CK DL post season planning session

[Cmdr_King]

Alrighty, now that we've gotten the CK DL off the ground, it's time for planning ahead and working out a few fine details.

Firstly, the next DL season won't be for a while.  I'd like to have 2 intermediate tourneys of different types to keep people from getting bored with our ranked games.  I want to build up a stable of different tourney types, of which one of course will be Futuramas (since those are mostly for my own amusement and hyping of games I've been playing.  that it serves other purposes like "throw games at wall and see which ones have voters" is a bonus).  Those, of course, will happen as I have material for them, and certainly no one wants multiple of them in a row.

From there, I'm not sure if it'd be better to have a few stock tourney styles to go with, or to make shit up as I go.  That said, I had the thought of 'class warfare', a tourney using some of the generic classes from the various FF games (and XF) that have them.  I was thinking of having the noms be for various fights to pit them against, maybe limited to bosses or battles from their home games, and then making each team go through and battle the enemies from other games.  So you'd have FFV characters fighting the assassins from FFT, XF drifters against Cloud of Darkness, that sort of thing.  The stable would be XF, FFIII, FFV, FFT, and FFTA2, but obviously this is just the planning stages and I'm open to using FF1 or looking into other games I've forgotten that use a compatible setup.  Similarly, whether to use fixed team designs or let the teams use whatever classes they want (within DL rules of course) would be more interesting.

That aside, some details that need worked out.

- Snowfire suggested to me that we keep the automatic bids for champions from each season, with the possible exception of Godlike, and just bump them up one division.  Would people prefer that, or since DL seasons will be about 3 months apart, having maximum nom slots?

- Some of the games currently ranked are somewhat questionable from interp and player standpoints.  Do people want to put them through the ranking process properly, and if so is it a one-time deal or should there be a general unranking procedure?

- The new ranking process is very cutthroat (see also: we didn't rank anything).  I think this is partly because it wasn't wholly clear what votes meant.  Does anyone want to give those games another shot, or should they wait for more players/interest?

-Speaking of, for games that have been turned down for ranking but not rejected outright, should I use strictly getting more players before they get another shot, or should there be a way to vote them into the list?

- It hadn't occurred to me before, but with the open rankings I'm using, it's technically possible to nom characters who have no business being in a season (for example, Blue).  Obviously that's not really acceptable, and I'll have to keep a list of unnommable characters.  Do you want to try and assemble a list from the outset, or should such things be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and hopefully it's a rare occurrence?

- It's possible that open noms might get a little abusive with obscure random duellers no one remembers existing, let alone what they do.  How aggressive should I be in culling such noms?

Yeah, lots of stuff.  But I don't want to really start noms for the next season until after DLcon anyway, and I'm not entirely sure if people like the idea I had for it anyway, so yeah, plenty of time to work through all this nonsense.

[Dark Holy Elf]

- Snowfire suggested to me that we keep the automatic bids for champions from each season, with the possible exception of Godlike, and just bump them up one division.  Would people prefer that, or since DL seasons will be about 3 months apart, having maximum nom slots?

I like Snowfire's suggestion. Always good to see how the champions can do in the next division up. Don't have the Godlike champ return, though.

- Some of the games currently ranked are somewhat questionable from interp and player standpoints.  Do people want to put them through the ranking process properly, and if so is it a one-time deal or should there be a general unranking procedure?

There should probably be some sort of unranking procedure in theory but at the moment I'm not sure how much I care, the procedure which drew up the CKDL roster generally cut the worst stuff we have ranked.

- The new ranking process is very cutthroat (see also: we didn't rank anything).  I think this is partly because it wasn't wholly clear what votes meant.  Does anyone want to give those games another shot, or should they wait for more players/interest?

Near as I can tell, the process was a bit flawed because some people just want to vote and NOT weigh in on rankings, and they should be allowed to do so. I look at the data you posted and it seems crazy to me that MMXCM with its 10 votes for ranking and 1 vote against isn't being ranked just because Meeple/etc. decided he didn't want to weigh in on rankings. That doesn't make much sense.

That said just straight-up 50% of those who care feels low for a ranking threshold to me too.

- It hadn't occurred to me before, but with the open rankings I'm using, it's technically possible to nom characters who have no business being in a season (for example, Blue).  Obviously that's not really acceptable, and I'll have to keep a list of unnommable characters.  Do you want to try and assemble a list from the outset, or should such things be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and hopefully it's a rare occurrence?

To some extent it needs to be case-by-case, because there will always be people you don't think of. However, in many cases, it makes some ranks more palatable to have the banned characters enshrined. As Djinn (I think?) pointed out, Soul Nomad becomes more rankable if we are assured nobody can nom Reyva, and Tales of Vesperia becomes more rankable if we are assured nobody can nom Repede.

Some general guidelines for unrankability (e.g. must have a valid form, must lose to >10% of Godlike, duelling form must be visible in the maingame or early aftergame, etc.) might be a good idea, although for the most part this is common sense.

- It's possible that open noms might get a little abusive with obscure random duellers no one remembers existing, let alone what they do.  How aggressive should I be in culling such noms?

As far as I'm concerned, anything in a stat topic (that meets the common sense requirements anyway) is legit, so, say, I'm fine with Sol Cannon even if it's a bit silly. Beyond that I'd be inclined to be a bit more harsh... at least X% of players should feel comfortable voting on the character in question, where X is, say, 50%? Higher? Not sure.

[Nephrite]

I generally agree with NEB that setting an arbitrary number of "Total voters" is kind of silly. This is, theoretically, a much smaller tournament than before, so I think that 50% is an adequate amount.

Re: Nomming weird things, I think it can be a case-by-case basis. I don't really think anyone is going to nom the Hydra from FFMQ or something but if you're concerned about it then you should probably make the final call.

[superaielman]

- Snowfire suggested to me that we keep the automatic bids for champions from each season, with the possible exception of Godlike, and just bump them up one division.  Would people prefer that, or since DL seasons will be about 3 months apart, having maximum nom slots?

Works for me.

- Some of the games currently ranked are somewhat questionable from interp and player standpoints.  Do people want to put them through the ranking process properly, and if so is it a one-time deal or should there be a general unranking procedure?

I'm fine with what we have ranked.

- The new ranking process is very cutthroat (see also: we didn't rank anything).  I think this is partly because it wasn't wholly clear what votes meant.  Does anyone want to give those games another shot, or should they wait for more players/interest?

I would ignore abstains. A high percentage for ranking is fine; making abstains count against a game doesn't make sense.

- It hadn't occurred to me before, but with the open rankings I'm using, it's technically possible to nom characters who have no business being in a season (for example, Blue).  Obviously that's not really acceptable, and I'll have to keep a list of unnommable characters.  Do you want to try and assemble a list from the outset, or should such things be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and hopefully it's a rare occurrence?

No Bluelikes, has to have an unquestionably legal form (fuck off forever Freya), has to be relevant enough to rank. I am fine with relaxed standards on this. Revya fails the bluelike test hardcore; as does Izanami.  Even extreme respect for  Repede speed doesn't make him Bluelike (Though annoying) and other than dislike for his form I don't see a valid reason to keep him out. Bluelikes don't lose because they can't outrace Melfice healing.

Something like Bat or Goddess? Sure, whatever. The format of the tournament limits the damage that a idea can do.

[Nephrite]

I would ignore abstains. A high percentage for ranking is fine; making abstains count against a game doesn't make sense.

I agree with this as well. If someone doesn't feel strongly one way or another, it just shouldn't count.

[Cmdr_King]

One of the things I wanted to make sure happened in the new rankings was that every game ranked was one people cared about, and given the generally high number of abstains, I don't think ignoring them entirely would accurately reflect that.  However, not counting people who don't take part in the ranking process at all (That'd be Meeple, Tide, and Pyro in this season) is probably for the best, I agree.

My current plan on bluelike and similar not-truly-rankable characters is to have a list of them in the ranking list, and simply add characters to it as they're discovered.  Maybe have a baseline list of Blue, Minato, and Revya?  Those three should at least give everyone an idea of what sort of characters aren't acceptable, since I really like the idea that the DL will self=police by and large in the matter.  If there's anyone else egregious we can add them as well of course.

[Random Consonant]

- Snowfire suggested to me that we keep the automatic bids for champions from each season, with the possible exception of Godlike, and just bump them up one division.  Would people prefer that, or since DL seasons will be about 3 months apart, having maximum nom slots?

Sure, provided the godlike champ doesn't return.

- Some of the games currently ranked are somewhat questionable from interp and player standpoints.  Do people want to put them through the ranking process properly, and if so is it a one-time deal or should there be a general unranking procedure?

There should probably be an unranking procedure but overall I don't object too strongly to anything presently ranked enough so I don't think we need to do it now.

- The new ranking process is very cutthroat (see also: we didn't rank anything).  I think this is partly because it wasn't wholly clear what votes meant.  Does anyone want to give those games another shot, or should they wait for more players/interest?

Agreeing that abstains/non-votingness shouldn't be counted period.  That aside, 75% playership for ranking seems needlessly restrictive.  Having it above 50% is fine, but 75% at this point is probably running the risk of not getting anything else in.

- It hadn't occurred to me before, but with the open rankings I'm using, it's technically possible to nom characters who have no business being in a season (for example, Blue).  Obviously that's not really acceptable, and I'll have to keep a list of unnommable characters.  Do you want to try and assemble a list from the outset, or should such things be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and hopefully it's a rare occurrence?

There should definitely be a list from the outset.  Case-by-case can be done in the event we miss something anyways, so better to deal with the truly offensive stuff now.

- It's possible that open noms might get a little abusive with obscure random duellers no one remembers existing, let alone what they do.  How aggressive should I be in culling such noms?

While I'm fine with anything in a stat topic with a legal form, I'd probably cull plotless sidequest losers (hello Retinite would you like to be my highly convenient example today) just on general principle.

[SnowFire]

- Snowfire suggested to me that we keep the automatic bids for champions from each season, with the possible exception of Godlike, and just bump them up one division.  Would people prefer that, or since DL seasons will be about 3 months apart, having maximum nom slots?

Well guess I'm already on record here.  Definitely strongly in favor of *not* having the Godlike champs return (except perhaps in a bonus match with the next season's champ or something) since the whole fun is seeing how a champion does in a higher division, and there isn't a higher division to go to, and Yuna / Ghaleon / etc. ended up being the most overused duelers in the old DL.


- Some of the games currently ranked are somewhat questionable from interp and player standpoints.  Do people want to put them through the ranking process properly, and if so is it a one-time deal or should there be a general unranking procedure?

Not worth the time and effort on a game level.  (On a character level, see below.)


- The new ranking process is very cutthroat (see also: we didn't rank anything).  I think this is partly because it wasn't wholly clear what votes meant.  Does anyone want to give those games another shot, or should they wait for more players/interest?
-Speaking of, for games that have been turned down for ranking but not rejected outright, should I use strictly getting more players before they get another shot, or should there be a way to vote them into the list?

Democracy can give a good starting point, but I am totally fine with just judgment calling it.  It is not worth the extra effort to try and stir up debate on something like this or do re-votes or something, it's not the end of the world either way.  Just go back and re-interpret the votes however you like; make it so the "best" third of the bubble is allowed, since the point of a bubble is they're all supposed to be borderline.  If you want suggestions, I advocate using an "enthusiasm matters" standpoint.  Lufia I has anti-enthusiasism, so no.  But some people obviously still care about Mana Khemia 2 and Mega Man X Command Mission (I played neither, for the record).  I'd strongly advocate for allowing Cthulhu Saves the World in, as the 8 players of it listed all vote and it's actually recent and people obviously care somewhat.


- It hadn't occurred to me before, but with the open rankings I'm using, it's technically possible to nom characters who have no business being in a season (for example, Blue).  Obviously that's not really acceptable, and I'll have to keep a list of unnommable characters.  Do you want to try and assemble a list from the outset, or should such things be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and hopefully it's a rare occurrence?
- It's possible that open noms might get a little abusive with obscure random duellers no one remembers existing, let alone what they do.  How aggressive should I be in culling such noms?

A list of unnommable characters would be far too huge, at least if it is of "characters who should not really be nom'd" rather than "characters too powerful to be nominated."  Just do it on a case-by-case basis.  (Or of course "use the old DL ranks, judgment call for games not ranked by the old DL," but you're a fan of everything-is-ranked, so).  Harmless to have some examples, I suppose.

Basically, the following attributes are like junk food: fine as a once-in-awhile-treat, but very dangerous in combination.  Too powerful, unmemorable / plotless, hard to interpret in the DL, default DL interpretation very different from how they work in-game (even if interp is clear), and potential giant respect split.  Retinite hits like 4/5 of these, so yeah, I know it's from Chrono Trigger, but that's just too many dang strikes.  The occasional dueler somebody likes getting in despite some questionable issues is fine; if they start taking up too much of the bracket, then it's an issue, and it's especially an issue for duelers who are maybe High Godlike / Bluelike.    Note also that merely "losing to character X" doesn't make something rankable; Repede is merely Godlike if he is given average initiative, but that doesn't mean he's a good idea.  For an example since he'd be ineligible anyway, FF12 Vayne gets rolled by most duelers with [infinite / super-deep] healing not based around draining, some of which are Middles, but *easily* slugfests the tankiest and most damaging bluelikes out there with the possible exception of Sulphur thanks to 3 layers of invincibility that are very hard to chip around and last way too many turns in the DL.  That's not a good rank.

[DjinnAndTonic]

Basically 2nding everything Snowfire just said in his last post.

I like the idea of the judgment-calling the borderliners, particularly with the enthusiasm call. That's the point of having a "CK" DL, he's generally made some awesome tourneys so let's continue to let him. I appreciate that he's trying to hard to do everything so democratically, but in the end, it's more fun with a little leeway. (And less Lufia1.)

Especially like SnowFire's idea for "once in a while" characters. 5 criteria, if you meet more than 3 of them, please don't nom. If only 1 or 2, then just don't nom them more than once every few tourneys.

Alternate proposal: If a questionable character is nommed and CK picks them and there's enough backlash against the character, then just disqualify them for that round. It's a fairly quick way to weed out bad ranks since there's no main site or outside voters anymore.

[Dhyerwolf]

Given the ranking criteria this time, I think if lesser ideas are up for rank Season 2 (and that's what the list seemed to be?), we should relook at the ideas that were up this time.

If people feel like something should be unranked, they can change their initial posts to boot. I don't think a formal booting is needed.

I don't think an "unnomable" list would be too long, since too powerful is the main ranking criteria (Throw in secondary like "interp mess" for someone like Repede as needed). Outset is better than having it come up during a tournament.

If the tourneys noms are random rolled, then limiting obscure characters to a number of noms doesn't work when they can all get random rolled in at the same time with a little luck. I'm good with culling at your discretion.