So are you saying this system picked those correctly? If so, then it is a bad system IMO.

Could someone just explain the system so we all know what is going on? :p

Do you need proficiency in math to understand? What about others?

Guess it is:

1st vote => 1 p
2nd vote => 1/2 p
3rd vote => 1/3 p

...

So your 1st vote is the most important.

And then you look, if a template makes the cut by points. If it does, the points above will be distributed to other templates. If no templates makes the cut by points at some point, the template with the lowest points will get scratched and the points will be distributed like if the template never ever was to vote.

...

It basically means, that your 1st and 2nd vote are the most important ones and the decision between 1st and 2nd vote is the important one. It isn't important, if someone votes a 1v1 template 11th or 12th.

Edited 1/25/2019 09:54:12

Once this panel has pruned the list to a manageable size, all clans in Group A and B will be asked to rank every template in the order of preference(1 being most preferred and 12 being least). These votes will be resolved using the Single Transferrable Voting system. You can learn more about it here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLH_w5kHJpA

Hmm, something seems to be wrong, assuming that i understand STV. Let's take a look at the 2v2 votes:
https://i.gyazo.com/6d4ee5c9e9b015a9218df7937b3eb8ce.png

In round one, we calculate a threshold we must meet in order to elect a template. This is usually calculated as:

T = Floor(Amount of votes / Amount of seats to fill + 1) + 1
T = Floor(14 / 4) + 1
T = 4

After that, we check if a template meets the Threshold. Three templates meet it, but Final Earth has the most votes, so it gets elected.
Now we transfer the surplus votes of Final Earth to templates that had Final Earth as first choice and said template as second choice.
So in total, we should be transferring exactly 1 vote, as FE won with a surplus of 1.

But, when looking at the next round, we have transferred:

0.6 to Guiroma
0 to Cookies
0 to MME
0.3 to China
0.6 to Szeurope

Which adds up to 1.5?
Where did the half vote come from all of a sudden?

Edit: the ratio with which votes got transferred seems to be correct, it's just not 0.3 per transferred vote, but 0.2 that needs to be added to each template's score

Edit2: Apparently the algorithm that calculates T can be changed into T = Amount of votes / Amount of seats to fill + 1
That would make the Threshold 3.5 and then it all makes sense.

Edit3: Nope. It's still not correct. The method described above in edit2 should be T = Amount of votes / Amount of seats to fill.
That would make T = 4.66, not T = 3.5
It looks like a combination of Droop and Hare quota was used?

Edited 1/25/2019 11:24:31

Take your time but Please don't guess :)

Edited 1/25/2019 16:05:47

Thank you for posting that Rento, I did not see it. It is above my head math wise though, so if the formula worked, I guess it worked and that is that.

It just baffles me that a template with the same number of first place votes, but 4-0 last place votes and 7 less 'total votes' can get in ahead of the other one. I guess if the formula worked, I would suggest not using that method in the future. It doesn't seem good to me at all.

I didn't even look at the 1v1s.

In the past, we just took vote totals. I could see if there was a tie there, you use some sort of method to break the tie. It just seems like common sense to have the most desired templates overall make it in there.

If you have a formula this complicated, how are we even supposed to know how to vote?

EDIT - ok, I read up on it. It seems like a nice system when people are not required to rank ALL preferences. So if you have 5 things up for vote, and they only rank 1-3...it helps there. But when everyone is ranking %100 of the templates, I guess I don't see why we'd use a system designed to deal with a problem we don't have?

Edited 1/25/2019 16:14:42

In every category the templates with most #1 votes got in.

In 2v2 there was a draw between Cookies and MME so it was resolved using the STV system.

That's all.

I plugged the 2v2 votes into a SVT calculator online. It validates his results (unless we both used the same one).

I still don't understand WHY we'd use the system. They both got the same number of 1st place votes and 2nd place votes. MME gets one extra 3rd place vote. It also has 1 extra 4th place vote. Basically MME was ranked higher in every way possible, or tied...and yet this system puts Cookies in. Either we used the same calculator and the calculator is flawed or I really don't understand using this thing.

From what I am reading, the purpose is to deal with hyper partisan voters. But in our case, if we really hate a template, should our vote not reflect that? A last place vote SHOULD matter I think, and this method is designed to almost throw out partisan votes.

Anyway, I am done complaining. It is what it is. It seems as though we were told this method was being used before hand, so the results are what they are.

Edited 1/25/2019 16:34:01

Wait a sec, can you post a list of the actual winners? It appears your screen shots accurately show the winners, not the list someone pulled from the score sheet.

Please confirm posting the template list here, thanks.

Edited 1/25/2019 16:53:23

3v3 Europe, Biomes
2v2 Final Earth, Guiroma, Cookies
1v1 Biomes, Elitist Africa, ME WR, British Raj, Guiroma, Hannibal

The list with DRoR and China are CL9 templates, not CL11.

That is what I thought, thanks!

I used this excel sheet for resolving the votes. : https://rightlabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/joeys_stv.zip
I picked the system because that was used in the most recent CL's.

The stream is live as I am writing this, but I will address the questions here later and do a write-up today/tonight.

Firstly, I want to explain why I posted the result so sudden and poorly formatted yesterday. I was working on putting stuff on the sheet, and then a few anonymous user showed up. I found it possible that at least one user had seen the votes, so I decided to make it public instead of possibly giving someone more time with the votes.

Secondly, STV has been used for the last few CL's. I know that previous organization spent some time putting that into focus, so I hoped that players where more used to STV. (I think it's fair to say that was a mixed bag). If you search about STV, then the first advantage is that it's considered to be a very fair system for this kind of voting. However, it's disadvantage is that it's far from intuitive and not something you can just calculate by looking at it.

Third, I want to thank you all for sticking to the format I asked for. It saved me a lot of time so at least my experience with that was very good, so the confusion you may have had there was at least not wasted. There are ways to improve the voters experience here thru it should not be hard to do so.

Also, to finish I do wonder if you feel that voting is worth it? Or if you think it's possible that we could have just a template panel picking the templates. [Say each clan in A/B can (if desired) put someone on the panel?] It would represent all clans, and probably be easier/less confusing AND save time since there is no voting period.

PS. The excel sheet i linked above is very cool. If you want to see how this vote was done, just looking in there and pasting in the votes could be helpful.

EDIT: Also, the current Cookies game link goes to the old MH map that has a missing connection. The map creator has fixed this (a long time ago), and the template nominator has stated that it was an accident that the old map was used. We will be using the updated map (the only change is the fix of the missing connection) for CL.

Edited 1/26/2019 05:52:00

Thanks, TBest, for your work organizing everything so far.

I think that the voting is an important component of the set-up. Because each clan has different strengths and weaknesses on the templates offered, they can vote accordingly and have a say in the process - but (other than what voting system to use, ha) no one really argues the results of the votes. I haven't looked at the votes closely, but I would assume most clans get some of the templates they voted for and not others, and since it's the result of 14 clans blind voting, there's no real argument to be made against the results.

Although setting up a template panel of 7-14 players still gives everyone a voice, I would think that would be way too many cooks in the kitchen. I honestly don't think that would be easier - people will argue over what to use, and then how do you resolve the disputes... take a vote? Haha.

One stated goal of the template panel for basically every CL I've participated in is to try and avoid using all of the same templates from the previous season, and try to avoid using the same map over and over in 1v1's, 2v2's and 3v3's. As someone who was on the panel this season, our ability to achieve those goals were limited by the templates that were nominated. We talked about leaving out Africa (since this will be it's 3rd use in a row) and the potential for overlap with the Biomes and Guiroma maps (or Volcano Island, which we left out of 2v2's), but we also did not have such an overabundance of templates we liked to choose from that we just left it to the voters to let it happen or not happen. So, I wonder if there is a compromise solution - keep the voting system, but the template panel offers fewer templates to vote on? Maybe three 3v3's, five 2v2's and nine 1v1's? That way the panel might be able to better achieve its goals but everyone still gets to vote. I don't know, just throwing ideas out there.

Edited 1/26/2019 07:26:38

I don't see a group of 7 or 14 people agreeing on anything. Just look how slow the Ethics panel is with just 5 people. And the audit panel half retired and noone cares because replacing Ko is work. Never put so many people in charge.

STV actually wasn't used last season. It was used only once, in CL9. And now.

We could consider changing the voting system since STV really limits the templates panel. Currently you need just one #1 vote in 1v1 to get in. Suppose that Bork was an option to be voted on this season. It would be possible for just 1 clan to force a MA+army cap template onto others. If we had a system where Bork needed a lot more votes, maybe the panel would give it a chance instead of a boring Yin'ang or repeating Africa for the 3rd time? And let the people decide if they want it? Maybe.

STV does have advantages though, mainly that it redistributes surplus votes. So you don't get situations like last season when everyone voted Africa and then everyone cried that wasted their vote because they voted Africa. You also don't need to game the system like "EU will make it for sure, but I hate Biomes a lot, so I'll vote India RoR Europe Biomes even though Europe is clearly the best".


Another thing: I heard opinions that the templates should be known earlier than 1-2 weeks before start of CL. Like, at the start of CL11 we should start figuring out CL12 templates. That also would allow the template panel to choose more unique templates since clans would have lots of time to prepare. I agree with it.

Anyone salty about cookies?

Also, to finish I do wonder if you feel that voting is worth it? Or if you think it's possible that we could have just a template panel picking the templates. [Say each clan in A/B can (if desired) put someone on the panel?] It would represent all clans, and probably be easier/less confusing AND save time since there is no voting period.

Yes please, remove the voting process!
And there's really no need for a large panel, just choose the templates yourself or select one or two players to do it for you. That way, it'll be easier to achieve quality and variety of templates.

And for all those worried that no vote will make things unfair for some clans, just give all clans some time to train on the templates chosen. If you announce the templates three weeks before the rosters are due/one month before games start, then everyone will be able to study the templates, and no one will have anything to complain about.

All this STV voting was implemented because there were some players arguing against the previous system. Now a fair, but not transparent system is implemented and again there are players that are against it.

Its nothing against all those opinions. But it is as it is: YOU CAN'T MAKE IT RIGHT FOR EVERYONE!

Keep it simple so YOU can organize it best.

If there is at the end still someone complaining he is still free to not join Clan League.

^That's my opinion. Definitely not the most supported. But actually you have to do it like this if you as organizer don't want to get burned out

Edited 1/26/2019 11:27:22