[Archive] "Brush Slave" - Season 2 - discussion thread

Archive [Archive] Brush Slave League
21

Burske:

Thanks for being willing to moderate the league again this coming season Clam! We appreciate the effort on your part!

Two items. First, could we consider “not” having a heads-up on the themed round? Why not just a 30 day notice? Then we wouldn’t need to have any point value increase for themed, knowing that the painter had only 30 days to whip the theme together.

Second, I think I am leaning more towards the 4-3-2-1-0 idea, though using that system would denote a clear winner, but since the idea was to use up old “lead piles” (or plastic now), our current system would continue to work just fine. My two cents!

Burske

22

Lord Aldades:

Problem might be though, with on average only 30 - 35 votes / duel, your going to have very narrow victory margins, so it might be better to think in the lines of 4 points is triple the number of votes of my opponent (so if he gets 10, you`ll be needing at least 30)

23

furrie:

I like the “4-3-2-1-0” idea.

24

clam:

You are probably right, Lord A. The initial though was 80% of the votes was a clear win - but it should reflect popularity as well. A 5 - 1 in such systems is a clear win too, so the system only works, as I intended, if at certain number of people have voted. The average numbers of votes are about 30-35 as you say, so if you get at least  5-7 votes you will avoid the clear loss. But it could be a different number of course, say a 20 vote difference? or xx vote difference. I just want it to be hard achieving, but not impossible. Idea behind it is you want to avoid/achieve these “clear” wins, and it will force you to put a little more effort into painting each time (the challenging aspect).

25

clam:

A a bit of statistics, so we all know what we talk about:

Round 1:

Average number of votes: 42

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 3

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 4

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 4

Round 2:

Average number of votes: 39

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 3

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 3

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 8

Round 3:

Average number of votes: 37

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 2

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 3

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 6

Round 4:

Average number of votes: 29

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 2

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 4

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 6

Round 5:

Average number of votes: 33

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 1

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 5

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 6

Round 6:

Average number of votes: 32

Clear wins/losses (25 points difference): 3

Clear wins/losses (20 points difference): 4

Clear wins/losses (15 points difference): 5

So not much of an effect if its 20 or 25 really - at 15 it will probably make more of an influence on the table. As said I’m leaning against a 4-3-2-1-0 score system, but really don’t have any strong feelings for "how to define the “clear win”. As long as we have “diversity”. If all wins are “clear ones” it will have less effect, that if it’s a bit “harder” achieving.

26

clam:

And a few more questions/opinions to be heard:

1) 3-man match up’s, how about those? Will need some complex rulings with a 0-4 score system. But I’ll hate if we should hold someone out because of an uneven number - but what’s the alternatives?

2) “Burske” made an opinion regarding the reveal of themed rounds giving people a month to do the entry. Originally it was though as something you would “prepare” for, but I can see his point. Any other opinions?

And someone asked me on PM what’s wrong with current rule set. And let me make it clear: “there is absolutely nothing wrong now”

As stated earlier there is some technical issues that needs to be fixed including a 2-1-0 score system instead of the current 1½-1-½. I want the ½ points out and leave out the default ½ point raise to all in each round - really no need for that and as it also “punish” those with a late start, is another issue that needs to be fixed. But the rolling sign up came late for me to see the mistake.

Should probably leave out names here, but hopefully you don’t mind (Bas_2312). Think it’s best explained by an example: Try look at the table. “Bas” has missed out first round (and missed the chance of 3 points), but has same number of wins and draws as leading painter “Warh” (and not that he is wrongly leading it, of course - he has done a incredible job), but “Bas” is now 3½ points behind. The extra ½ point to “Warh” is due to his “auto raise” competing all 6 rounds? You can say it’s the prize of a late start! - but I can say it wasn’t the intention. So I’ll fix it by changing it to a 2-1-0 system.

Alternative there is the 0-4 point system (4-3-2-1-0). Adding this will give some new dimensions to the table and might affect “what team to play” etc. So see it as an aspect of motivation for the competitive minded people (that might be here in such a gaming circle like CDO :D).
But I can also understand people saying: “a loss is a loss - big or small”. You could also ague it wasn’t fair as it’s not an all against all tournament - so your result depends on who you are matched up with. And yes, like all sports you also need some luck. But as long as we all have fun, and get miniatures painted … "who cares"

In between, we could then have a 3-1-0 - system (like most football leagues uses). It don’t give you a degree of victory, but will give some chance to level it up, should you miss out on a team. It’s nice and simple - and also easy for me to administrate :slight_smile:

So how shall we decide?

I’m now setting up a public poll with the alternatives. I’ll not feel oblige following it if voting ain’t clear. In that case it will probably be the 2-1-0 system (we almost had this year) :wink:

A public poll you say? Yes, it will be public cause I need to know if it’s a vote from a current league painter or a potential newcomer. Hopefully you’ll understand the reasoning - and still participate :slight_smile:

Oh, and its a multiple choice one - but please just vote for the systems you really would like seeing, please :slight_smile:

7 days guys - please … “Help Me” :smiley:

27

Lord Aldades:

Copy the LPL system in a way of 3 - 1 -0 and the vote difference for tiebreakers?

28

DAGabriel:

My thoughts and I hope I can get them written down without causing problems:

I like the system as it is as it gives as much encouragement to reduce the lead pile as it gives to improve the painting.

Still think about the 12 months to cover with 8 rounds.

Wouldn`t it be a thought to do a 2 month round with the aim to paint a unit, for example 10 incl. full command and another one with the aim to paint a war machine/tank/flier?

The idea to do the themed rounds in 30 days is ok, but then the tale would only cover 8 months.

Another thing which could be discussed is the use of jokers instead of using the same entry for the biggest part of the league.

Every painter could get the chance to use one or two jokers to use his latest entry in the next round and there would be the pressure to complete at least 7 (1 joker) or 6 (2 jokers) new entries per year.

29

Lord Aldades:

Maybe an idea for reapeat entries, is to penalize them with -1 point of their total normally scored. So say, if they win second month running which would normally yield 3 points, they only gain 2.

Combined with the bonus for new entries, this should encourage people to actually keep on entering fresh material instead of one superb one and winning fingers down, and in the end rolling in the top spots of the tables while less talented painters who put at least time and effort in 8 different things don`t end rock bottom?

30

clam:

Sorry for another looong post!

My thoughts and I hope I can get them written down without causing problems:

I like the system as it is as it gives as much encouragement to reduce the lead pile as it gives to improve the painting.

Still think about the 12 months to cover with 8 rounds.

Wouldn`t it be a thought to do a 2 month round with the aim to paint a unit, for example 10 incl. full command and another one with the aim to paint a war machine/tank/flier?

The idea to do the themed rounds in 30 days is ok, but then the tale would only cover 8 months.

Another thing which could be discussed is the use of jokers instead of using the same entry for the biggest part of the league.
Every painter could get the chance to use one or two jokers to use his latest entry in the next round and there would be the pressure to complete at least 7 (1 joker) or 6 (2 jokers) new entries per year.

DAGabriel
All opinions are welcome here. And when they come from an established coach, like you the are even more valued :hat off

To me, the optimal would be if I could have first round starting on 1st September - and then end it all mid June. That would give me “the space” for 8 rounds and a mid term break or an extended period for painting something bigger. But as 1 season started in March and 2nd will now start in December, so I cant really achieve this until 2013  - so would reallly like to keep up pace and run Season 2 over 8 months. So we can have kick off for a possible season three in July 2013.

And why is that?

Most of us are in the northern hemisphere and painting competitions over summer has always been “bad” (from a number of participant point of view). So a set date like 1st September (each year) could give people a chance “to plan” for the first rounds, and after that it will mostly be in the “hobby prime time”. And yes we all have a different life cycles (work, study, family… you name it) and not all are up here in the north etc. - but I still see a pattern here, when people are most active “hobby-wise”.

So I want to rush things a bit in season 2 - but we could just have 7 (or 6) rounds - but think 8 rounds is best to find the “rightful” champion.

Not 100% sure I understand the joker system fully. You want people to commit to paint a certain number of teams for the 8 rounds - so I can say that my team 3 will play in round 3 and 4 (use the Joker)?? In that case I can probably only see it work if all teams are entered at the start. Or will there be “sanctions” if you then miss a round? but it’s probably me just not understanding!

I know that LPL asks you to enter the first 3 teams at signing up. And I do understand why. But BSL will always be a hobby league compared to that :slight_smile:

My approach has been that there shall be “room for all”. See, where we were coming from was open monthly challenges, so signing up, monthly commitment, minimum miniatures … was … a “big” step. So to avoiding loosing to many we made it acceptable only making a few/a single team.

That said, if you come to BSL knowing you’ll only get 3 models painted this winter" - BSL isn’t probably for you, is it? But it’s your call and not sure I’d like to make regulations against it?

I think, that if you enter BSL you should probably have the ambition of doing 3-4 teams, at least - that would be good and fun for spectators and participants. If you then don’t managed to do so, it should affect your score in the league table afterwards. And I think it already does that, in fact.

So my reasoning for adjusting the rules now are that we never really took the rolling signing ups into account. Again it’s the “all is welcome approach” taking over, I know. But I just want to make a minor adjustments so people that signs up after a few rounds will have “a fair chance”. Perhaps not of winning overall, but then give the leaders a tough match :smiley:

A then a general question, to all:

“Is missing replacements such a issue that needs rule regulations?”. I think we a close to 66% each round and I’m actually positively surprised by that. I know there’s a few 1 round teams still around but the majority is all rather new teams! And I’ll have to admit that I would rather have a league with 20 participants with a turnover of 66% than an elite league with 8 participants but with a 100% turnover!

I can see many ways to punish those teams, but never really saw it as a problem. Think the voting system takes rather good care of that. But perhaps that’s just me. 'd like to here your thoughts, before I start re-writing the rules :smiley:

31

DAGabriel:

Ah, didnt know the aim but an ultimate September to June league would be welcome. <br>To me the missing replacement is no real problem because most of the really old teams seem to get a punishment in the voting itself and the 2 Joker system wouldnt really produce a much higher turnover.

32

clam:

How should you know? - have probably never been written down anywhere in here :smiley:

33

GRNDL:

:(
- sorry to here, mate! You are such a skilled painter and would have loved seeing you in on a season two.

clam
Kind words, as always sir! Time has been short for me these days. Earlier this year I lost my job of twenty years and so I'm busy trying to get a portfolio (writing and art) together to get another one, and trying for a career change as well, as you might have seen from the tiny, hard to read blog ad below. If things go well, I shall do my best to get into the league. I haven't touched a model in months. :(
34

G.2:

Earlier this year I lost my job of twenty years and so I'm busy trying to get a portfolio (writing and art) together to get another one, and trying for a career change...

GRNDL
Sorry to hear about your job loss. I can't even imagine what it would feel like after 20 years. Good luck with the portfolio and the career change. I look forward to hearing some good news about this.
If things go well, I shall do my best to get into the league. I haven't touched a model in months. :(

GRNDL
It would be great to see your painted minis again. It has been too long a time to not see something from you. I hope everything goes well.
35

clam:

My too, GRNDL - but I wish you all the best establishing a new career and I’m confident it’ll work out for you.

And should find time for painting there will always be room for you here in our little corner on the inter-webs.

Take care old friend :cheers

36

DAGabriel:

And that looks very much like the majority isn`t really clear. Any idea how to proceed now?

Perhaps try the extreme (winning degree scale) and have an open mind for season 3?

37

clam:

Not sure - but I lean against a 3-1-0 system and then let the vote difference counts in the table (just like most European football leagues counts goal scores). But will give it some more thoughts and post a draft for Season 2 rules.

38

DAGabriel:

As long as we can brag with our work!

39

clam:

:smiley:

- don’t think there will be a rule against that :wink:

40

warh:

One thing I would like to see is to increase the image size from 800x600 to 1024x768 or higher, It has been hard to judge some entries because of the low resolution.