My strong observation is that there is no acceptance in the strategic community towards boot times shorter than 3 days. Any attempt to enforce such has, sometimes dramatically, diminished participation. I consider a boot time of 3 days + 0 banked to be the minimum which is worth considering.

There has to be more of a common sense approach to this. We're at a status where this league is diminishing not flourishing. If you have a HeyHueHei which I'm intepretating as someone just blatantly stalling when the game outcome is known. Just mark the game as forfeit if it gets to that stage. Formal warning, then ban. I think 1 day 12 hours + some banked time solves most of these problems. There's not a perfect solution, but 1 day 12 hours or whatever the deemed speed is.. Should ensure a good pace.

I have no issues with people taking all their allowed recommended time to make orders, but there has to be a side that this is a competition, not everyone enjoys prolonging such events for months and months, so quicken the pace of it. It's unfortunate it but if we have this problematic mindset of taking every available second to make each turn, then I don't see an other solution.

There has to be a collected effort to look at the total duration it takes to complete these events and wonder "Is this in the best interests of the league in terms of being competitive and fun?" My personal answer is No and No. Cause the games are poor quality, and you have players who don't want to commit to a long boring league that drags for months and months. The collective engagement levels is at a all time low. It's clear to me it's diminishing. We have to agree as a community, we have to quicken this up for the sake of good.

I understand players want time to procastinate/make custom scenario games on existing game states, but this is a situation where you must prioritise the overall interests of the league ahead of the interests of a minority that want to take every single second, (where I would argue it's just utter procastination in most cases anyways).

I have some significant concerns and some massive support for these changes.

In our desire to overhaul Clan League I think that we should recognise that it remains the most prestigious Clan tournament for a reason.

I have heard most of the ideas and think that there is a simple solution.

1. Reduce the number of Clans per Division from 7 to 5 reducing the total number of games in a season from 6 to 4 on each template.

2. Reduce the maximum number of slots per player from 3 to 2.

3. Introduce Tiered Divisions

Tier 1 - Division A has the Top 5 seeded Clans - the Clan finishing top is Champion and the Clans finishing 4 & 5 are relegated.

Tier 2 - Division B1 & B2 have Clans seeded 6-15 - the Clans Finishing top are Division Champions and they promote to Division A. The bottom Clan in each Division is demoted.

Tier 3 - Division C1, C2, C3, ....Cn have the remaining Clans in divisions of 5 Clans or fewer where the top Clan from each is promoted.

* In the even that there are more than two Divisions in Tier 3, more Clans will demote from Tier 2 much of that will be managed in concert with new Clans joining and others retiring.

4. Reduce Banked Time

1v1 games to 7d

2v2 to 10d

3v3 to 12d

---

This means that a Clan winning two consecutive Divisions would then be in Division A in 2 years. An improvement from 4.

This means that they total number of games would reduce by 1/3 which combined with the reduced banked time should speed the tournament up significantly.

This means that the maximum number of games per player would reduce by over 1/2 reducing the stress and workload of individual players significantly.

This means that all of the other things which make Clan League the overwhelming success that it is each year will remain.

I like the set-up Bodski is suggesting

If we want less slots per player (which does reduce the # of games a single player can have in total), do we also want less templates?

At the moment, a clan can CL with 6 players that triple-slot. If we limit that to double slotting, then a clan at minimum would need 9 players that play to their max.
Its still pretty low, but its also a 50% increase in the number of interested players a new/small clan needs.
It is not an unreasonable thing imo, but it might be something to take into consideration.

With regards to the boot time, CL is a multiday competition, so boot time must be at least 2.00 days.
The current 3 days / turn seems good enough to me.

Yes, it is annoying if someone always takes 3 days per turn, but that doesn't outweigh the inconvenience a shorter boot time would cause to normal players i.m.o.
WZ shouldn't be a daily chore, but something you play for fun in your spare time.

The reducing of banked time however is rather needed.
It just makes the game needlessly slow if every player can slow the game 15 more days.
Especially since most people end up burning it all on picks anyways, so it doesn't even end up being used.

"Yes, it is annoying if someone always takes 3 days per turn, but that doesn't outweigh the inconvenience a shorter boot time would cause to normal players i.m.o."

Well it does become a problem if in theory you have a 20 turn 1v1 game, where each player takes 3 days to take a turn. In theory a game lasts 3 months. If you apply the normal game allocation schedule, it becomes 5-6 month competition.

You could keep the convenience of a 3 day timer, but imo you have to significantly reduce the overall time it takes to allocate everyones games to a much more condensed period. Then you have the issue of too many games on a dashboard. There really isn't a perfect solution.

Hmm yes that would be an issue...
But can't the CL Panel just impose a penalty for stalling at that point?

Alternately, you can also maybe force speedy turns by 1 day boot + 20 days banked.
Which should give like 2 to 2,5 days boot per turn on average.
But such a setting causes games to quickly sink all the way to the bottom of the Dashboard, so anyone with more than 15(?) games will have their CL games go to page 2 where they will never be played.

And since people are used to wasting their banked time on picks, playing with boot/banked times like that is also likely to increase booting in CL.

There really isn't a perfect solution.

Agreed, every solution is wrong in one way or another

Edited 5/26/2025 12:43:04

I like the current format. Enough time for weaker players like me to practice maps. Wouldn't be against the banked days being slightly less, perhaps 12? I don't think many people would join if it is less than 3 days per turn.

I think people have really abused/normalized the 15d banked standard of CL games - which was only put in place to account for vacations given that players on vacations can be booted. Everyone here seems to forget that. Yet now it is treated as some intrinsic essential element of Clan League while bizarrely remaining unique only to Clan League. The reality is that hardly anyone actually goes on lengthy vacations from Warzone while in the middle of playing important Clan League games. And those that do tend to go AWOL and not return in time to avoid the boot.

The extended boot time serves a particularly niche purpose that has been so commonly abused that it has become normalized. If you aren't off Warzone for a week there really should be no reason why your CL games are taking more than 3 days per turn - including picks. And honestly, if a player can't be trusted to be consistently active enough to show up at least once every couple of days for the duration of the event, then they shouldn't be on the lineup.

That's why I believe there is no viable solution that has anything more than about 5 days banked for any conceivable reformatting of Clan League one is going to propose. Extended banked times increase jeopardy for both players as well, naturally of course. Because they increase the potential duration of the match and thus paradoxically enough increase the likelihood of booting. The actual benefits IMO are marginal. If you were available to play at a regular pace but then your opponent stalled picks for 2 weeks and your schedule becomes tight your boot risk is increased relative to your boot risk 2 weeks earlier.

I think the idea should be reducing jeopardy at every stage of the competition except when it is actually necessitated. Obviously if you reduce jeopardy at every stage then the event will hold no prestige. This is why I strongly favor a two-staged format as it solves this problem beautifully by introducing a first stage with relatively low jeopardy in which many clans can participate at a reasonable pace while the second stage which will naturally involve fewer clans that are more dedicated can then have the stakes raised (and thus the boot times as well).


For me the only real takeaway from Bodski's suggestion is the varied boot times on 1v1s, 2v2s, and 3v3s. I quite like that idea and think it can be applicable to a reformatted iteration of Clan League. 3v3s are of course much tougher to coordinate than 1v1s and have multiple players involved so the banked and boot times should be higher than for 1v1s. Fantastic proposal.

However, the tiered division format has significant problems. And reducing the number of clans in this tiered divisions significantly compounds those problems. It increases jeopardy across the board for every clan while not really solving the underlying issues. If you have the bottom two clans in a 5-clan division relegate, I will tell you that mergers will become a LOT more common than they already are. Clans will become even more homogenized and talent will be concentrated at the very top given that the clans in division A will appeal a lot more to stronger players and there will be fewer such clans as division A has been shrunk down. And 2 relegating clans means only 3 of those clans will actually be mainstays. The stakes and jeopardy are dramatically increased yet the prestige actually diminishes because the same clans will compete year in and year out. You can have no Bunses at VS or Rakleaders at SNinja. They will all invariably end up playing for the same clan. Which is what the current format led to anyway.

It is essential for a reformat to be able to create the conditions to allow for a distribution of talent across the board. That isn't to say it must dismantle the top clans. But it must create conditions that don't end up concentrating talent at the top clans.

You are correct Chris, I should read fully rather than skim read:

Pros:
- Shorter length (allegedly):
Except it's comprised of four stages of multi day games that have to end before the next stage starts:
Group stage, quarter finals, semi finals and final.
This could drag it out even longer than a schedule of overlapping group games.

- Shorter boot times: Irrelevant to the discussion of format

- Less time to get to Division A and win: True but this for me is part of the beauty of clan league is the battle to get to A or to B. Gives something for lesser clans to fight for rather than just being filler to get knocked out by Myth Busters before they move into the Quarter finals.


Cons:
- Some clans get knocked out early meaning a smaller and smaller pool of invested and interested clans throughout the competition. By the end only the elite clans care much about the results. I as a mid-tier clan member couldn't care less is Octane beats MoD to clinch clan league victory but have cared a lot about whether Razor can pull in a result on French Brawl against Photonic Symmetry to help drag my clan out of relegation to Division C.

- The suggestion to have an 8 player 1 slot each roster will remove any flexibility as a clan leader to build a diverse and inclusive roster and introduce new clan members to the competition without a massive risk. Currently there are 18 slots on the roster and I can put a newer less experienced player in with an experience hand on a teamgame meaning more involvement for more people.

- Requires a CLOT change?

- Requires a specific multiple of clans rather than any number meaning some clans are proposed to be knocked out in a pre season qualifier (which also adds an additional round to wait on).

- More than one clan league a year? Reduces anticipation and prestige.

- Is a cup not a league (just because the champions league is misnamed doesn't justify removing promotion and relegation format of a league).

- Chance to destroy a long running and successful competition on the game which has stood the test of time as the highest level of gameplay on this game.

--‐--------------------------------------------
I'm not opposed to this existing I just think it could complement Clan league and not replace it.

Photonic Symmetry and everyone

I think that we need to step back and ask some questions to inform the debate rather than jumping to the fix.

(I am as guilty as anyone)

What I tried to do was to compile the complaints / problems that people had raised and propose a solution which addressed ONLY those complaints.

As I understand it, these are (I do not necessarily agree, but this is what I picked up from others):

1. The competition takes too long
2. Players find it stressful
3. Promotion and relegation is too slow (i.e. it takes too long for a new Clan to get to Division A) - so yes
4. The boot time is too long leading to procrastination

Maybe we should focus on brainstorming what is wrong and record that. There will likely be much conflict, but we should see some consensus fall out if we seek input from the widest community. My list may be wrong and there may be other significant problems which people can share which we have not yet considered.

Once we know what we want to fix, we may be able to make small changes to achieve this or it may need a bigger overhaul. I am reluctant to support a large overhaul, but others may disagree, and we should listen to what everyone wants (not just the top players).

We should also consider what constraints exist (e.g. will the new format work with the Clot ?). If a radical overhaul is proposed, this may require some testing - do we have anyone who is prepared to do that ?

Only then can we really develop a system which solves the issues at hand.

In summary - we should get consensus on what needs to be fixed before we propose any changes and the changes should focus ONLY on what needs to be fixed.

---

I will continue to champion the role CL plays in Player and Clan development. In this respect, team games are important, and allowing sufficient time for teams to function together and facilitate player development seems a critical part of what CL is and does.

I support what the guys from Corp have said - our Magna 3v3 team is made up of the least qualified team on paper yet we are holding our own at the very top. This has been due to hard work. Somewhere in Warzone there must be a place for teams to work together at a pace which is relaxed enough to allow teams to function effectively as a team across different timezones whilst also having a real life outside of here.

"If you can't make your moves within x days".

Does x days allow for the ability for 3 people to do analysis, discuss this to correct errors and then get together to agree what to do ? Someone may not be available on Sundays (like in our team) or may have a couple of trips into different timezones during the season so have times a limited availability (also like in our team). I know that many teams work with one leader and another one (or two) followers, but this is not how it should function. Team play should result in 1+1 > 2 or 1+1+1 >3. Not who is the best one in the team.

---

I also feel strongly that CL should remain as a promotion / relegation league and that it should be a once per year event. Maybe an overall view should be taken linked to other community events (Manager League, Nations Cup, etc.).

I do agree that a lot of people are abusing the banked / boot times. I can confirm that in our Magna 3v3 team we have utilised all of our time as best we could. Also, we are not a slow team - we are as quick as the others.

@Dry-clean-only There is no quarter finals. I find it difficult to understand how this could drag out even longer then the original format if you are 1. Reducing the amount of games (in total it goes down from 6 to 5) 2. Reducing the boot times for each game substantially. 3. Condensing the game schedule significantly.

Regarding the "Knocked out early, lost interest" point. In theory yes. But unless you finish quite literally last in your group. You should have a participation in the next round. Hence increasing your interest significantly more then playing in a 6 month competition where you know you're not gonna finish top 2 or finish bottom 2 almost from the start seeing the line-ups. I think the point is valid but is a less relevant one then how it is currently is in the current existing format. For that reason, I would say this is a more exciting format.

You can argue that reducing the slots/template required for each clan allows more smaller clans to participate which you could say is more healthier for the league then accomodating for one large clan to have a "inclusive and diversive" roster which is a bit of luxury not many clans can afford. I think it's more problematic for clans to fill out a line-up then having the opposite problem.

Regarding the CLOT, which is the heart to any format. I think it's fine I'm sure. No expert but you can always set up round robins via the clot and count it this way or use the existing clan league function. At the worst case, although absolutely undesirable. Manual games creation can be used for the group stage. I believe games have to manually made for the knockouts though cause it's just a once off game per template so there's not much point in automating such a process.

I'm sorry but Clan League is losing prestige and anticipation as it currently is. I and I would say a silent majority, do not find clan league the best competition to play in for many reasons elaborated on this thread. I really ask that you read the posts on this thread cause I find it a bit annoying you are bringing up points that have already been answered for. Photonic Symmetry makes a great articulate post explaining why reform is important. You can agree or disagree as you feel, but It's clear to me you've not read these posts.

Edited 5/29/2025 14:04:06

@machine-washed-bliss "I like the current format. Enough time for weaker players like me to practice maps. Wouldn't be against the banked days being slightly less, perhaps 12? I don't think many people would join if it is less than 3 days per turn."

Should your need for longer practice times, be a sufficient enough reason to make this event last months making the overall commitment to such a event significantly high and potentially dismissive for new clans/players to join?

To the people who are trying to sell the idea that clan league once per year is a acceptable model, I'm going to ask you to give your heads a wobble please.

The average shelf life of a player who takes part in this competition, is very subjective to guess cause we don't know exactly but I'm willing to gamble a lot of coins it is not above 4 years. Therefore a player promoting Division D to Division A likely won't make it. Might luckily get one season. How in gods name is that right? To me it just encourages clans joining/merging.

I would say it's a crime that MB, have not been in Division A until next year. Despite being a dominating force on clan wars. And you guys think it's right a clearly division A clan should take almost as long as a olympics/world cup cycle to just qualify for it adds presitge? It's just bullshit to me and is in fact so damaging to what the league is suppose to be. A league of high quality games, where we have the best at the top.

Instead we have the best drowning in the pool of time, cause they have already likely retired at this point. It's actually almost elitist by nature and so unwelcoming it's insane.

Why the hell has it taken 4 years to get Aika a proper top player to play in Division A? What a absolute joke.

@Plat

Saying I haven't read the posts because you disagree with my viewpoints makes this whole discussion kind of useless.

Insulting people will also discourage anyone to listen to your ideas :)

It's taken me almost 10 years to get to a clan to Division A (looks like it is happening finally fingers crossed). I don't mind that because this is a clan competition not a single player competition - building a clan that has reached the heights of this competition has been something I've enjoyed doing and shows the prestige of this clan competition. Else you will just see new clans every year formed to win clan league that season... If you want to see that - go run the next season of manager league.

I like the sound of the competition you want to run - would very happily take part in it with my clan in addition to clan league :)

I do find it mad saying that a competition is dying when it's been around for 18 seasons and outlasted (chronologically) every other strategic competiton on the game.

Now you want to change it to a format that has at times existed in slightly different ways and died very quickly in order to "save it".

I think create this competition as a cup and I look forward to playing. I also look forward to CL19 :)

@dry-clean-only

It is dying though. Participation has been rapidly declining for the past few seasons, to the point where Division D was no longer necessary. Even in Division A, hardly anyone is motivated anymore, and you have clans like Turtles having to merge 4 clans into one just to stay alive.

The reason for this is that while old players retire or lose interest in Clan League, new strat players have no interest in Clan League whatsoever. People show a strong preference for Clan Wars, in large part due to its rewards, casual playstyle, and how fast the event is. The problem with Clan League is that with the excruciatingly long boot time, and the 3 year road to get to Division A, new clans see no reason to play anymore.

The only way this could possibly be fixed is with a drastic format change, so I like Plat's ideas to try to reduce the length of seasons, as well as reduce the stress load some players inevitably feel during Clan League, which can lead to a quick burnout. I actually personally think we should also abolish the P/R format, so that new clans don't get discouraged by starting from the bottom, and theoretically have a chance to win in even their first season of Clan League. I know Cowboy came up with a potential Swiss Stage format at some point to deal with matchmaking, although it is far from perfect, but I haven't come up with a new format myself.

You can't say with a straight face that Myth Busters spending the last 3 years trying to get to Division A, while being one of the most skilled clans on all of WZ, isn't just a load of BS. There are many examples that are similar to MB too, many of which lost interest before they even reached Division A. It's a nightmare.