Alright, so I've been thinking about this for a while now, and the more I think about it the more I like the idea: There should only be one ENSL, regardless of where the teams are playing from. Yes, I am saying that I think Europeans, Americans and Australians should be competing against each other in the same league.

I know that this sounds crazy coming from me. A year ago I was one of the loudest voices arguing not only against cross-continental play, but even against the ENSL having tournaments for regions other than Europe. At that time, however, I still thought we would see a larger community and separate regional tournaments would spring up on their own, which sadly has not happened. It has instead become clear that while the game has been a commercial success for UWE, the competitive side of it will likely not get much larger than it already is.

Accepting these facts, I now think that the best course of action for the future, is to aim for creating the most amount of fun for the largest amount of players worldwide. Given that there are so few teams, I don't think it's possible to accomplish that with regional tournaments -- there simply aren't enough teams to make skill balanced groups and as a result we get far too many one sided games that are neither fun to play nor watch.

Merging the three current leagues into one will make it a lot easier create skill balanced groups. While I detest high ping play, I think it's a price worth paying for better quality gameplay and more ggs. This also means that I think the groups should be seeded based on where the teams themselves want to be. If a team doesn't want to be placed in division 1, for example, they shouldn't be forced to, unless it is clear that they would be too good for division 2. Basically, every effort should be made to ensure that the teams are having fun while they're playing in the league, rather than just the "usual" competitive ideals.

I think we should also consider changing the league format. While the current format of small groups where everyone plays everyone works alright, other formats can have additional benefits. One such format is the one used by CAL in the NS1 days. The idea then was that you had two or three divisions, each with 10-20 teams in them. Every week two teams from the same division would play each other, like it is now, with a playoff at the end of the season for the teams who had collected the most points at the end of the season. The regular season would last for a set amount of weeks (10 for example) with two or three more weeks for playoffs afterwards.

It would not, however, be necessary for every team in a division to play each other -- each week's matchups would instead be determined at the end of the previous week, based on the standings. I don't know what algorithm was used for this, but I think the general idea was that the top placed teams play each other, the middle placed teams play each other and the bottom placed teams play each other -- but never more than once each season. The benefit of this format is that it allows for more dynamic groups, where the less skilled teams get to play the more skilled teams every once in a while, but for the most part only play against teams on their own skill level. It automatically skill balances internally in the division, with the larger division sizes reducing the chance of teams being placed in a division that's too strong or too weak for them. It shouldn't be too difficult to set up (the only thing missing is an algorithm for creating matchups) and I think it's worth considering.

While NS2 isn't quite the game I had hoped for, it is still a fun game to play and if we want to give the competitive side of it any longevity, we should act now.

This sounds more or less like the system we have been asking for. I would say its of a dynamic ladder format?

Regardless of personal skill level and views, i feel we share a common goal in trying to secure a active competitive scene for years to come.

I really like the idea of hosting a rookie gather night on the ensl, giving public players a taste of organised 6v6 matches without the pressure of displeasing skilled competitive players by not knowing what to do. There really isnt any middle ground in the ensl for new players to start out on without getting recruited into a team through a friend.

I my self am willing to advertise in public servers and on the uwe forums and even host said nights. I would need a admin to remove trolls to insure that we have fair matches. If other competitive players wanted to help out and possibly command these games that would be great a insight for the rookies.

Ill leave the league formatting to the admins but i want to focus on bringing new players into comp ns2. Just as we did in ns1 with reality gaming, twst and #NSFarmTeam.

I am sorry, but if you wanna do any longevity and fun, you shouldn't have create Godarchaea. In different threads around the forum the idea was to split the most skilled players somehow, so they can teach less fortunate ones and maybe create even competitive space. I am not saying I want to force you to anything, you are free to do whatever you want, but preaching one thing and doing the opposite, yeah... so much fun. Also I don't wanna turn this into flamewar, if you wanna discuss this you can find me on steam, I am just a bit disappointed.

@skyice: It is a proper league format, not a ladder, but I suppose it does include some of the same benefits a ladder would. I'm glad you like the idea. Rookie gather nights, farm teams, and other such initiatives to help ease new players into competitive teams is something I'm all for.

I believe this is just a mix team for the summer cup. Archaea and Godar are still around as far as I know.

SammyG: I heard otherwise - https://twitter.com/Mendasp Anyway if it's just for the cup, more a reason to make new teams, teach new people, coach lower teams and try it in the cup. If Fana thinks, that this should be done for newbies out of real competitive environment then I think it's fine. But what about mid skilled teams, not just complete newbs, the skill disparity between the top few teams and everyone else is huge. Maybe it's just more practice makes you better, but wouldn't better practice make you better faster?

To the Fana's point: if you have 10 teams and 10 weeks and same teams can play only once, you would have to play everyone eventually with one free week, the top range of 20 teams makes more sense or the 16 teams with 8 weeks to play then playoff. I was always pro ladder and if this is as close as we will get then I am all for it too.

Godarchaea is just a joke name so we could get a team signed up in time for the summer cup. As for Archaea and Godar, things will be announced in due time. If you want to discuss mendasp's ragetweets, that only show his side of the story, I suggest you do that somewhere else. Please stop derailing this thread.

@Vindaloo: Obviously the season wouldn't be 10 weeks long if each division only had 10 teams. The numbers in the OP are just examples to explain the concept.

Fair enough. As I said anything that would bring us "ladder" experience I am all hands on deck.

This is basically a ladder FYI

The fact you are putting teams in a league format where they don't have to play each other - and only play people of there own level that they chose - then that's basically a ladder.

In a ladder you would only be able to challenge people say 250 points within your ranking either up or down.

Premier League teams start on 2000 points
League 1 start on 1500 points
League 2 start on 1000 points

Ladder format basically works perfectly to what you have described.

I think you missed the part where I said it isn't challenge based and there's separate skill seeded divisions with playoffs at the end.

I understand, but by making it so you can only challenge a team either say 10 places about/below or x amounts of points ahead/behind - then you are effectively making it such that there are league - albeit ones that can be flexible should a team go less active/have "gone bad" etc.

No reason you couldn't also put monthly/quarterly playoffs as well.

you could make it such that top 4 always enter a playoff, alongside the 2 best teams from "section b" ie 11th and 12th position, the team that's got the most points during the period and the team that's gained the most places in the period

I'm not saying its a winning formula above, but its all more flexible etc.

Its actually hilarious, so many similarities with the last played ns1 cup drama in the link below

http://www.ensl.org/matches/4101


---

Yep. This and the div 2-3 pcws are boring are basically the same discussion.

Either get good, or lose raging - with a decent amount of baseless drama

@Fana : HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


but anyhow... yum :(... deeply hurt by uwe :/

I'm all for having the intercontinental games again. The community is so small that without merging them I feel that the competitive scene will not grow. Plus this will allow for more interesting games and they will be somewhat fair. I definitely think this upcoming season should only have 2 groups. NSL Season 3 - Group A, and Group B. Group A being all the known top teams (will be a smaller list of team but we can play more often), and Group B will be the others who are the teams who need to do well in Group B to move up into Group A at the end of the season.

without having read the suggestions, which afaiu amounts to a ladder with a couple of twists, would it not have been worth keeping the discussion about what format the ENSL will use in the future in the thread that had been discussing that - "NSL Season 3" in the General Discussion forum?

It's pretty sad that 90% of the posts in this thread is essentially spam.

I don't know what I expected.

I don't know why you would expect people to jump at the chance to discuss different ladder systems on your terms just because you've had a change of heart, particularly as you have been so vocal about your opposition to them in the past...

talking about spam - http://www.ensl.org/topics/871 that thread specifically talks about ladder systems and there are several suggestions in there as to what they may look like and problems that may arise/obstacles etc.

as for your idea, i think one of the main problem lies with the fact that it is not challenge based, and activity is to a certain extent, decided by the website. the advantage of a challenge based ladder system is that it could potentially allow matches that are currently only considered as PCW's to be included in the ladder - thus leading to a higher volume of real competitive games - which makes the rating system more effective, and leads to a more vibrant community.

another general issue with using a ladder or algorithmic rating system is that with the game in the state thats its in (essentially standardizing draw's), unless some complex scoring system uses information gleaned from the events of the game to assign a 'score' independent of the actual result of the game, the ladder would be totally useless.

@Fana; Agreed, combine the intercontinental teams in 1 division.
This however is a shortterm solution. There is 2 things that have to happen longterm:
1) balance the game; we need to help UWE with this; I made some suggestions I would like feedback on in the "Div 2-3 Games are boring" thread.
2) bring in new players to the comp scene; this fits to Skyice's initiative.

@Skyice; arrange the gathercup for newcomers! I'll gladly command a team and learn them the ropes.

Regardless of the context, I would personally quite welcome such a setup and it does incorporate a lot of what I was hoping for from a ladder. The only thing missing really is the ability for new teams to form and join up immediately, which is a shame, but could be mitigated by having short seasons with little down time between them. Anyway, I hope this idea is given serious consideration instead of being summarily dismissed like the ladder.

as for your idea, i think one of the main problem lies with the fact that it is not challenge based

I don't know why you would expect people to jump at the chance to discuss different ladder systems on your terms just because you've had a change of heart, particularly as you have been so vocal about your opposition to them in the past...

Apparently calling my (it's really CAL's, as in the Cyberathlete Amateur LEAGUE) league concept a "ladder" makes it a ladder and the main problem with my "ladder" is that it isn't challenge based like a ladder.

This apparently also means that I should now be in favor of ladders since my league concept is a "ladder".

Make sense of it those who can.

It makes perfect sense. We think you're a bellend and that's why 90% of this thread is diversion.


















On a serious note, a ladder will suck dick because of how risk averse a lot of teams are. You can already see it in the whine about godarchaea. You need to enforce participation in a ladder when there's such obvious skill stratification.

Either that or you do what Fana is suggesting. Make it short, sweet and sensitive to skill.

Where's the up-vote button on these bloody forums.

Im curious as to the contents of the upcoming "huge" update. There was talk of a built in 6v6 matchmaking program around 5 months ago and Hugh said he deffo wanted it and it wouldn't take much longer than 2 months to build. Code name: SABOT.
forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/129430/organised-play-systems-natural-selection-2/p2

Can anyone give a sneaky nod as to whether or not this is actually in development? As it will rip my rookie gather night a new ass-hole if its released in 23 days!

I don't think it is in development.

Gone the way of the BUS

I believe that two divisions is the way to go. 8 teams in the top division sounds right to me.

Despite the Euro teams having the most volume, there is still hardly enough teams to make for a good league on their own. Using a single league sounds ideal at this juncture.

I also think that the "Map by week" format is essential to the competitive nature of the game. We need our teams playing the same map over and over and over again throughout the week if we want to get the best competition out of the league. I might make my own thread about this in specific.. It enables custom maps to be used in competition because a week playing the map should be enough. At the end of the day when it is playoffs there can be another system, but it makes so much sense for there to be weekly maps.