An idea ta kick around again

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 6:03 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: JOaknshld

Disclaimer: Yes dis is an old topic, yes its just an idea nothin' more, no ya don't need ta turn it into some sort of insult war, ignore at yer pleasure, read at yer interest

Havin' observed da current times and "problems" of DoS, I started again considerin' dis idea again

Me idea seeks ta kill two birds (problems) with one stone, da problems are...

1. Cut down on da number of baronial challenge matches (now is a good time ta readdress dis, in me opinion, as challenge frequency is gettin' a bit outta hand)
2. Give da Warlord Rankings more purpose dan ta serve as braggin' rights (Bapheloc ranked #79 at da time won da last WL tourney, so #1's only real adv. is da first bye)

Idea: Limit da number of challenges ta 9 per 3 month WL tourney cycle

Determination of da 9 WL: Top 5 rankin' warlords at da end of da 3 month cycle + Top 4 warlords in da WL tourney not optin' da intercession free challenge ta da OL.

I know dis is an old topic, perhaps unreasonable, but it would be nice ta discuss a topic not involving insults and cheap dreats.

Also, dere will come a tourney when no ring is up fer 2nd place, and it would be good ta have more dan one prize up fer grabs.

Respond, ignore, do what ya care ta with dis post as it nae hurts ya ta just be up here.


~Jeffrey Oakenshield~
One who always like ta contribute

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 6:56 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: BadgerAx

::Grins at the post::

Well well well....Good to see that ya still here even if ya using another Dueling name.....I don't want to open my yap on this one. I made to many friends with my last post...::Laughs:: I knew the old Dwarfy could never stay away long from the rings....

Brother to Brother, Yours in Life and Death

Badger

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 8:26 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: DravenIl

I do believe that a Challenge Bracket will suffice well enough, allowing only ten Warlords the opportunity to challenge at any time.

~Draven
::tired of restating himself::

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 8:31 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Daemon102

I say increase everything.

Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL

PWs required to challenge for Baron =15 and Must Contain at least 5 Barons. I mean after all, that is the rank you wish to be so show you can beat them on a regular basis.
PWs required to challenge fot the OL= 20 for Barons containing all 8 of their peers and the OL. For Warlords. . . 25 and must have All 9 Barons and the Overlord as well.

::thinks this should start a good fire.::

I have always been a man of extremes and I throw this out as an extreme in hopes of finding some middle ground. Maybe another rank is needed instead. Maybe like ::looks for a word::Squire could fill the part of the 2 WoL category. Perhaps a SeargentMajor position above GM.

Just my .02
Daemon Satyriasis
~~F.E.S.o.R. ~~
((by my own standards Swordsman of DoS))

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 8:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Alyxz

hmm...both ideas sound good, each for different reasons.

I remember when I first started learning the rules, I was actually surprised that a warlord could challenge the OL. It just natural that only Barons would be allowed this. After reading the rules (not the challenge rules, just the regular rules) I assumed that Barons must work out between themselves, perhaps in a tourney, who would be permitted the right to challenge for OL.

I just always thought that challenging for OL should be allot harder than challenging for Baron. It is allot harder now, but I figured there would be more of a difficulty gap.

Then I read the challenge rules. maybe its a good thing DoS wasn't designed by me. ::

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 9:26 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: PrlUnicorn

>>I say increase everything.

Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL<<

Only one thing wrong with this restructuring... it would fry all current ranks in place and many people would go down in rank... and what of those duelers that are earnest in there desire to earn rank, but simply can't get here to duel often enough..

Sorry... I just don't so how this is fair.

C. M.

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/9/97 9:30 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: SidarthaE

>>I say increase everything.

Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL<<

Yeesh ::sigh:: and I'm just doing my best at *2* WoL.

~Sid
The Eternal Commoner

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 2:26 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Brigath

>>>>I say increase everything.

Swordsman=5WoL
M@A =10 WoL
GM=15WoL
WL=20WoL<<

Yeesh ::sigh:: and I'm just doing my best at *2* WoL.

~Sid
The Eternal Commoner<<

I'm with you there, Sid. ::wry chuckle:: And I might even have more right to that title than you.

~WhatsAFancy?~ Brig

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 4:10 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: DukeUzieI

::smiles and waits for this post to go the way of the last one::

Aye increase the WoLs, add new ranks. Even throw in the challenge bracket. All would be more than acceptable to those that are up to the challenge. And when it comes down to it ranks are just a name.....a place of identification of skill. Do whatever it takes. I of course will still be here...no matter what *rank* I may be.

~Adonai~

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 7:15 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: SlothShamn

Just a point and my two cents worth.

I don't duel enough to be ranked in the rankings in the top. Even if I duel 8 times in a weekend, which is unusual for me, and win them all, I sill wouldn't be in the top bracket.

Therefor, I think its all a silly idea.
-Slothie

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 8:31 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: KayneRune

Sloth,

Maybe you are worthy of a ring, but if you don't work hard you shouldn't be able to get it. Now I'm not accusing you of sloth (heh heh), and I understand that you may not be *able* to make it to duel every weekend, but it's not fair to the rest of us that this new ranking/whatever can't be implemented because of a certain few who can't/won't duel every weekend.

Someone has to get screwed.

~Kayne

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 11:11 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Zsyber

Having never dueled but one practice duel, and read about everything the Duel of Swords folder in the Dueling Center and taking the time to download various things from the archives and peruse this folder at length, I am not sure I qualify for much in the way of validity of comment since I have never actually particpated as of yet in this sport.

However, it seems to me the sport is lacking in succnificant challenge as far as progression and the ability to become a Baron or Overlord as far as qualifications, still though skill is the determining factor when it comes time to duel for the title. What I am adressing is more the ability to become qualified by achieving rank and by accumlating challenge qualifcations.

Perhaps a tougher rank progression is the idea, perhaps more peer wins is an idea, perhaps alot of things and suggestions are a good idea. However, I see it as only a prolonging of the inevitable. Regardless of the standards set down or changed, the attitudes and customs of how duelers go about thier careers will not change. Dueler A who duels every night a few duels a night, might have to wait an extra weekend or two if they are any good to achieve the same results. Dueler B who maybe duels one
night a weekend for one duel, probably still isn't going to come close to being qualified for further involvement.

In other words what I am saying, you can dress up the problem some more and make it look prettier, but it won't solve the problem. As far as more Wins over Losses, and peer wins are concerned. It will only take a little bit longer, and maybe for a couple of weeks the challenges would slow down but with so many duelers the revolving door would wind back up into full swing again. About the best idea I have seen is perhaps involving the Warlord Rankings in the qualifications of being able to
challenge. That I will explain in a seperate response.

Again, I feel that adjusting the needed peer wins and WoLs would only temporaily slow things down, and really not solve the overall continuing problem. Though I think the idea is good, but not because of too many challenges.

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 11:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: Zsyber

I am not discussing my ideas and views of the peer wins and WoLs, becuase the orginal topic of this thread was about the Warlord Rankings and too many challenges, and trying to kill two birds with one stone. And so this is the thoughts I had on doing just that.

Since the Warlord Rankings are so nice and colored coded, use another color, like maybe green, to denote which duelers are challenge worthy. Challenge worthy duelers would be duelers who dueled "X" number of peer duels and have "X" number minimum percentage. This all in besides to having at least the 10 peer wins or 15 peer wins. Example;

Warlord Dueler A has 15 WoLs. They also have 10 peer wins. Normally enough to qualify to make a challenge.

What seems wrong with that picture to you? Their WoLs are only 15, barely enough to be a Warlord, yet they still have 10 peer wins. This to me does not make a worthy challenger or holder of one of the sport's most elite titles. No WoLs don't mean everything, but something tells me that this example is a so-so dueler who barely has rank but wants a title. Is it wrong? That is a matter of opinion.

I think that a dueler should be worthy of being able to challenge if they fall into the top bracket of duelers, and have at least a 50% or higher percentage against peers. Falling into the top bracket would signify that they particpate in the sport enough to achieve the average number of duels the average particpating Warlord does. I think in being a title holder one should be an active participant in the sport. And then of course one should on average beat your peers more then they beat you.
Example;

Warlord Dueler A 15 WoLs, 10 peer wins, 10 - 12 - 1 against peers at 43%

Warlord Dueler B 27 WoLs, 10 peer wins, 12 - 10 - 1 against peers at 52%

To me Warlord Dueler B seems obviously more qualified to make a challenge then Warlord Dueler A, though not by much, but enough. Though I am sure many who fall into Warlord Dueler A's category have made challenges, and more then likely either failed and or lost thier title promptly thereafter as well.

Basicaly I feel not only should a dueler have a certain number of peer wins, but as well prove they beat more of thier peers then have beat them while maintaining an active number of duels within the sport. In essence a title holder should be an above average dueler at least by the stats, and be in the rings enough to be apart of the events of the sport. Of course this is all based on my opinion of someone who has never been in the sport.

Zsyber Zet'Sequ-wai

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 12:47 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: DukeUzieI

::rolls his eyes::

Well look at this...the answer has been under our noses the whole time. Thank god this new dueler pointed it out for all of us that were far to dense to comprehend it ourselves.

~Adonai~
~Warlord of the Duel of Swords~[And Once a Future Overlord::snigger::]

[DoS Archive]

Date: 9/10/97 2:37 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: GIRVIN

I do think that Zsy and, as much as I hate to admit it, Draven have the best point.

Merely increasing the WoL is no' logical. Tis a wee bit like giving more swords to everyday people will cut cut down on sword related wounds. Tis a patch work manuver and not a repair. The most logical choice is ta scrap the current challenge rules in favor of something alnog the lines of Draven's idea. In me own humble opinion, Draven has the idea. Some sort of bracket in which a limited number of folk could challenge in a limited number of time.

In the short term, folk will be verra mad, but in the long twill make a better enviroment for all..

~Brian