Division Resizing

[Hansa]

Soo Division Resized great very good.

A bit strange for some teams the resizing process but still fine in my opinion.

Will be back to normal in the next months i guess so everything good.

relegation:

3-4-5-6-7 in Div 1-2-3-4-5

feels a bit low in numbers for me espacially we had 33% relegation from div 1 before (10/30) now we only have 19% (3/16)

makes it pretty easy to stay in division 1 if you are there once even if you have a bad month.

In my opinion 5/16 teams relegating would sound nicer would make it a bit harder to stay in Div 1 and it would be around the same percentage of relegation as before.

so

5-6-7-8-9 in Div 1-2-3-4-5 would be my proposal

that would mean for

Div 1:
5 relegate
11 staying
Div 2:
5 promote
6 relegate
7 staying
Div 3:
6 promote
7 relegate
7 staying
Div 4:
7 promote
8 relegate
7 staying
Div 5:
8 promote
9 relegate
7 staying

For Div 5 i would also like to have implemented that you only can relegate if there is a team promoting from Div 6 so if only like currently only 5 Teams have points in Div 6 only these 5 promote and then only 5 teams from Div 5 would relegate or in the actual case with less than 24 teams in Div 5 nobody would relegate (except for the automatic relegation of inactive teams.

[flockmastoR]

This has two sides:

1) It makes it easier to stay in Division 1, well not exactly. You need to be in the top 13 of Division 1 to stay, in the old system with 30 teams you needed to be in the top 20 to stay. Additionally, no cannon fodder from Division 2 will join the Division 1 in the future with just 3 spots there.
2) It makes it harder to get into Division 1, which IMO is a good thing. Earlier you came into Division 1 with a quite average season, when you had the same season in the next month you went back to Division 2 without any chance. IMO this elevator teams (don't know if thats a term) may be the exception but not the rule. You should end up in a Division that reflects the strenght of the team rather then going up and down too easily. Of course this needs to be balanced, permeability is important to motivate the teams in lower divisions.

All in all I think the fight to get/stay in division 1 will get harder. If 5/16 relegate you always need to be in the top 11 to stay there. I can hardly imagine that that would be easy.

Just looking at my stats from the point where I first entered Division 1 after my Comeback:
12-2020 Div2, place 2 (promote to Division 1)
01-2021 Div1, place 21 (relegate to Division 2)
02-2021 Div2, place 3 (promote to Division 1)
03-2021 Div 1, place 17
04-2021 Div 1, place 21 (relegate to Division 2)
05-2021 Div2, place 3 (promote to Division 1) <----Until here elevator team
06-2021, place 11
07-2021, place 9
08-2021, place 6
09-2021, place 10
10-2021, place 12
11-2021, place 10
12-2021, place 2
01-2022, place 1
02-2022, place 1
03-2022, place 1
04-2022, place 2
05-2022, place 1
06-2022, place 3
07-2022, place 28 relegate to Div2
08-2022, place 5 promote to Div1
09-2022, place 12
10-2022, place 10
11-2022, place 14
12-2022, place 5
01-2023, place 3
02-2023, place 4
03-2023, place 5
04-2023, place 4
05-2023, place 1
06-2023, place 4
07-2023, place 14
08-2023, place 12
09-2023, place 5
10-2023, place 6

So while it was pretty easy to stay in Division 1 in the past, it will become way harder with the smaller Division, your proposal is a bit extrem. It demands 5/16 which is a higher percantage of a half as big Division. 3 is ok, 4 could be an option as well. 5 is way too many imo

[Gipfelstuermer]

Earlier you came into Division 1 with a quite average season, when you had the same season in the next month you went back to Division 2 without any chance. IMO this elevator teams (don't know if thats a term) may be the exception but not the rule.

Yep we had these elevator teams and that's why the percentage of promotion/relegation ranks has been reduced a bit.

From a technological point of view, it can now be changed easily (if after a while it seems way too difficult to move through divisions... but yes, the idea was to make it a bit more difficult, so it will take time to get used to it.)

[Robyklebt]

3 IMO is ok, expected 4 which would have been ok too, 5 would be too many.
For me the divisions as they are right now work.
Easy to change now, but I hope we're not changing monthly, depending on how many active players there are.
The names are stupid. If anything make it Buhvision-Big Buddha of c4f Division (or lesovision).. but I like Division 1. etc. But ok, unimportant.

Edit:
Inactive teams, 0 points and 0 races directly down to D6 is still not a good idea. You earn your way up, now hard, then you're off 1 month, sell the riders with points and you're back down at the bottom even if you after this month off you ride again. ? Don't expect it will happen often, but in the long future history of c4f at some point it will happen.
Normally it takes 2 months, yes, one month not riding you still have points. So it will happen to teams like Lorient, stop at the top. Down to D2, then D5. But much better if it takes them 5 months to D6, not just 2. Looking into the game after 3 months, still in D3, see a nice guy on the market, get motivated again, better chance to keep them in the game with a slow down I think (of course there's the weirdos a la Manghi who think the D6 market is so much cooler who would prefer going down fast)

[Alkworld]

Now with the cleaned up divisions, proper relegation and the ability to resize, I also think that there doesn't need to be auto-relegation. However, I would go for slightly higher number of promotions and relegations, as those two go practically hand in hand: automatic relegation of inactive practically increases teams being promoted, so if we take away the relegation due to inactivity, we should raise the regular promotions / relegations a little, e.g. 4-5-6-7-8.

[flockmastoR]

Now with the cleaned up divisions, proper relegation and the ability to resize, I also think that there doesn't need to be auto-relegation. However, I would go for slightly higher number of promotions and relegations, as those two go practically hand in hand: automatic relegation of inactive practically increases teams being promoted, so if we take away the relegation due to inactivity, we should raise the regular promotions / relegations a little, e.g. 4-5-6-7-8.

But this auto-relegation for inactive teams is "just" by one division?! Or directly to "The Rest" as the Donkey post indicates?

[Alkworld]

Now with the cleaned up divisions, proper relegation and the ability to resize, I also think that there doesn't need to be auto-relegation. However, I would go for slightly higher number of promotions and relegations, as those two go practically hand in hand: automatic relegation of inactive practically increases teams being promoted, so if we take away the relegation due to inactivity, we should raise the regular promotions / relegations a little, e.g. 4-5-6-7-8.

But this auto-relegation for inactive teams is "just" by one division?! Or directly to "The Rest" as the Donkey post indicates?

Directly to "The Rest" currently. The cleanup would have taken quite long otherwise.