Problems With TWDT

[Pressure]

I was just speaking with Aura and he told me to make a thread so that these issue can be resolved for next season.

First of all, for those of you who don't know, the * system was incorporated into TWDT to encourage newer players to play. It was adopted from EG's draft league. The idea is that if there is a *-cap (in EG, the cap is 54 per game; 8v8) then in order to add elite players, you'll need to add newer players to reach your cap. For example, in a basing match if a team were to add 6 players who were rated 7*, that's 42*. Therefore, if the cap is 54*, you have 12* to spare for the match. Say you have a player who is rated 10*, a true legend that who you need in game. In order to add this player, you'll need to add a 2* player to meet the cap. Thus, to add a great player, you need to add a newb. Not only does this give new players a chance to play with better players, it opens the doors to caps actively training their bad players so that if the case arises that you actually need to utilize the bad player, they can perform up to par. IMO this season shouldn't even use a * cap, there are too many good players at 5* and 6*. The rating system should just be considered a guide for drafting, and the cap should be abolished. In EG, 5* and lower are considered low ratings. In that league, these low ratings are the most valuable players because in order to add high rated players, you need to balance it out with low rated players. If you need to cover 21 * points with 3 players, you can either add 2 9*s and a 3*, or you can add 3 7*s. With the way the league is now, there is no room for newbies, since there are good players with newbie ratings.

Another problem is the "average * rating." Many players were rightfully complaining about there being too few 7*/8* players in this league. I 100% agree with the complaint. If you have players who have played for 10+ years at a 5*, the captain is obviously going to add them over someone who is an actual newb at 5*. If a newb and a vet are the same rating, the vet is getting added.

In EG, 6*-9* is considered a vet player: 6* is a vet player who hasn't gotten better, 7* is a good vet who is adaptable and would fit well into any lineup, 8* is an elite and has always adapted to the skill curve and improved accordingly, 9* is a legend, a machine that doesn't rust.

5* and down are the newbs: 1*-3* are really bad, new players, 4* show potential, and 5* are active players that can keep up with the good players but aren't that great on their own. In this league, an average rating for all 3 leagues drastically reduces the *rating of good players who may own in one league and suck in the other 2 leagues. This is why we have a bunch of great players at 5* and 6*. So here is my suggested remedy this problem:

Use the player's highest league * rating as their overall rating. If someone sucks at dueling/basing, but are an 8* in jav, then they are an 8*, period. This induces a substantial amount of strategy into drafting, because you may want the elite jav at 8*, but if he sucks at other leagues is he really worth 8* for you to use in just one out of 3 leagues? Are you focusing that much on jav that you are willing to let your other leagues suffer? Of course, each player would be given a raitng for every league, so a draft list would look something like this:

xmen1231323 - 9* (jav-9* / wb 7* / base 4*) <--- good jav/wb, not great at basing
eatmyass123123 - 7* (jav-6* / wb-6* / base-7*) <--- decent and experienced jav/wb, good baser, good all around

Say you draft xmen1231323. You drafted him at 9* probably for javs, and as a jav he would be credited to the *-cap as a 9*. But, the player could also be added to basing at 4* since that's what he's rated in basing. Thus, for the cap in basing, a better player can be added alongside him since he has a really low rating, but in javs a newb would have to be added to balance out his 9*.

My point is that if you draft someone who is a pro at javs, you're not thinking of using him for basing or wb, you're going to only be using them for javs. If you weren't even considering them as a baser or wb, then why would their basing or wb *rating be averaged into the equation? This would just drag their jav rating down. This just makes better javs (and respective basers/wb) cheaper; it's an unfair advantage to be a pro 1-leaguer because your shittyness in other leagues dumbs your rating down.

There also shouldn't be a cumulative, weekly cap, and there shouldn't be a limit to how often a player can play. A player should be allowed to play in any league that their captain wants to add them in. There should be a different * cap per league - probably something like.. 32 for jav/wb (since its 5v5), 52-54 for basing (since its 8v8).

In my opinion, the primary reason this league is flawed is because you have very good players with very low ratings. This league is using the * system to introduce new players into the game, but why would any captain add a newb who sucks at a low * if they can add a great player for the same low *? This is not a newb-friendly league this season, which is disappointing, but it can definitely be resolved by next season.

I have some more ideas but this is all I can come up with right now, thoughts?

[Shaddowknight]

I agree the cap rating and cap is dumb

draL had like 59 stars left for the week after javs and warbirds to put into basing

having the cap so high means newbies will NEVER get played
specially, as stated above, with many good/decent players having low overall ratings

sure, you could play them, or you could play the better players in all three leagues, add a newbie or two, and have spent like 30 stars all week

[Shaddowknight]

overall, the * system needs revised
also, remove the rule where using someone in multi league only uses their star rating once. this is also easier to manage if you go back to the individual league rtings

[Summa]

As the creator of the majority of the rule system in place, I will explain to you why this doesn't work and what has changed in the 2 seasons of TWDT since I stopped running it.

Why an overall cap vs. a match cap:
The primary concern here is that EG, as successful as their league has been, has a simpler league to run. They do not have 3 separate forms of competition to deal with, so they can afford to have that. With 3 separate leagues in play it is more difficult to use a match cap than to just have an overall cap and have supplementing rules. For example, when I was running the league, outside of playoffs there was a 2 league maximum per player rule and the 5* rule which forced you to play both a variety of players and lower level players (the overall ratings were significantly lower during my tenure, and I will explain that later).

However, what I discovered very quickly from jaa (cap of top5squad and most abusive captain I ever dealt with) is that unlike EG where dropping/adding/trading is more seldom, TW captains were going to be more aggressive with their trading/adding/dropping, so there had to be measures to regulate and penalize for just dropping players and re-drafting them at lower costs and other such practices. The easiest way to reconcile this problem is by establishing an overall cap and levying penalties for dirty practices. With a match-cap if you levied such penalties I feel it would be far too severe and also not long-reaching enough. Dropping x player means you play 1* down in match for 1 wk doesn't have the gravity of you permanently lose X*s from your maximum.

However, when we did extend the rating system to rating all 3 leagues, we were contemplating doing a match cap at the time, but that much rating turned out to just be too burdensome and I did not have the time. But I would say that you would have to extend the rating system to a league by league basis if you wanted match caps...and who is going to do that work? I did it for 3-4 yrs, and Aura seems a bit worn out after his first rodeo. Are you going to do it?

Why are ratings so high:

Simply put, someone changed the rating scale and it has caused inflation. What used to qualify you as a 10* in the system I ran doesn't exist in the current rating system. What qualified you as a 9* is now a 10*, what qualified you as an 8* doesn't exist, what qualified you as a 7* is now somewhere btwn an 8 and a 9* in this system. So what you're seeing is there is a 1-1.5 pt avg inflation between when i ran the league and its current state. I don't know who changed the rating system or when it was changed, but the current system generates both an issue and a solution. You already addressed the issue that it raises, so I won't cover that, what I will cover is the solution it generates that you don't seem to realize. If the goal of the league is to mix newer players in with veterans to gain them experience/interest in high lvl play/give vitality to player base/create new stars, then inflation actually helps that. If you inflate the rating of all of the veterans/high rated players, then you force captains to add even lower level players than they used to when ratings were lower. It generates more activity and more playing time for players that were not going to play had the ratings not been inflated. It's an interesting trade, and one which I honestly can't say which is better. For me it would depend entirely on activity. If these lower level players aren't active and don't contribute and consequently don't continue to play, then we should not bend over backwards to try and get them involved; but if they do, then stick with the system that inflates ppls ratings as to get more of them involved.

Do you have any other gripes? I can address them too from a league management and rule creation point of view, since you don't seem to have one.

[Rasaq]

Summa is missed.

[Infrared]

In the eyes of the captains the newbie rules are a nuisance and they will find any way possible to give themselves an advantage while still following the rules.
The best way to counter that is to enforce the < 5* player in every game rule AND there can't be a way to acquire players for much less than their "deserved" star rating (for example picking up players for 1* during waivers).

[Summa]

In the eyes of the captains the newbie rules are a nuisance and they will find any way possible to give themselves an advantage while still following the rules.
The best way to counter that is to enforce the < 5* player in every game rule AND there can't be a way to acquire players for much less than their "deserved" star rating (for example picking up players for 1* during waivers).

Yeah, acquiring people sneakily for 1* and then week 4 acquisitions when every1 but you is @ max cap and ur friend signs up were issues that came up in the last season I ran, and I was working on ways to solve them, but alas I quit staff and took a 2 yr break from the game.

[Ricko]

the issues with TWDT have pretty much all just been addressed - far too many elite players in certain leagues are at 5-6* ratings so there really isnt an issue for any of the captains in struggling to get their lineups beneath the limit, therefore meaning no new players will get game time as captains can pretty much add who they want and not have to worry.
The solution is to either drop the * cap per week or to thoroughly go through every players ratings and as summa said; give them the rating they should have for their best league (although it's a little too late for this option now the draft has happened).

[Pressure]

Why are ratings so high:

Simply put, someone changed the rating scale and it has caused inflation. What used to qualify you as a 10* in the system I ran doesn't exist in the current rating system. What qualified you as a 9* is now a 10*, what qualified you as an 8* doesn't exist, what qualified you as a 7* is now somewhere btwn an 8 and a 9* in this system. So what you're seeing is there is a 1-1.5 pt avg inflation between when i ran the league and its current state. I don't know who changed the rating system or when it was changed, but the current system generates both an issue and a solution. You already addressed the issue that it raises, so I won't cover that, what I will cover is the solution it generates that you don't seem to realize. If the goal of the league is to mix newer players in with veterans to gain them experience/interest in high lvl play/give vitality to player base/create new stars, then inflation actually helps that. If you inflate the rating of all of the veterans/high rated players, then you force captains to add even lower level players than they used to when ratings were lower. It generates more activity and more playing time for players that were not going to play had the ratings not been inflated. It's an interesting trade, and one which I honestly can't say which is better. For me it would depend entirely on activity. If these lower level players aren't active and don't contribute and consequently don't continue to play, then we should not bend over backwards to try and get them involved; but if they do, then stick with the system that inflates ppls ratings as to get more of them involved.

Did you see the ratings this season? They're anything but inflated. Maybe you misread my post, but I wasn't saying that the ratings are too high, I was saying that they are too low for players that deserve higher.

[Pressure]

Also, another big problem with this league that I forgot to address: When free agents are on the waivers, there should be two types of people that you can bid on. You can bid on veteran players, who start at a 6* and go up to 10*, or you bid on newbs, who start as a 1* and go up to 5*. This would help avoid any problems with good players getting too low a rating in the waiver pool.

Summa, I think you need to look over the current ratings and the lineups used in each game during pre-season. They're so stacked, no newbs played and if they did they were just aliased good players. Then re-read my post, and you may acquire a better understand of my "gripes."

[Summa]

Also, another big problem with this league that I forgot to address: When free agents are on the waivers, there should be two types of people that you can bid on. You can bid on veteran players, who start at a 6* and go up to 10*, or you bid on newbs, who start as a 1* and go up to 5*. This would help avoid any problems with good players getting too low a rating in the waiver pool.

Summa, I think you need to look over the current ratings and the lineups used in each game during pre-season. They're so stacked, no newbs played and if they did they were just aliased good players. Then re-read my post, and you may acquire a better understand of my "gripes."

No, they're inflated; do the math. I did the avg on the numbers and the overall avg is 1.02 higher than what it was when i was doing the system. the difference in the current ratings and ratings when I ran it is this: 1) more players before 2) more high rated players now than before. In the previous DT the goal was to force 80% of the players into the 4-7 range in order to make caps really have to distinguish who is a good pick or not. In the current ratings it seems like people weren't scared to get top heavy and be a bit more generous. So yes, they are inflated.

And I would suggest you don't call these "large problems" since the league has historically seen more activity than TWL does, and has never really had substantial negative feedback; I would say the rule set is overall successful. It is just very difficult to do what you seem to want us to do. Captains by their very nature are going to push the limits and try to get the best deal possible to play for them. And admins by nature are going to try to get the worst players possible some playing time. Overall though, caps are in it to win, and if that means only playing NewbmcPubber48 1 time all season after their playoff spot is locked, then that's what most would do. You're asking an admin to make a flawless rule that forces people to play people they don't want to play because it hinders their chance of winning. The current set of rules does its best to impose that force on captains without making them feel like they are getting screwed by the system. If captains felt they were getting screwed, no one would want to captain ever again.

Mind you, all of your "gripes" hinge on 1 assumption: that there are new players who both want to play and will then continue to be active. The great part about people who have played for 10 yrs is that they aren't likely to stop showing up. That is a known and true player base, the other branch that this league tries to reach into (if it even exists) for the most part hasn't tried to reach to us. There are always a couple people in the Draft arena who are newbs and really wanna get picked (I may be wrong, but Zagis was this way in the 1st season I ran of TWDT, and by the 2nd season I ran he was a hot commodity), and someone usually picks them up for their dedication. But outside of that there aren't exactly many "newbs" that have signed up and really shown a passion this season from what I have seen (I am not head op tho).

Lastly, I bring you a simple, yet interesting case that really fucks up your split bidding system idea. Where would I fall in that system? I am a 13 year veteran of this game, I have 3 TWL titles, and I had the 14th highest stats in TWDT 3 seasons ago; but I haven't so much as played a game in 2 years. It seems almost unfair to immediately make me a 6* and make me not qualify under the 5* rule, but it also seems unfair to put someone like that under the 5* limit because I could potentially start playing seriously and be effectively a 7 or 8 @ a 3 cost.

Mind you, I don't think your ideas are stupid, and I am glad that someone is looking critically at the rules and trying to find ways to patch them up. There are no "glaring errors" in the current system. However, what your issue seems to be that you want the league and rules to be more forceful in pushing forward with its overall mission, which is fine. However, people don't like things rammed down their throat; and you can only scorn your tried and true supporters so many times before they stop showing up. That's politics.

[Dral]

A player at 4* and under will not only be free, but will subtract * from your weekly spending. A 4* player will give you a -1* star usage. A 3* player will give you a -2* usage. A 2* player will give you a -3* usage. A 1* player will give you a -4* star usage.

Redo the averages with a 1 star player valued at -4 and I bet they won't be inflated. Calculating it this way yields an average player cost of 1.935 on my team.

[Zeebu]

yes the negative * points lower scores give you is stupid. remove that and it should balance out the high amount of cap limit per week. unless you give caps some sort of advantage to having extra cap space at the end of the week. (dont do that it would be stupid.)

thix a split bidding system would be fine it just has to overlap a bit. start values should be placed along with something similar to what they would have been in the league subtracted a couple stars. i was given a 6* value so if i signed up as a free agent it would start at 2 or 3 lower for a 3 or 4 to start the bidding. people will bitch about it.
id say have the cap of each squad submit a score for each free agent. throw out the top score and the bottom score and average the rest. depending on whether you take 2 or 3 off round up or down. a squad cap has x number of days to submit a score on a free agent. if a squad captain neglects to submit a rating on a free agent they forfeit the opportunity to bid on that person. an assistant might be able to submit a score if it is desired.

[Infrared]

It's too late to make any drastic changes, this stuff should have been brought up before the league started

[Supreme]

Why not separate the caps completely:

cap x(35?)* for jd
cap x* for dd
cap 54* for bd

It avoids all problems above.
And separate the 3 stars for each player again aswell.