I have another scheduling suggestion which should be familiar to people who played in CL10. In that season we essentially had two waves of 1v1 games. 3 of the tournaments were created at the beginning of the season, and the other 3 were created at the midway point. This has two benefits:

• If you start some 1v1s at the very beginning of the season, you get some early results when everyone is excited about the new season, rather than having to wait a month before the first team games start trickling in.
  
• If you have some players who will only be available for the first half, or the second half of the season, they can still be involved without having to resort to substitutions.
  

Perhaps a bit of the nitpick, but if you decide to date with DD/MM/YYYY (European Format) instead of MM/DD/YYYY (American Format), I would rather you do DD.MM.YYYY or DD-MM-YYYY. That way there's an easy visual cue to me that the formatting of time string is the European standard instead of being confused by it all the time.

Edited 4/22/2020 20:10:41

i know this will take a long time to happen but maybe realling The Cl League instead of having 4 divisions of 7
lets have 2 divisions of 14?

Edited 4/22/2020 19:54:14

and all play all, that doubles the games, doubles the length. CL11 took 9 months (?) as it was to complete

Even Cl12 looks to be taking 6 months to complete

Did you think that through at all?

no i didnt i wont lie

I think the size is good enough. but one shouldn't complain about that promotion from D to A last too long if you throw goralgns idea away that fast. this way you could get to A within 1 season :D

Edited 4/23/2020 11:00:42

1) The schedule is too squeezed, likely as an overreaction to the stalling of previous CL. I would consider to extend the schedule of 1-2 months as to allow to any player to be able to cope with all other events ongoing. Ideally the schedule may be adjusted to have 2 CL per year, one starting in September and one in February.

2) Scheduled games work well, still it has the problem of creating a peak of games in the middle of the season. In order to optimize it, the first and the last 2 games may be started almost together. Creating the games 2-1-1-2 would improve it, whithout delaying the schedule.

3) Banked time is great, still it cannot be combined in team games. So if team mates have different periods of break, it won't work. I would add honored vacations with limitations (e.g. 1 only vacation per player per CL, 1 only vacation per game per team, vacations not honored in the last scheduled games).

4) Template selection: voting is nice, but it would be good if part of the templates (maybe just 1 or 2) are directly selected by a panel (not necessarily template panel, CL panel is fine). This would ensure giving a chance to templates that are not known, to have always variety of settings and fine tune the pool.

5) Template definition for next CL: it would be great if this is anticipated well in advance of the end of previous CL, say at the point when the last games of previous CL are created.

6) New clans joining the CL that, based on objective criteria, are good enough may be directly going to B or C (criteria may be the average MDL rating of the top 8 players of the clan). Arguments are so strong for this (not killing lower divisions, having homogeneous interesting competitions, making it interesting for all, ...)
Let's remember that this was considered before Masters merged with Apps. As this issue is likely closed, this may be the right moment to implement it, as it would not cast any shadow on the purposes for it was created.

"1) The schedule is too squeezed, likely as an overreaction to the stalling of previous CL. I would consider to extend the schedule of 1-2 months as to allow to any player to be able to cope with all other events ongoing. Ideally the schedule may be adjusted to have 2 CL per year, one starting in September and one in February."


change the dates to one in december(winter cl) and June(summer cl) That would work better than september and february

(accidental double post

Edited 4/23/2020 12:58:59

superpromotion in case of pure dominance in the division sounds fair.
If a clan has >90%, >85% or >80%PC maybe.
MDL is wide in template range, but only limited to 1v1s though. Would be good to have a measure to consider all aspects

I also would prefer to let new clans start from the bottom, really. and then let them superpromote if they really perform well.

Too often I saw promising looking clans signing up, imploding before the season actually starts, imploding during the season or not playing in the season after.

i am not sure if this would be valueble for clan league to have "one-hit-wonder" clans promoting fast and make the life harder for slowly but consistantly growing clans.

But I might be biased

Edited 4/23/2020 13:31:30

superpromotion is a nice idea, but there needs to be room; if enough clans drop out it's fine, but if none do and a clan from C needs to superpromote you either end up with 8 clans in A and 6 in B, or you need to relegate one more clan who "just barely managed to hold on"/promote one less who just earned it. The only way it works is if we do with more relegations anyhow so we always have that space freed up and while that makes it more dynamical it also may mean clans have to play below their division every other season.

superpromotion sounds good on paper but the execution would fail because it creates more problems than it solves

If you allow super promotes, you also have to allow super relegations to make the space.
Same if new clans can start anywhere.

If a new clan made of greats gets put into A, then there is are three teams relegated from the previous season that they don't know about until the new clan registers? Hardly playable
And that then makes a three team relegation in B and C too...
You spend the whole season playing hard and celebrate your 5th, then you get told you relegate anyway? No thanks..


There is the ugly rule about 1/3rd players being able to claim a clan spot. As it would be unlikely for a new clan to appear out of the blue; good enough, known enough; worth a spot in A/B/C rather than start in D.
But if keeping the divisions the same size (A teams = B teams = C teams etc) and not relegating three teams it's just not doable. No matter how logical or fair it seems ;-)

There could be the option of A, B, C1, C2 with one promotion from each C. But that would need good knowledge of all the clans in the C. To make it fair, and that's knowledge I don't know people have. But would take a year off the D to A charge. (and 3 teams switch between the Cs). Depends on the level of all the teams in C and D this season. And i have no idea. It would be a clever person + clans in C+D who would decide these and I am neither of these things!

With clans falling apart/splitting/merging/feeder there is the plan that top 7 clans go A (previous 5 + 2 promotes). B made with 3 from B, 2 from A, 2 from C. Any clan that folds will drag a clan up from the lower division. There's always a chance to move up a little quicker

I doubt very much there'll be big changes, many things are discussed between many people already and this is what comes out from 12 seasons of experience. Work through your own ideas, ask the right questions to help others understand.
Further discussion would come once the number of teams entered for CL13 is known. 28 broke easily into 4*7;n
24 doesn't break into 7,7,7,3