ez4u wrote:
(sober?)
That was hardly two hours. How did you do that?
Quote:
1. The proposal is to split beta (2 groups) and gamma (3 groups). What is the advantage/purpose of splitting?
The idea of splitting the groups, or rather of keeping them split, is to make the groups larger, but not too large. The reason being, to keep the balance in favor of winning in the higher classes, and because the structure looks better.
Quote:
2. Regarding the points applied to each level, let me rephrase:
Alpha: 100% winning, nothing for activity. 2 points or 1 point (or .0001 point do not matter).
Beta: Win = 3 times the value of activity. In other words win = 1.5 points for win plus 0.5 for game while loss = 0.5 points for game plus 0 points for loss. Any reason for 3 to 1 leverage?
Gamma: Win and activity equal weighted. In other words win = 1 point for win plus 1 point for game while loss = 1 point for game plus 0 points for loss. Again any specific reason?
I don't have a specific reason for the weighting, but the general idea is that the higher you get in the league, the more you have to win. In other words, it makes it harder to get into Alpha, making Alpha more of a competition between the strongest players.
Quote:
Delta: Win = half the value of activity. In other words win = 1 point for win plus 2 points for game while loss = 2 points for game plus 0 points for loss.
The result of this will be to push people out of Delta rapidly based on activity but slowly based on winning. As we move up from Delta the impact of winning steadily increases while activity decreases. To me this is a little counter intuitive based on feedback we have so far. A number of people seem to be satisfied in Delta as long as they have the opportunity to play lots of games. In this case, should we want to let them stay in Delta and enjoy it there rather than pushing the active players out and up? Should we want to shift the winners out of Delta and leave those who just like to play a lot in place?
I think that what people like about Delta is less that they can play lots of games, and more that they are finding it easier to get games. Also, they want the chance for even games against stronger opponents, so we should avoid shifting all the strong players out of Delta. By allowing the more active players to shift up to Gamma, it also becomes harder for stronger players to move up just by winning. This should keep some strong players in Delta, and encourage others to play more games.
Quote:
In the higher classes, once you make it out of Delta the more each win is worth and you sort of accelerate up the class structure (assuming you win). This would presumably concentrate the winners (should = the stronger players) in the upper classes. Is this what we want from the ASR? In terms of recognition, maybe so. However, a stratified playing area already exists on KGS, aka the English Game Room. We should be careful not to plan a system that will segregate too strongly based on strength. The desire for interaction between stronger and weaker players will be thwarted.
Certainly, keeping a mix of strengths in most groups is imperative. Nonetheless, I'm guessing that making Alpha more competitive and thus more prestigious would make the league more attractive to stronger players, who nonetheless must move up through the classes on their way there. By increasing the promotion/demotion zone, Delta through Beta should still be pretty permeable for most players.
Quote:
3. Sizes Alpha = 20, Beta = 60, Gamma = 120 already totals 200. At current membership this would leave Delta = ~100. This is probably unsustainable with the current level of inactives, non-qualifiers.
I'm not sure what would make this unsustainable. Halfway through the month, close to half of the deltas, around 70 players have already played their minimum amount of games, and there are some folks who apparently just want to be in the league whether they play much or not.
Quote:
I think that the next step would be experimenting with larger classes in other levels and seeing what happens before expanding the levels themselves. Right now about half the membership is in Delta. My feeling is the Delta experiment is still too new to lead to radical changes throughout the league. However, my own total experience in ASR is limited to only 5 games in Delta, so there are others with vastly more experience to draw on.
Anyway, a few thoughts in response. Feedback?
You might very well be right, and it might indeed be better to experiment with just increasing the size of the other classes.