Big league restructure proposal

User avatar
ZachSmack
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 7:53 pm
Battle.net Name: ZachSmack
Battle.net Char Code: 340
Battle.net Server: NA
Location: East Troy, Wisconsin

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by ZachSmack » Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:06 am

I think you raise a lot of good points krazy. The part I found especially interesting was the 2 seperate owners per team, this could solve a lot of problems owners face while also keeping the ability to promote exceptional probe players to the ZHL.
User avatar
Watermelon
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:34 pm
Battle.net Name: Watermelon
Battle.net Char Code: 1918
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by Watermelon » Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:26 am

The problem with having 2 different sections of players designated 'ZHL' and 'ZHPL' is that attendance is never perfect, and some teams suffer from major attendance issues. Limiting ZHL lineups to 2 subs is just asking for more lopsided or forfeited games.

I also think you'd end up with some "ZHL subs" who don't see any action all season because their starters happen to be very active and they're "too good" to be on their probe team.
S4 Champ | Playoff MVP | "Best Owner"
EUDL7 Champ
BaseTradeTV ZH3K Winner
record for most goals in a ZHL game: http://www.zealothockey.net/event/450/
User avatar
Rigensis
Posts: 888
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 12:44 pm
Battle.net Name: Rigensis
Battle.net Char Code: 955
Battle.net Server: EU
Location: rigaLatvia.
Contact:

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by Rigensis » Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:48 am

1) Make easier rules.
In your explanation about why you think that splitting probes from main team you gave 1 example of rules which you want to ditch (complicated playoff eligibility rules for play-offs) - which would be replaced with a different rules which would regulate the splitting of main and probe teams.

Same with remake rules - the current rules would be replaced with a new rule set which would regulate what you thought would better remake procedure.

In general - rules are added whenever there is a need of some sort of regulation - all rules are necessary because at some point in past the issue arise which was needed to be controlled. Yes - with time some rules get outdated and those rules should be spotted and updated. But taking out rules cos they look too complicated would only lead to the same chaotic situations which wouldn't happen if those rules were in place.

If you have a list of specific rules which you think is too complicated or unnecessary please show us.

2) Make an owner position more prestigious.
In EU owners can choose their team names, and the name of team is Owners_nick Owners_team_names pick. Tho we have a common theme for season. First season twitch emotes (McDoudle`s Kappas, Rig`s PjSalts, etc), in second - animal names (Snake`s Tunnel Snakes, Shusuke`s Demon Wolves, etc).

I have proposed to the_music an award system for Leagues - the owner of winning team gets customized skin or goal horn, 4-5 players from his team by owners choice gets a skin from a catalog, everyone in winners team gets winners icon (those showed at start of a game). That would make ownership`s position very desirable.

3) Split Main Team from Probe team and have for each of those teams different owner.
This actually is one of a rare suggestions in your list. And a good one, IHMO. Not only that would help drawing clear border between those who can play in playoffs but also that would make 2 tier league better structured. But that work in ideal world, I guess, because the big counter point is that people are not showing up for games, which would break even this system.

Tho it is worth to explore this idea more.

A more radical step would be ditch probe league and to have 16 teams (7-8 players per team) with two conferences (2 games with team from same conference, 1 with a teams from other conference).

4) Boosting trades.
In Russian KHL there is this system where owners can put players in unprotected player pool - notifying every owner that there is a player he wants to trade. I am not sure on details with that system, but in ZH it could work like - if you put 5th rounder in that pool then that player can be traded with a player from 5th round without a need of owners accept. But if someone wants to trade that 5th round players with, eg, 7th rounder then the owner can refuse or accept.

5) Owner draft pick rounds.
From NA rules "Draft Order and Owner Pick Value will be decided by the League Commissioner."* - last NA season you guys had a procedure which made sure no fishy things going on - with votes from owners, league managers and commissioner.

* It should say - "The procedure in which Owner Pick Values are set will be decided by the Commissioner."

In EU`s first season we didn't have a problem with a way we did it, and we used almost the same way in season 2 but there was issues because of fishiness - and thus - in season 3 rule set we will address that by having stricter regulations for that.

6) #Transparency2015
With the toxicity you guys have in your community? Kappa. A larger scale discussions would be an obstacle for a quick solid decision.
I was reading reviews of zh on na. Few 1 star votes because ppl didn't enjoy the bm.

Also - in past seasons NA had a great tradition of Pre-draft Owners meeting - where Commish explains rules and takes suggestions. Also in rules - any Commish rule can be veto`d
"Reserves the right to exercise emergency powers and make changes to the rulebook in the best interests of the league if he and at least 2 League Managers agree with the change. If a majority of the Owners and League Managers combined (more than 50% vote) disagree with a change made in emergency circumstances, the change will be revoked."

And no one forbids to start a discussion about any issue.

7) Active league managers.
"Must assign between 3 and 6 League Managers (LM) to rule on issues in his/her place if he/she is absent or if he/she recognizes a large enough bias for a ruling."

8) Rescheduling issues
Each team has 3 reschedules. It is not much if you take in account that each team has 18 matches.
What`s the issue there? If there would be no chance for reschedule - ppl would demand it.

9) Remake issues.
Each game has 30 min slot - last season Moose started to have a stricter time rules - games need to start no later than 5 min after start time - each team has 1 remake per game, which they can lose if they are not ready for that 5 min mark. And each team has 2 min pause time in game - in the worst case scenario - game would take those 30 min slot, in best case - 17 min.
With adding new player issue when remaking - well - again - it would be like with reschedules - some people will be happy if no new player can come in remaked game but others wont. In general - you guys want beautiful - competitive league - with best possible teams playing - and in that light - remaking just to get in a game a person who was late for a game start - would just add closer games. Tho I think ProfX hates remakes :D
User avatar
krazymen
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:10 pm
Battle.net Name: krazymen
Battle.net Char Code: 249
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by krazymen » Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:17 am

Watermelon wrote:The problem with having 2 different sections of players designated 'ZHL' and 'ZHPL' is that attendance is never perfect, and some teams suffer from major attendance issues. Limiting ZHL lineups to 2 subs is just asking for more lopsided or forfeited games.

I also think you'd end up with some "ZHL subs" who don't see any action all season because their starters happen to be very active and they're "too good" to be on their probe team.
I am aware of that, however, during the many seasons attendance problems were linked to either, bad teams or there was enough players from the top 6 rounds to play in. The other major attendance issues was in probe league which is why theres so many rules about it for probe. I believe that a lot of attendance issues also comes from the owner and i also believe that having 2 subs and reschedule possibility should be more than enough. For the 3k tournament (yes its only 1 day but its still the same idea) most of the teams only had 1 sub originally and they felt like it was enough. 2 subs with reschedules as well as commish having a final word on any particular issue should be more than enough if we have a structure that involves the players and the owners in a better way. Attendance issue is also something to keep in mind while drafting. Could potentially add a way to drop a player completely from your rooster to free up some space for more active player during the season. For example, you draft gigi 3rd round but he never shows up while you have very active probes, drop gigi and switch a probe up.

As for the ZHL subs that doesnt see any action, it doesnt change anything from that system and the system we have now, sir for example said many times that he would rather not play than play in probe and have a bunch of people talk about how unbalanced it is. Keep in mind that the goal would be to reduce as much as possible the skill gap between players and to have more consistant players and instead of having a top 4 that is the best having diversity in lineups. For example, that team has a very strong offense but weak defense, ill try to field my better defender (that might be in lower rounds) instead of my better offensive but less responsible players.
Bowling trophy (birthday trophy)
Achieved level 105 in starcraft 2
Undefeated in 5v5
self proclaimed director of ironic trophies
User avatar
krazymen
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:10 pm
Battle.net Name: krazymen
Battle.net Char Code: 249
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by krazymen » Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:36 am

Rigensis wrote:1) Make easier rules.
In your explanation about why you think that splitting probes from main team you gave 1 example of rules which you want to ditch (complicated playoff eligibility rules for play-offs) - which would be replaced with a different rules which would regulate the splitting of main and probe teams.

Same with remake rules - the current rules would be replaced with a new rule set which would regulate what you thought would better remake procedure.

In general - rules are added whenever there is a need of some sort of regulation - all rules are necessary because at some point in past the issue arise which was needed to be controlled. Yes - with time some rules get outdated and those rules should be spotted and updated. But taking out rules cos they look too complicated would only lead to the same chaotic situations which wouldn't happen if those rules were in place.

If you have a list of specific rules which you think is too complicated or unnecessary please show us.

2) Make an owner position more prestigious.
In EU owners can choose their team names, and the name of team is Owners_nick Owners_team_names pick. Tho we have a common theme for season. First season twitch emotes (McDoudle`s Kappas, Rig`s PjSalts, etc), in second - animal names (Snake`s Tunnel Snakes, Shusuke`s Demon Wolves, etc).

I have proposed to the_music an award system for Leagues - the owner of winning team gets customized skin or goal horn, 4-5 players from his team by owners choice gets a skin from a catalog, everyone in winners team gets winners icon (those showed at start of a game). That would make ownership`s position very desirable.

3) Split Main Team from Probe team and have for each of those teams different owner.
This actually is one of a rare suggestions in your list. And a good one, IHMO. Not only that would help drawing clear border between those who can play in playoffs but also that would make 2 tier league better structured. But that work in ideal world, I guess, because the big counter point is that people are not showing up for games, which would break even this system.

Tho it is worth to explore this idea more.

A more radical step would be ditch probe league and to have 16 teams (7-8 players per team) with two conferences (2 games with team from same conference, 1 with a teams from other conference).

4) Boosting trades.
In Russian KHL there is this system where owners can put players in unprotected player pool - notifying every owner that there is a player he wants to trade. I am not sure on details with that system, but in ZH it could work like - if you put 5th rounder in that pool then that player can be traded with a player from 5th round without a need of owners accept. But if someone wants to trade that 5th round players with, eg, 7th rounder then the owner can refuse or accept.

5) Owner draft pick rounds.
From NA rules "Draft Order and Owner Pick Value will be decided by the League Commissioner."* - last NA season you guys had a procedure which made sure no fishy things going on - with votes from owners, league managers and commissioner.

* It should say - "The procedure in which Owner Pick Values are set will be decided by the Commissioner."

In EU`s first season we didn't have a problem with a way we did it, and we used almost the same way in season 2 but there was issues because of fishiness - and thus - in season 3 rule set we will address that by having stricter regulations for that.

6) #Transparency2015
With the toxicity you guys have in your community? Kappa. A larger scale discussions would be an obstacle for a quick solid decision.
I was reading reviews of zh on na. Few 1 star votes because ppl didn't enjoy the bm.

Also - in past seasons NA had a great tradition of Pre-draft Owners meeting - where Commish explains rules and takes suggestions. Also in rules - any Commish rule can be veto`d
"Reserves the right to exercise emergency powers and make changes to the rulebook in the best interests of the league if he and at least 2 League Managers agree with the change. If a majority of the Owners and League Managers combined (more than 50% vote) disagree with a change made in emergency circumstances, the change will be revoked."

And no one forbids to start a discussion about any issue.

7) Active league managers.
"Must assign between 3 and 6 League Managers (LM) to rule on issues in his/her place if he/she is absent or if he/she recognizes a large enough bias for a ruling."

8) Rescheduling issues
Each team has 3 reschedules. It is not much if you take in account that each team has 18 matches.
What`s the issue there? If there would be no chance for reschedule - ppl would demand it.

9) Remake issues.
Each game has 30 min slot - last season Moose started to have a stricter time rules - games need to start no later than 5 min after start time - each team has 1 remake per game, which they can lose if they are not ready for that 5 min mark. And each team has 2 min pause time in game - in the worst case scenario - game would take those 30 min slot, in best case - 17 min.
With adding new player issue when remaking - well - again - it would be like with reschedules - some people will be happy if no new player can come in remaked game but others wont. In general - you guys want beautiful - competitive league - with best possible teams playing - and in that light - remaking just to get in a game a person who was late for a game start - would just add closer games. Tho I think ProfX hates remakes :D
1: Its not much about scraping rules but more about simplifying them, a lot of problems came from those rules that are hard to enforce like the if a zhl player wants to play in probe there much be no other probe available but etc etc etc

2. How many players on EU were opting in to be owner?

3. Answered in the water's reply (would probably still need a test drive else we'll never know)

4. Something we could look at

5. Comes back to what I said

6. Not everyone from the community comes on the forums, a lot of the people on the forums have good ideas that can be explored. THE COMMUNITY WILL NOT TAKE THE DECISIONS THEY WILL ONLY PARTICIPATE. That will not change the delay at which the decisions will be taken. You can even put some sort of deadline until you take your decisions as the commish. The commish will have the final word.

7. I wasnt precise enough, what I meant was an update before the season draft, right now the LM are already decided since the owners round position are out. Correct me if im wrong but there hasnt been a post saying who they were. I also think that 3-6 is not a good. Take the numbers of owners cut that in half, thats the minimum of LM, no maximum.

8. The issue doesnt come from the fact thats theres no enough reschedules or too many. The issue comes from the fact that an owner can refuse a reschedule proposed. Which should be fine because you dont want to get screwed over when your team can make the date and its the other team that cant but I feel like this comes back to the issue of being a chore to make it to the game. I think its something to be argued about, I dont have a perfect way to "fix" it right now.

9. Remakes are bad, in a perfect world no remakes would be awarded, however i think we do need them because not everyone has perfect internet and the game is unstable. Its true that moose added more rules for the time slots but from my experience they were not enforced well enough. This is not about making everyone happy, this is about making a fair system. If the other players showed up on time but yours is 5 minutes late hes late, you shouldnt be able to get him in the game using your reschedule.
Bowling trophy (birthday trophy)
Achieved level 105 in starcraft 2
Undefeated in 5v5
self proclaimed director of ironic trophies
User avatar
Rigensis
Posts: 888
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 12:44 pm
Battle.net Name: Rigensis
Battle.net Char Code: 955
Battle.net Server: EU
Location: rigaLatvia.
Contact:

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by Rigensis » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:05 am

krazymen wrote: 1: Its not much about scraping rules but more about simplifying them, a lot of problems came from those rules that are hard to enforce like the if a zhl player wants to play in probe there much be no other probe available but etc etc etc
Have you seen NHL rules? :D
It would be easier to understand which rules have been difficult to implement if you had an examples from the past seasons.
krazymen wrote:2. How many players on EU were opting in to be owner?
22 in season 1 for 8 teams, 20 in season 2 for 7 teams.
But if owners could win a customized skin - more would put their name for possible ownership. Since team owner same as League Commissioner will be under huge stress during the season because people will disagree with decisions those two make. And if there is nothing to gain from that experience only lousy virtual award then I can't imagine why anyone would put one in that position.
krazymen wrote:6. Not everyone from the community comes on the forums, a lot of the people on the forums have good ideas that can be explored. THE COMMUNITY WILL NOT TAKE THE DECISIONS THEY WILL ONLY PARTICIPATE. That will not change the delay at which the decisions will be taken. You can even put some sort of deadline until you take your decisions as the commish. The commish will have the final word.
Please, name one public discussion which yielded some positive results here on forums? Kappa.
But I am all for good clean discussion about issues.
krazymen wrote:7. I wasnt precise enough, what I meant was an update before the season draft, right now the LM are already decided since the owners round position are out. Correct me if im wrong but there hasnt been a post saying who they were. I also think that 3-6 is not a good. Take the numbers of owners cut that in half, thats the minimum of LM, no maximum.
Names are in Rules section.
krazymen wrote:8. The issue doesnt come from the fact thats theres no enough reschedules or too many. The issue comes from the fact that an owner can refuse a reschedule proposed. Which should be fine because you dont want to get screwed over when your team can make the date and its the other team that cant but I feel like this comes back to the issue of being a chore to make it to the game. I think its something to be argued about, I dont have a perfect way to "fix" it right now.
Actually I read the s6 rules - it seems there will be 13 games per team not 18 as in the last season. 2 conferences with 5 teams in each of it.
Maybe 3 declines per season?
krazymen wrote:9. Remakes are bad, in a perfect world no remakes would be awarded, however i think we do need them because not everyone has perfect internet and the game is unstable. Its true that moose added more rules for the time slots but from my experience they were not enforced well enough. This is not about making everyone happy, this is about making a fair system. If the other players showed up on time but yours is 5 minutes late hes late, you shouldnt be able to get him in the game using your reschedule.
2 counter points -
A) Real life > Video games.
B) If there is a way to have a better quality games - then you should go for it.
If a better player missed the start of game and wants in to rise the quality of game - they should be allowed.
User avatar
Blitz
Posts: 1001
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:34 pm
Battle.net Name: Blitzerg
Battle.net Char Code: 713
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by Blitz » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:24 am

Why is someone "not signed up in the league" <--- LOL... posting about changes to the league?
Image

The only two links you ever need to click:
https://puu.sh/zFTwQ/57cfb6dd4f.png
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=2556
User avatar
krazymen
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:10 pm
Battle.net Name: krazymen
Battle.net Char Code: 249
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by krazymen » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:27 am

Blitz wrote:Why is someone "not signed up in the league" <--- LOL... posting about changes to the league?
i played the league longer than you.

Thank you for your feedback
Bowling trophy (birthday trophy)
Achieved level 105 in starcraft 2
Undefeated in 5v5
self proclaimed director of ironic trophies
User avatar
krazymen
Posts: 1171
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:10 pm
Battle.net Name: krazymen
Battle.net Char Code: 249
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by krazymen » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:33 am

Rigensis wrote:
krazymen wrote: 1: Its not much about scraping rules but more about simplifying them, a lot of problems came from those rules that are hard to enforce like the if a zhl player wants to play in probe there much be no other probe available but etc etc etc
Have you seen NHL rules? :D
It would be easier to understand which rules have been difficult to implement if you had an examples from the past seasons.
krazymen wrote:2. How many players on EU were opting in to be owner?
22 in season 1 for 8 teams, 20 in season 2 for 7 teams.
But if owners could win a customized skin - more would put their name for possible ownership. Since team owner same as League Commissioner will be under huge stress during the season because people will disagree with decisions those two make. And if there is nothing to gain from that experience only lousy virtual award then I can't imagine why anyone would put one in that position.
krazymen wrote:6. Not everyone from the community comes on the forums, a lot of the people on the forums have good ideas that can be explored. THE COMMUNITY WILL NOT TAKE THE DECISIONS THEY WILL ONLY PARTICIPATE. That will not change the delay at which the decisions will be taken. You can even put some sort of deadline until you take your decisions as the commish. The commish will have the final word.
Please, name one public discussion which yielded some positive results here on forums? Kappa.
But I am all for good clean discussion about issues.
krazymen wrote:7. I wasnt precise enough, what I meant was an update before the season draft, right now the LM are already decided since the owners round position are out. Correct me if im wrong but there hasnt been a post saying who they were. I also think that 3-6 is not a good. Take the numbers of owners cut that in half, thats the minimum of LM, no maximum.
Names are in Rules section.
krazymen wrote:8. The issue doesnt come from the fact thats theres no enough reschedules or too many. The issue comes from the fact that an owner can refuse a reschedule proposed. Which should be fine because you dont want to get screwed over when your team can make the date and its the other team that cant but I feel like this comes back to the issue of being a chore to make it to the game. I think its something to be argued about, I dont have a perfect way to "fix" it right now.
Actually I read the s6 rules - it seems there will be 13 games per team not 18 as in the last season. 2 conferences with 5 teams in each of it.
Maybe 3 declines per season?
krazymen wrote:9. Remakes are bad, in a perfect world no remakes would be awarded, however i think we do need them because not everyone has perfect internet and the game is unstable. Its true that moose added more rules for the time slots but from my experience they were not enforced well enough. This is not about making everyone happy, this is about making a fair system. If the other players showed up on time but yours is 5 minutes late hes late, you shouldnt be able to get him in the game using your reschedule.
2 counter points -
A) Real life > Video games.
B) If there is a way to have a better quality games - then you should go for it.
If a better player missed the start of game and wants in to rise the quality of game - they should be allowed.
1. i just said one to you, i didnt copy paste the exact rule but that rule always had issues paired with it, LM had to go and look the # of games a player played, then everything changed in playoffs, people would be confused by it or try to abuse it.

2. thats a lot more than on NA already

3. bitchwalk discussing season 5, lagging discussion season 3, maha - dirty fight, season and many many more.

4. how can we tell that list is up to date? the owners says "pending" when they have been announced for at least 1 week if not more.

5. I think a seperate thread would help for this one.

6: A: thats why we have more players on 1 team.
B: by the off chance that theres 3 players missing on the same time and date AND that the owner didnt know so he didnt reschedule, thats where I said the commish would have a final word to keep the integrity of the league by that I mean he could postpone a game that he thinks should be postponed for such reasons. Maybe, reward the team that wasnt missing players by giving them a 1 or 2 goal advantage during the rematch.
Bowling trophy (birthday trophy)
Achieved level 105 in starcraft 2
Undefeated in 5v5
self proclaimed director of ironic trophies
User avatar
Blitz
Posts: 1001
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:34 pm
Battle.net Name: Blitzerg
Battle.net Char Code: 713
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: Big league restructure proposal

Post by Blitz » Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:43 am

krazymen wrote:
Blitz wrote:Why is someone "not signed up in the league" <--- LOL... posting about changes to the league?
i played the league longer than you.

Thank you for your feedback
So because of your experience this entitles you to smurf an entire season and then tell everyone what they should do? No reason to argue with logic like that. If you're not actually smurfing, only you know... then execuse me for my rudeness... but I have my doubts.
Image

The only two links you ever need to click:
https://puu.sh/zFTwQ/57cfb6dd4f.png
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=2556
Locked