going on throughout the season. 

Searching around there is very little in terms or rules/structure posted these days. If it is there it is extremely hard to find. Anyone who takes a break for x amount of seasons like I did will come back and look for a refresher on some of the rules/structure and find nothing. Then when something is made public it's last minute. Is the council information so sensitive that no one should read it but squad "reps"? Or is it public knowledge that everyone should be able to read and then get their rep to make a reply/suggestions/vote after discussion amongst squad.  

It's a little silly to ask a rep to repeat a potentially long winded or semi-complicated post to everyone in their squad when the posts can be made public for everyone to read. If the reps are supposed to discuss and pass on the information anyway then why not just make the forum available for everyone to read but only the reps can post.

[Nude For Satan]

Your best places to look are :
1. Stickied threads:

• Rules
• Ship Settings
• Schedule
  

2. Threads around the point between last season and current:

• Winding Up Last Season & Forward to Next
• Council Representation
• Starting Date & Generalised Format
  

It's very possible not every single detail will be covered. Anything unclear can be queried of course. You can ask your rep. Or any rep. Or even the sysop.

If you think Council discussion should be bifurcated into a (read-only) public portion and a private portion, again, push your rep to lobby for it. Or any rep. Or even the Sysop. It'll be tabled for discussion as a recommendation.