Leaderboard

If this means preventing this: then yeah, I agree 10000%. (For example) Pro Group 1 12th place team SSK was 4 points from a playoff spot, and they are going to have to go through qualifiers when PENTA (highest seed eliminated in Lite top16 so 9th I guess) gets to go straight to Pro. I kinda like the idea that even the 12th place team in Pro has to qualify, but imo in the case of extra spots you should just allocate those to the qualifiers so that the best teams play in Pro. Those five that now got instant promotion might just be the top5 teams in the qualifiers and be top5 in Pro next year, hell do I know, but imo they shouldn't take a priority over teams that weren't too far off from Pro playoffs. --> just let everyone prove themselves in the qualifiers, that's the primary idea behind this new system isn't it? If there's extra spots, then great, more (qualifier) teams have the chance to get promoted!

I can definitely understand and appreciate the passionate response regarding the subject. That being said, I have to make it clear that any personal attacks on staff members will not be tolerated. This applies to this topic and all topics. We are happy to receive your feedback and discuss the subject, but going after staff members individually is not ok. We are all passionate about what we are doing here and while our opinions may not always align, it doesn’t mean that we don’t want the same end result. At the end of the day it comes down to the fact that we announced how this would work on the 30th of December and at this point are honouring what we described the procedure would be. We received some feedback and criticism at that point and made some immediate adjustments to some valid points that were brought up. One of these points of feedback was not how the teams would be promoted in the case of unforseen spots in the divisions. As a reminder, here’s how it was outlined in the New Division and Promotion Structure article: In this case, there were as many as five (5) unforeseen spots in Pro and we filled them as previously announced. Is it the right approach? Depends who you ask, and we’re open for feedback on this - preferably also from teams that are not in any way involved in this procedure currently, so we can get a broader view on the subject. Either way, we do not believe it would be right to change the rules for this a few days before the qualifiers. So while the question about whether or not this was the right approach to begin with may be legitimate, we have stuck to the original plan and not undermined anyone’s chances. As for the screenshot of the registration news story - valid feedback, this notion lacks specification on our part. It is referring to the spots that are available by default as per plan - seven (7) for Pro and does not take into account spots opened due to other circumstances such as teams disbanding. We apologise for the obvious lack of specification. I hope we can keep this discussion productive and develop the structure in a way where we can all agree on the amendments to make to the qualifications for season 13. Does everyone agree that in the future (from season 13), every free spot - both default and unforeseen - should be made be available through the qualifiers? For clarity, I am not referring to the instant promotion spots that are available through finishing top 3 in Lite etc. Thanks for all the constructive feedback, for example by @Mikka. I will address some of them in a separate message.

This is spot on and actually shows that there is two contradicted rules simultaneously. I only have two ECL seasons of experience so my opinion maybe isn't the most interesting but I really feel that there is some unfairness of how things were decided. It feels unfair that Pro teams 12th-16th have to qualify while these 5 Lite teams get promoted directly without being challeneged at all. I also think that, deep inside somewhere, everyone knows that there probably is a skill difference between Lite 9th vs Pro 12th. We understand if the timeline as per now is too short but there are some options still and there is still time for some changes that would result in more fairness with less frustration and dissatisfaction. A. Add these Lite teams to the Qualifier and put them to a fair test. A 25 team Qualifier would take maybe 1 week extra than planned. This would mean 12 spots to Pro out of the 25 team Qualifier. B. If 25 team Qualifier is to big and take too long time. Let the highest Pro seeded teams from the Qualifiers get those open Pro spots and replace them in the Qualifiers with the 5 Lite teams. This would feel more fair and you'd have time until next ECL to overhaul these Qualifer rules and it's flow.

@NHLGamer Please explain why you change the rules again. And can we trust the rules set for the qualifying-tournament or will these be changed again before ECL12?

Thought it would be obvious that ALL free Pro spots would be in qualifiers. Part of the reason i was okay giving away my teams Pro spot was that someone who actually deserving it would get it through qualifiers. RIP. (No offence to any team getting a free spot, all are great, but still🤷‍♂️)

The idea of qualifications was good and it is necessary, but the execution for this season fails and I understand that a lot of it has to do with what was originally said to be the rules. I understand that you have stick with those for this season even though it would be clear already that those rules need a lot of fixing. I agree with Mikka on many parts. I do not think that any unforeseen spots caused by teams disbanding should be filled automatically. Those should be filled by qualification. Also I dont think that announcing this midlastseason is any kind of a real issue even though it stings some teams, but everyone was surely trying to finish their best anyway? I dont see an issue with new wildcard teams getting a chance for qualification. Do we really wanna throw new teams created by elite and top pro players end up in Core or Lite? Who does that benefit, it would only ruin those divisions for everyone. I agree though that it looks bad that some teams fire everyone except the captain to get to a higher qualification. Would be hard to enforce any rule to prevent that though because any rule could be circumvented by simply the captain changing the name of the team and making someone else the captain and then its a whole new team. There was no mention originally about wildcard teams having to qualify for the qualifiers and I believe information about this was given to the teams at a very late moment and with a very short notice and that should be handled a lot better. There were different demands to apply for ecl12 lite qualifiers than ecl13- lite qualifiers which were way tougher for ecl12. I found that very puzzling when considering that the number of the wildcard teams are the same for both. Ecl12 lite qualifiers actually has way more teams than starting ecl13-. And now only 44 teams participate in the lite qualifiers even though it was supposed to be 64. So many teams will disband from lite and higher every season that I wonder how messy will that make the current rules look in the future lite qualifiers. The biggest thing for the future is definitely not filling the spots of disbanded teams automatically.

Just as I mentioned in my Post regarding the first Change of the whole Promotion & Relegation System in December/January during the Season. This Stuff is once again next level and makes everything even worse and more unfair. GG WP.

Wow, just wow. Imo, you already messed up with the announcement of the qualifiers and the timing of the tournament etc., but this is on a whole other level. So how does promoting the next available Lite-team make the qualifiers a fair deal?

With how the qualifiers have been seeded, those 5 teams would be the top 5 seeded teams in the qualifiers From the original structure update article: Lite teams being higher seeded than the Pro teams also means that at least I, personally, would in the "real" qualifier format prefer to be the 13th rank in Pro instead of 12th. "Why is that?", you may ask. Well, in the format that's going to be in use starting next season, the only difference to the seedings I posted above is that Pro bottom4 will be directly replaced with top4 of core. --> the 12th and 14th placed Pro teams will be in the same group with each other, meanwhile the 13th place teams will be the lone Pro teams in their groups, as seen below. I haven't had enough sleep to think about how this could be solved or even if I'm the only one thinking like this, but I'll just drop this here. I thought I commented about this on the original article but it appears I didn't, so sorry for the late feedback Also I don't personally get the complaints about how this was announced mid-season, I mean I'd like to think that everyone wants to achieve the highest finish possible no matter what, so I don't see how an earlier heads-up would've solved anything. I do understand that the teams affected might feel upset about getting this unpleasant surprise so late, but be honest if you would've finished higher due to the fear of a relegation battle instead of the hunger to get into the playoffs, you're doing something wrong.

Really? You dont see any difference from previous 10 season? I wonder why that is... Did you get a Pro spot without qualifying perhaps?

Just to put my 2 cents in, as someone who plays in LITE next season. I think it's ridiculous, that a team that needed around 10 wins (like @iSvamp pointed out multiple times) to win LITE, get INSTANTLY promoted to PRO, before a team (SSK) that was just a couple of wins off playoffs, even though, the rules was said to be that the top 4 LITE teams get promoted whilst top 8 (or 9?) has to be in the qualifier tournament. Out of a competitive point of view, I think it is really important to withhold the principle of QUALIFYING into a higher division, ESPECIALLY when you did NOT actually "earn" it. It's not too late to make things right IMO, the staff HAS to consider this overwhelming feedback, just put those teams that you chose to immediately promote to PRO, into the qualifiers instead. That would be the best thing to do, out of a competitive point of view. But hey, what the fuck do I know

"Overwhelming feedback"? 10-15 players (mostly players from affected teams so the opinion is not very objective) is not agreeing out of what...close to 300 teams? I say no changes now and let NG figure this out in peace. I think people forget how much work they put in to make this work and i know they care about the feedback. Also, moving the teams to qualifiers creates a series of events so there will probably not be enough time to do that.

Did you read my comment at all? I am personally against free spots. I dont think any of the "free spot" teams are specially proud of getting promoted this way. We didnt make the rules, so I think your comments "blaming" us for getting a promotion is a bit strange..

Södertälje SK: 4 points away from the PRO Playoffs = Qualifications Your team: 10 wins away from winning the ECL LITE (TEN) = Free spot in PRO. ---- Ofc we're "happy" for you, but this is so wrong. It's not your fault tho, it's gamers.

Why on earth teams that should be in the Lite qualifiers get a direct Lite spot???? Why not just fill the rest of the free Lite spots based on last ECL's success then? FFS

This means: * Winner of B07 games play Pro next season * If your team does not reach Last 16 in Lite there is no chance for Pro next season. * If your team will be 15 or 16 in PRO there is no chance for Pro next season. * If your team goes to the semifinal in Lite you will play Pro next season. * Lite 16, Qual and Wild teams will have a chance to get an Open Spot after next signup. This is just one model. I don't actually see the point with Wild Cards, but this system works without those teams as well, of course.

It's just that your team doesn't deserve a spot in PRO without qualification (but I really understand why you and imosi are fighting about it, cuz you got it for free) compared with SSK who almost reached the playoffs in PRO and NOW needs to battle for their spot. It makes no fucking sense that a team in LITE who needed 10 more wins to even win the LITE division getting a spot for free in a higher division when a team who almost reached the playoffs in the higher division needs to fight for the spot in a qualification to even stay there. It's fucked up for real. I would love to see you guys fight about this PRO spot vs Royal HT and their "Elite" roster. But once again, congratz.

As I stated in the last article about ECL 12 - Imo, there is no fairness in having wildcard teams. If you disband, then you officially give up your spot and automatically fall down the ladder. It's that simple. But then there is the question of how far you shall fall? Well, since Elite and Pro are the most competitive tiers, would it be strange to fall down to Lite/Core/Neo? Imo, not at all. I think that disbanding teams is a huge issue for the divisional system since it disrupts the "flow" of the relegations and promotions quite a lot and thus needs repercussions. With disbanding, I mean officially stating that you are not going to compete in a tournament with that particular team or it ceases to exist. Changing names and most of the roster is another issue for another day. No disrespect to the teams duking it out in the wildcard battle, many of them are highly skilled and would give even the best of teams a run for their money. But it's just not fair that you can scrap together a team (hypothetically) on a weeks notice and just run into a Pro-qualifier when you already have teams in line, that has had decent seasons in the lower tier. As I also earlier said, by doing it this way, the communitys feeling of a teams skill seems to outweigh the performance of last season. Promoting the next eligible teams in line from the lower tier? Well, that's like pissing on someone and pretending that it's raining. Why not just place them in the qualifiers? If this logic continues to the next season, a bottom Pro-team would have an equal chance of qualifying to Pro just by not playing this tournament and get a Wildcard-spot for the next tournament. No schedualing issues or playing during the summer, ez game ez life. But as stated in previous articles, this is a one-time deal with the qualifiers so this can't happen right? Thank you! And if we had more time: C. No wildcards and Qualifiers for bottom Pro and all eligible Lite-teams (including the ones that are now promoted). Wildcards placed in Lite Fair point and I agree to some extent, but imo I think you should't change the pre-conditions of a tournament when there is merely 3 rounds left, it's just poor judgement. But as I search around for the divisional framework and in particular the info regarding relegation in ECL 11, I only see this side note: *Note: The divisions are still a work-in-progress and NHLGamer reserves the right to adjust the divisions as necessary. Is that referring to this upcoming qualifier or have I missed some info in any of the previous articles?

As far as I see, this whole qualifier-thing was created to ensure that the divisions are as tight and competitive as possible, as in so that the best eligible teams will get into Pro((&Lite)). Blindly promoting the best Lite playoff teams from the previous season doesn't in my opinion only cancel out the good elements this system has brought, but actually outweights them and makes this worse than the one we had before. If a team belongs in Pro, they can surely get a top 7 placement in a qualifier consisting of bottom Pro, almost-top Lite (& top Core) and these week old new teams, no? Getting to top 8 in Lite isn't imo enough proof that a team is better than a 12th ranked Pro team. They could be though, and that's why there's these qualifiers where they can prove themselves, isn't that just great I get it you're happy you got a free ride through the quals cuz rules are rules n shit but I'd maybe let the next season do the talking if I were in your position, gz & gl, see you in Pro. Np, although I don't agree with you on this (my comment from yesterday, just let them battle it out imo) Also I'm not sure anything can be done about ECL 12 anymore, just giving improvement suggestions for the future at this point

@Bjono To answer your question. The rules you quote are in this article from 29 Dec 2020 (updated 17 Mar 2021): https://nhlgamer.com/community/news/european-championship-league/new-division-and-promotion-structure-updated-170321-r775/# And there is information in a later article from 24 Mar 2021 that contradicts but imo would be more fair: https://nhlgamer.com/community/news/european-championship-league/the-ecl-is-now-bigger-than-ever-sign-up-for-ecl-12-now-r809/ So maybe it's a question of interpretation or maybe it's just a mistake or I don't 🤷‍♂️

Actually it’s because we went to Lite finals and got promoted to Pro according to the rules set before the start of season 10, and it’s way more difficult being top 11 in your Pro group than reaching top 16 in Lite. Im fine with qualifying. I’m not fine with all the changes to the regulations mid-season.

I love that someone pointed this discrepancy out. As if being top-16 in Lite is somehow better than already competing Pro... 🙃 I also love that they're asking this after already making the decision for the upcoming tournament.

Where is the logic the post is all about? I dont get it....

Is this a joke?

@NHLGamer The seeding is wrong for the Pro-qualifier. Why is suddenly Pro-teams 12th-14th seeded higher than Lite Playoff team 10th???? Please explain why you consider 9 Lite teams to be better than the Pro-teams but not 10. You also state that the Lite-teams will replace the directly promoted teams. So it makes more sense if you seed them higher Its wrong...but at least make it consistent. Also if you belive free spots are wrong then make it right now, not after the tournament.

How about ECL 9 and Delusion (now hREDS)? That season they were über dominant in the Pro, imagine putting that kind of team in Lite.. Would Lite teams enjoy playing against that kind of team and losing 20-0? They were winning in Pro by over 10 goals many occasions (like 17-5 and 13-1). If hREDS formed today would you seriously put them to Lite?

Out of curiousity....as I understand it for ECL12-13 etc the top 4 core teams will get into qualifiers for Pro before some Lite teams who are not successful enough in playoffs. BUT if enough pro/elite teams disband then potentially a Lite team who is not eligible for Pro-qualifier can get the Pro spot before the pro-qualifier eligible core team. Its very unlikely, but theoretically possible, no? @NHLGamer Im not sure but there is probably like a 100+ years or so of documented promotions/relegations in sport...why not have a look at how its done?

What is the different from previous seasons? so if you play that ”good” that you end up in the qualification situation, and obvious didnt have any success in the division, you are the better team and should stay in the division?? maybe we should close the division aswell?

WTF did I just read?? 🤣 You fucked up. Can I make a support req about this?

ez4 @Haldeem

I'd say 70+ likes on Mikka's post is pretty ''overwhelming'' feedback 😆😆? Or do you usually see this many likes on ANY post here @NG?

First of all the team is not mine and im not the captain of the team just a member. Please tell me what would my comments change at this point? These are all my personal opinions. What do you want me to say that you would be happy? Can I say it more clearly, I think no one deserves a free spot.

My point was by no means to have any kind of disrespect for the new teams, I know they are very good and for sure could have success in PRO, but feels a bit unfair for all the teams who are fighting their ways from the lower divisions. Was more of a friendly advice. Look at teams like Ghetto Firebirds etc. Of course sometimes changes in the lineup is necessary. But when you change the name and the whole roster its a bit weird. I dont know about how the rule would go, but maybe the staff would have to take a look at the teams who are changing basically everything. Maybe a Captain + some old members at least. minimum. Would it be too harsh for a new team to start from Lite for an example? All ideas are welcome! I advice everyone to give their ideas for making these tournaments better for everyone.

I am sorry, but what is the logic here? Personally ive played in lite, pro and elite. I dont see much of a skill difference between top 8 lite and most of the pro teams (maybe not top 4-8). At least before. Maybe its different now and I am completely wrong, who knows.. I see that the biggest skill difference is pro -> elite. Anyway.. How are these ideas fair for the ”old” teams, who played very long seasons just to play in the same qualify with a team that is maybe 1-4 weeks old (Wildcard)? Why would any team "deserve" a free spot? On a personal level I also see it a bit odd, that the captain is enough to ”own” the team and its enough to keep the team spot. Just kick the whole team and get new players in after a ”bad” season? I dont think that is the key for a good success in a long run. Overall I find the new system is a good idea and its main idea, which is getting rid of these free spots. Unfortunately this isnt anything new and this has happened before every new ecl season. This is why need these new ideas and systems. However at the moment the ”new system” is maybe a bit too confusing and hard to understand. Or maybe im just dumb😬..

1.4? Farssi

You have to qualify?🤔 why is that? so you think you deserved the spot?