Tier League ( New smash 4 league idea )

[stancosmos]

This idea is definitely a work in progress. I'm just gathering information at this point and seeing if you guys can point out any flaws or if i can get an idea of if anyone is generally interested.

The focus is a smash league that focuses on character variety.

Anywho here's the core idea.
To start a semi-respectable tier list will be taken. Maybe Shi-G, maybe the smash boards community tier list. Maybe just a list based off current tournament standings.

Each character will be worth a certain amount of points based on their Tier standings. For example winning a game with a character placed at the #1 would grant 1 point while winning a game with a character ranked 45 would rank 45 points. At the start of each month, or maybe less than that, I would update the list. Players would go up or down in rankings based on wins and losses, and a new list would be constructed. Unused characters would also go down a spot to make sure that the list continues to change.

The purpose of this will not be to make an accurate tier list, as i don't think this will accomplish that. But i do think it will make a fun smash league with much more variance than we see in most tournaments. And it would also reward players for playing less viable characters.

Anyone who wants to help me develop this, message me.

Constructive criticism is what i'm shooting for here, so let me know what you guys thinks. Thanks for taking the time to read through this. Hope i explained it alright.

 

[A-9]

Interesting idea, but how will the league be fought? Traditional format? Round robin? Let everyone just challenge other players?

 

[stancosmos]

Interesting idea, but how will the league be fought? Traditional format? Round robin? Let everyone just challenge other players?

Up for debate, but i was thinking each player can play each other player once within the time frame until the next reorganizing of the tier list. Players can refuse matches if they want and neither player would gain points. Players that play only 1 or 2 games would be removed each refresh.

 

[A-9]

Up for debate, but i was thinking each player can play each other player once within the time frame until the next reorganizing of the tier list. Players can refuse matches if they want and neither player would gain points. Players that play only 1 or 2 games would be removed each refresh.

Maybe a default tournament setting would work as well now that I think about it. If someone would sweep the tournament with a high tier they would still get a low amount of points versus a lower tier that wins a few matches.

Otherwise, just dump all the players into one pool and generate 3 or 4 matchups for every player that they have to play each week. Add each score to a total for the end of the month for example.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Sodo]

I like the idea of this. Another interesting thought: Player A is good with Swordfighter. Swordfighter is ranked last, so they score 52 points or whatever it is per win. Player B is very good with Gunner, and scores 51 or 50 (whatever the list dictates) per win. Say they're like 50 points apart in the standings near the end of league play. To win, Player B has to use a character like Gunner or someone similarly ranked to overtake Player A. Player A knows this, but is not as confident that Swordfighter can take Player B's Gunner. Instead, they play Sheik and win the set. Player A gets a couple points and keeps Player B from taking over the top spot.

It's an interesting concept, for sure. Lots of strategy involved, especially with matchups. Your matchup knowledge will dictate your place in the standings more than your play will in a league like this.

 

[Raijinken]

Interesting idea, but just because Diddy is top and Sheik is #2 doesn't make Diddy twice as good as Sheik. And one odd win by a high-skill player who wins on Swordfighter against a lower-skill player would virtually seal the higher player's position, even if they used Diddy for the rest of the tourney.

 

[Sodo]

Interesting idea, but just because Diddy is top and Sheik is #2 doesn't make Diddy twice as good as Sheik. And one odd win by a high-skill player who wins on Swordfighter against a lower-skill player would virtually seal the higher player's position, even if they used Diddy for the rest of the tourney.

Your first point is correct. They should go by tier ranking (so S would be 1 point, A would be 2, etc.)

And not necessarily on the second one. Two wins by a mid tier makes up for a loss to even the lowest tier.

 

[Raijinken]

Your first point is correct. They should go by tier ranking (so S would be 1 point, A would be 2, etc.)

And not necessarily on the second one. Two wins by a mid tier makes up for a loss to even the lowest tier.

I was more pointing out that a player of notable skill could secure an insurmountable win with just a few low-tier victories, possibly against significantly weaker players. Of course, if all skilled players do so, then the floor is still even. It just depends on how the tournament is run. Leagues tend to be RR or Swiss, though, so perhaps it wouldnn't be as big of a deal in practice as I'm imagining in my head.

 

[sogeki]

If I knew how to design websites, I would make an eventhubs-like voting list. This sounds awesome!

 

[Sodo]

I was more pointing out that a player of notable skill could secure an insurmountable win with just a few low-tier victories, possibly against significantly weaker players. Of course, if all skilled players do so, then the floor is still even. It just depends on how the tournament is run. Leagues tend to be RR or Swiss, though, so perhaps it wouldnn't be as big of a deal in practice as I'm imagining in my head.

You're right, the success of what OP is looking for depends entirely on the tournament format.

 

[stancosmos]

Alright, you guys are making a lot of sense. Maybe tournament would make more sense. I guess it would work better to have 1 or two pools, then seed players into a tournament. My main issue is that is that the final might be a little undervalued if the players in it can't possibly win with enough points? But it seems like theres some merit to my idea. Anyone interested in helping me run/organize it?

 

[sogeki]

Alright, you guys are making a lot of sense. Maybe tournament would make more sense. I guess it would work better to have 1 or two pools, then seed players into a tournament. My main issue is that is that the final might be a little undervalued if the players in it can't possibly win with enough points? But it seems like theres some merit to my idea. Anyone interested in helping me run/organize it?

I would gladly help if you don't mind.

 

[NegaNixx]

Instead of making the characters numerical ranking the amount of points they win, why not associate the points with the tier placement.

Winning with an
A-Tier=1 Point
B Tier=2 Points
C Tier=3 Points
D Tier=4 Points
E Tier=5 Points

10-11 characters per tier. This coming from a Marth main (bottom of the tier list) it makes it more fair for everybody and leads to less skewed results as well as a low tier counter pick situation. The current method gives low tier mains an unfair advantage of 50 points for a win, especially because tiers only matter at the highest level of even play. If someone wins with Mii Swordfighter once a Diddy can never win the tournament. This form solves that problem.