TWDT Rules

[Summa]

updates:

* cap set to 525 currently
(found as follows: 255 players totalled 4301 composite *'s, the average player per * ratio was 16.87. Multiplied time 30 (minimum roster size) was 506*s, then i handed the caps 19 extra *s to make it a round number and to let them play with.) Note: not set in stone yet

set the penalty for dropping a player at 5*s

set the minimum bid at 12*s

added a piece about players who withdraw

wrote about an appealing process

more updates to come now that the bulk of the ratings are done

[Burnt]

In the event that teams have the same records at the end of the regular season, they will be differentiated in rank for the playoffs by +/-. Basing will also be judged on a 50 point scale for +/-, based upon the following grounds: 15:00 is the winning score in basing, which is equivalent to 900 seconds, 900(seconds)/50(parts)= 18. Each 18 seconds positive or negative counts as 1 point +/-. Judgment will be done on your COMPOSITE +/-.

I don't like this because comparing basing results and warbird/javing results is like comparing apples to oranges. 15:00-7:30 in basing isn't the same as 50-25 in dueling. You can lose a basing match 15:00-3:00 but it's impossible (virtually) to lose 50-10. I propose if there is a tie, the record in each league should determine who makes the playoffs in each league. example: squad A is better than squad B in warbirds but squad B is better than squad A in basing and javing. So squad A advances to playoffs in warbirds but squad B goes to the playoffs in basing and javing. Ties in individual leagues would be broken by head-to-head results.

[PjOtTeR]

I don't like this because comparing basing results and warbird/javing results is like comparing apples to oranges. 15:00-7:30 in basing isn't the same as 50-25 in dueling. You can lose a basing match 15:00-3:00 but it's impossible (virtually) to lose 50-10. I propose if there is a tie, the record in each league should determine who makes the playoffs in each league. example: squad A is better than squad B in warbirds but squad B is better than squad A in basing and javing. So squad A advances to playoffs in warbirds but squad B goes to the playoffs in basing and javing. Ties in individual leagues would be broken by head-to-head results.

Yes, this was quite stupid last season...

[Summa]

I don't like this because comparing basing results and warbird/javing results is like comparing apples to oranges. 15:00-7:30 in basing isn't the same as 50-25 in dueling. You can lose a basing match 15:00-3:00 but it's impossible (virtually) to lose 50-10. I propose if there is a tie, the record in each league should determine who makes the playoffs in each league. example: squad A is better than squad B in warbirds but squad B is better than squad A in basing and javing. So squad A advances to playoffs in warbirds but squad B goes to the playoffs in basing and javing. Ties in individual leagues would be broken by head-to-head results.

you qualify for playoffs based upon composite score, then you play individual leagues to determine championship. with 6 of 8 teams making the playoffs i think it will be a non-factor, however i may adjust it. i need some factor to drive captains to draft well rounded teams and not create 1 league team, and the elimination of composite playoff qualification to single league qualification would eliminate that factor, so i am sorry i cannot do that.

[Summa]

rules have been updated, almost finalized, will be finalized by sunday

[PjOtTeR]

you qualify for playoffs based upon composite score, then you play individual leagues to determine championship. with 6 of 8 teams making the playoffs i think it will be a non-factor, however i may adjust it. i need some factor to drive captains to draft well rounded teams and not create 1 league team, and the elimination of composite playoff qualification to single league qualification would eliminate that factor, so i am sorry i cannot do that.

Did you even read what he said?
He meant that when 2 or more teams are tied for a play-off spot when you count total wins. The top 6 in total points make it to playoffs... when there are 2 or 3 teams tied in 6th place, only 1 of them can make it, but even the biggest morons will get 25 kills in a dd or a jd... hardly ever see any lower kill count... While even some decent players can lose 15:00 - 0:00 vs an awesome basing team. So basicly counting 3 minutes as 10 kills because that averages out is silly. If you wanna count them against each other I'd say 3 minutes equals to each 5 kills above 25 kills or 6 kills above 20 kills so if you want to still do it like you planned, please average it out a bit. Cause 50-0 in dd or jd never gonna happen, while 15:00-0:00 might happen in a bd...

This fucked my team over last twd, while we were way better in javs and wbs then one other team tieing with us, they destroyed us in base.

You could also look at heads up when teams are tied, since you play everyone, just say whoever won more matches in the heads up advances over the other team. Which basicly means you let the better team overall of the 2 get through...

[Summa]

Did you even read what he said?
He meant that when 2 or more teams are tied for a play-off spot when you count total wins. The top 6 in total points make it to playoffs... when there are 2 or 3 teams tied in 6th place, only 1 of them can make it, but even the biggest morons will get 25 kills in a dd or a jd... hardly ever see any lower kill count... While even some decent players can lose 15:00 - 0:00 vs an awesome basing team. So basicly counting 3 minutes as 10 kills because that averages out is silly. If you wanna count them against each other I'd say 3 minutes equals to each 5 kills above 25 kills or 6 kills above 20 kills so if you want to still do it like you planned, please average it out a bit. Cause 50-0 in dd or jd never gonna happen, while 15:00-0:00 might happen in a bd...

This fucked my team over last twd, while we were way better in javs and wbs then one other team tieing with us, they destroyed us in base.

You could also look at heads up when teams are tied, since you play everyone, just say whoever won more matches in the heads up advances over the other team. Which basicly means you let the better team overall of the 2 get through...

heads up play is likely to perpetuate the same type of problem, having team a beat team b but lose to team c, team b lost to team a and beat team c and team c lost to team b but beat team a. i fear the same sort of thing may occur. I may just go under the assumption of a minimum of 50-25 and adjust from there. so a 15:00-0 would be a 50-25 result...dunno i am working on it, and will figure somethin out, but you are right dtb is overweighed in terms of tiebreaking right now.

[Summa]

rules fixed and finalized, the only thing that might be adjusted is the *cap dependent on how much caps spend/have left after the draft, but it should be fine.

[tragiK]

Burnt is out of *'s and can't bid. Jaa wins.

this will be a recurring theme

[Black Mage]

Do Free Agents acquire the * rating of the winning bid, or will they receive separate ratings that will determine their * rating?

[Downfall]

any chance that times could be changed some weeks? to 5pm or even better saturday?

edit: small pole to see how many ppl cant make 2-3-4 sunday every week pls. At the top of my head, i think schope <_<

[freddie]

"-To bid on a player, the lowest you may go is 4 - wb 4 - jav 4 - base 12 composite. To outbid someone you can add *'s in any department, but you must always type out all 3 leagues and composite. Ex: Humid is a free agent. Jaa bids 4/4/4/12 on Humid. Burnt really wants Humid he bids 4/5/6/15 on Humid. This angers jaa, he bids 4/6/6/16 on Humid. Burnt is out of *'s and can't bid. Jaa wins."

Sorry if this has already been explained but..

This has loophole(s), if player X is great jav and cap really wants him and bids 20 5 5 (just example) on him he still qualifies to play javs as 6* or lower. Thats legal if I havent missed anything, but completely against the spirit of 6* rule. If you want to prevent that, just something like "free agent worth 19* or more doesnt qualify as 6* player for any league" would work.

Also if bid starts 4 4 4 (12) and someone bids 4 6 6 (16) and someone raises 4 5 8 (17) is that legal, or do you have to bid at least same amount of * in every league than previous bidder?

[Summa]

"-To bid on a player, the lowest you may go is 4 - wb 4 - jav 4 - base 12 composite. To outbid someone you can add *'s in any department, but you must always type out all 3 leagues and composite. Ex: Humid is a free agent. Jaa bids 4/4/4/12 on Humid. Burnt really wants Humid he bids 4/5/6/15 on Humid. This angers jaa, he bids 4/6/6/16 on Humid. Burnt is out of *'s and can't bid. Jaa wins."

Sorry if this has already been explained but..

This has loophole(s), if player X is great jav and cap really wants him and bids 20 5 5 (just example) on him he still qualifies to play javs as 6* or lower. Thats legal if I havent missed anything, but completely against the spirit of 6* rule. If you want to prevent that, just something like "free agent worth 19* or more doesnt qualify as 6* player for any league" would work.

Also if bid starts 4 4 4 (12) and someone bids 4 6 6 (16) and someone raises 4 5 8 (17) is that legal, or do you have to bid at least same amount of * in every league than previous bidder?

that is actually a great idea...i think i will make it 20 to be a round number and add it....i am not sure tho...i feel bad adding rules after the draft...i will make the decision on it by tmrw.

[tragiK]

that is actually a great idea...i think i will make it 20 to be a round number and add it....i am not sure tho...i feel bad adding rules after the draft...i will make the decision on it by tmrw.

one of two choices:

1. just let it be exploited. it's not THAT big a deal, if everyone can do it.
2. make it so subsequent bids have to be at least 1* higher in EACH category. meaning, 4/4/4/12 --> next lowest bid has to be 5/5/5/15. this will get complicated and use up a lot of stars.

[Summa]

one of two choices:

1. just let it be exploited. it's not THAT big a deal, if everyone can do it.
2. make it so subsequent bids have to be at least 1* higher in EACH category. meaning, 4/4/4/12 --> next lowest bid has to be 5/5/5/15. this will get complicated and use up a lot of stars.

also not a bad idea