@JSA Could always set up a 2v2 20A league to test it out. 2v2 is the easiest, quickest, and will allow people to see if it's something they want. As well, if you just do 2v2, you can manually create the games fairly quickly to test it.

Perhaps it should not be called 20 league anymore also?

I mean I know the original idea was 20 of the best players, but now we have different divisions, proving grounds, etc. And if we do this random team idea, you won't have 20 in a division (would make matchups impossible). I think you'd have to do 12.

Might want an updated name that reflects how the league has transformed.


I think Ree is correct, just make a 12 person 2v2 test tournament to try out the format. Invite good players willing to test it out.

BTW, if you have a smaller division (12 vs 20), people would be less worried about having random teammates than chosen ones, because the skill drop off from top to bottom should be much less.

let's call this [12]?

You would need 5 divisions to have as many as there are now then.

He already had that many. He had A/B/C and then 2+ proving grounds as well. But [20] is a poor name anyway, since there is a clan named that (which by the way does not have 20 people in it for years). I never liked number names anyway (like Big 10 conference, which has 14 teams now). If you choose a number name, you will have issues if the format/size changes. Best to allow for those changes.

As I said, more admin work, much better results IMO. Best to accomplish via CLOT.

If you guys are discussing possible format change, I'd like to throw in my old idea of replacing 20 RR tournaments with CHampions League. The format allowed multiple teammates and wouldn't take as long as a big RR tournament would take. Also the format can be modified on many different levels.

4 players for any RR top 2 advance and who ended 1st will get a 2nd place player.

16 players for divion. 16 for A 16 for B etc.

yeah it's great.

for playoff there was few 3v3 as well no?

Yes, I believe a name change is needed anyways; I was thinking that earlier :) I don't understand the point in a test tournament; we already know what it will be like. And we may have many more divisions in [12] (assuming we switch] than [20]. In [20], I tried to allow only solid players into even the lowest league of [20] (C). With [12], it can be more like the promotion/relegation league but with a couple spots open for potentially good newcomers. Perhaps the top 3 of A league the first season could vote on two newcomers for the second season or something.

I will make a game with a few [20A] players to discuss this with.

Keep the ideas coming :)

Swiss tournament?

@JSA Knowing what it'd be like and what it's actually like are 2 very different things, even a 2v2 with 8 people I think would be beneficial just to make sure before all the work is put in.

In regards to the name change, I agree that it's important to change but never had the urge to say anything. Also, I think naming it [12] is bad (not sure if that was just a placeholder or not). Ben's idea of Swiss league makes sense but it may lead people who don't know what Swiss tournaments are away from it?

Maybe Randomized League or The Ultimate Teammate (since we are finding who the best teammate in 2v2 and 3v3 is)? Just some thoughts.

Edited 10/15/2015 05:28:20

I think perhaps there will be two "20" events this season. However, they will not be run at the same time, and neither one really deserves the "20" name.

At this point in time, the first event is mostly decided. It can be changed if better ideas are presented, but I will lay out the current state of it:

Perhaps some of you remember Szeweningen's Champion's League idea? It ended up not working out as expected when the 2v2 template in Round 2 was not well liked. With his advice, I have worked up a repeat of the Champion's League that will hopefully run smoothly. Here is the basic format for it:

There will be multiple divisions, just as there is a [20A], [20B], etc. How many divisions depends on the amount of players interested. There will be 16 players in each division.

Round 1: This round will consist of 4 groups of 4 players. Players will be divided first based on tiers, then one player from each tier will be placed in a group randomly. Each player will play in two 1v1 games versus every other player in their group. The template will be decided out of a pool of an even number of templates, where each player will veto the same amount of these templates. The templates that are left standing will be the templates the games are played on. This will result in a total of six 1v1 games for each player. For 2v2, each player will veto 2 templates out of the 10 that are given as options. This means that there will be two templates remaining. On each template, the players will play a total of three games, with each other player in his group being his teammate for one of these games. Since there will be two 2v2 templates, this results in six 2v2 games being played. There will be 12 total games played for each player in Round 1. Tiebreakers will be handled in a Strategic 1v1 game between the two players.

Round 2: The top two players from each group in Round 1 will advance to Round 2. Group A will consist of the top finishers in Group A and Group C of Round 1, and the second-place finishers of Group B and Group D of Round 1. Group B will consist of the top finishers in Group B and Group D of Round 1, and the second-place finishers of Group A and Group C in Round 1. Round 2 will be played in the same manner as Round 1. This means a total of 12 games being played in Round 2.

Semifinals: The top two players from both groups in Round 2 advance to the semifinals. This means that the semifinals will have four players. The top player in Group A from Round 2 will play a semifinal matchup against the second-ranked player from Group B, and the top player in Group B from Round 2 will play a semifinal against the second-ranked player from Group A. Each semifinal matchup will be a best of seven series. There will be 3 1v1's played, 2 2v2's played, and 2 3v3's played. The team games will be played with alts (alts will be provided if you need them). In this round, the 3v3's will both be played on the Europe map. The 1v1's and 2v2's will likely be decided based on vetoes again.

Finals: The two semifinal winners advance to play in the finals. This series will be nearly identical to the semifinals. The winner of the final will be crowned as the Warlight Champion!


This could all be changed, but this is the basic outline for what I am planning at the moment. Once this event reaches the semifinal and final stages, I will see whether it is a good idea to have another season of this, and/or if we should continue with the traditional [20] leagues, and/or if we should start the idea of the [12] (calling it this for now) league.

I'm way too tired to read into this too much and need sleep, but:

First point would be in vetoing, you assume each player vetos unique templates. If, once a template is vetod, you must choose another, whoever gets first pick is at a major disadvantage in comparison to last as they are picking 2 out of 10, instead of the last player picking 2 out of 4.

With picking templates in subsequent rounds, I assume it is the same as follows above with round 1? If so, since there are less vetos, which templates are removed or to people just get more vetos?

Second point, using alts and forcing alts is not a great idea, just throwing it out there.

Third, coincidentally, if there is a 3-way tie, RR or...?

How to progress from C to B and B to A?

Great theory in concept and I know it's just a basic outline but I also think it will take too long. Each subsequent round can not start until the previous round is fully complete. Time could be an issue. Tiering is good but harder since it's quite opinionated.

The problem is also repetition... people wanting to come back for more and do it again, something that wasn't present the first time.

Vetoing would be be anonymous (via mail) I assume but what if two players veto on the same template...?

I would definitely be willing to play.

I think the ideal scenario would be a Swiss-system tourney for the 1v1s and either a Swiss with alts for 2v2s and 3v3s or random teammates. Of course, Warlight doesn't have native support for Swiss tournaments, which is a significant problem.

I think the simpler the tournament design, the better. I'm also skeptical that the competition will be successful if it is run manually. It's much more likely to work if we use Warlight tournaments or a CLOT. The problem with a CLOT is that it's a significant amount of work to create one, and it doesn't seem worthwhile without some guarantees that it will actually be used.

JSA's idea seems cool but I have two issues:

1) that looks like more admin work than my idea. I also don't see how you can put that in a CLOT easily with your setup. I did something similar in a USA cup, and I think I just stopped making the tournaments after a few rounds as it was an admin nightmare and took a long time.

2) It only accommodates 16 players, would you be doing more sets of this?

@Chris

There will be multiple divisions, just as there is a [20A], [20B], etc. How many divisions depends on the amount of players interested. There will be 16 players in each division.

If someone has to manually create these games (which seems to be the case for the majority of them), I can't really see this working. The admin will lose the interest required to create dozens (hundreds?) of games.

Would it be bad to just have 2 leagues? Both are run the same way but 1 league is only 1v1's and the other league is only team games....

Also for whoever was curious about boots in 20C. It was mainly AWESOMEGUY + RA getting booted and they were on the same team. The majority of 1v1 boots were due to vacations.

As bad as it sounds, I am to the point where I am only really playing WarLight for an odd game here and there and some randomly yearly tournaments.

I would love to create something like this for the community which is why I really want to get the ball rolling on this idea. I think the idea of randomized teammates would be new, fun, and consistently different. I personally don't mind having to set up games manually and admin it. Even if it is a lot of games, I am online quite frequently just to pop in so I might as well do something useful.

@Turtle I think 2 leagues would be bad. There is already the P/R league and separating the league would not accomplish the goal (that at I see from this) is to attempt to determine who are the top WarLight players overall, not just strat 1v1 or whatever else.

I would play in a random team league for sure, as long as we had divisions to keep it from being bad teammates.