It is broken. Go back to our 2nd fixture. You told me on Thursday night that you wouldn't be able to play it till Sunday night because richie wouldn't be on Friday or Saturday. We had enough players on Friday and Saturday but because you didn't want your less good players in you refused to play.

THAT is what needs fixing.

How's about when sending in team lists, suggested times for killer are also given. Then the runner can find a time best for both clans, if no time can be found good for both just have the default time as backup.

That certainly won't happen. We can't gather info on the willingness to play for the 32 players that are eligible.

If you give a whole day as an option, then what if one team is available in the morning and the other at night?

If there is a predetermined start point, it has to be a specific time.
Some of the suggestions have gone beyond what we need. But I think the system is well on its way to being broken. We can't handle 4 games going to the default time, because I have to check the availability of every single player at 9 on Sunday. If I'm not there, someone else would have to do it.

If we predetermine times (which as you said is easier with the 9pm), then it will be much less trouble for the captains.
We would get bigger, more exciting killer games (anyone who is online can play, not just 3) and there would never be any trouble about only playing the strongest players.
Captains could agree to another specific time and tell me about it, if that's preferred.

I also said if there was 3 on get them to play..
it was basically whatever night i could be bothered to log in. and ededed played his 1st game of killer for us that night so wasnt really waiting for anyone..

But im happy at whatever you lot decide.. we play what we have to..

Right now I'm tending towards testing this system of different predetermined times during the preseason friendlies. If it turns out to be crap, I would ask captains for a vote on whether to keep killer with the current system (the way we've had it the whole time) or to get rid of it completely.

Another topic:

The cup format needs a rethink. Right now, I'm thinking that a group stage followed by semifinal and a final would be nicer.

Assuming 6 teams:
2 groups of 3, (meaning everyone plays each other once 1v2, 1v3, 2v3)
top 2 teams go through from each group to semifinals.

Everyone would have at least two games guaranteed. This would eliminate the plate though.

I think you would have to consider seeding in the 2 half thing. Say group A was TD, D&C and Noobs. No offence to Noobs, but that's them out and with no plate they have nothing to play for.

Either with seb's suggestion or the current system, I don't think there is enough randomness for any result other than the cup winner being the winner of the TD vs D&C match, whenever that happens. I mean no dis-respect to the other clans there, but when it comes to all-round ability over all game types, they don't have the strength in depth. Basically the discussion has to look at one of two things:

1. Find a way to increase the chance of an upset.

Or

2. Make sure something is on offer that any of the other clans can win.

what about 1 group of 6, with the top 2 paying off for the cup

and then 3rd and 5th play and 4th and 6th play as the semi final of the plate, with the winners of those moving on to the final ?

How about in the 2 group split, the top 2 play the cup semi's. The losers of the semi's play 3rd place from the other group in the plate semi's?

This thread needs help to become as peaceful as the pool discussion thread!

Or we introduce a cup handicap, but I'm not sure that's a good idea. I think points should be won on the table, not paper

i gotta say this looks good

Yes, zante is right, plate can be worked in there.
Any other suggestions? The group thing was only a thought, maybe there's something better.

If not, are there any rule changes you want to try to get in?
Anything about Individuals or the Player's Championship?

If you do 2 fixtures between each team could you work in a 'home' and 'away' leg? Then do it like we used to in the UK v ROW carom thing and away captain sends teamlist to home captain who matches his players to it. The away captain could still shuffle a bit but that would be minimised with the rule stopping players subbing into the same game type. Could also maybe have 3 bonus points if the away team wins?

Away captain would say have to send team by Saturday midday, and home captain send the fixtures to seb by Sunday midnight.

Oh and to stop captains sending in ridiculous teamsheets, then making subs in every fixture to get what they want, could say a minimum of 5 original fixtures must be played? If not then teams could be fined points or something. Obviously this loophole is available now and no captains exploit it, so I would like to think none would .

Edited at 12:10 Sat 02/03/13 (GMT)

^That's a lot of legislating and oversight though. It seems more appropriate for an event in the events forum to be honest.
The matching up lineups falls to the subs as you mentioned. Any sub would be questioned almost every time.

Additional rule I'm looking to introduce (just the idea, not the actual text):
a player who is removed from a partially played game under rule 6.5 is ineligible to play in games for that clan for 2 fixture sets.

I don't want anyone "kicking out" a player to get the completion bonus and then sticking him back in next set or a set later. The use of rule 6.5 should remain an exception!

I like the sound of that rule.

I'll agree that's a good addition if in addition it is made clear that in the event of one clan's player refusing to play on and finish, the other clan will automatically be awarded the completion bonus (assuming all other games are played). Common sense really.

Don't we do that already in the default team?