Minimum number of competitiors to run a league?

[Linkachu]

Yo guys.

What do you think should be the minimum number of competitors needed in order to run a league? As much as I'd like to say "there shouldn't be one", the reality is that it's not really worth anyone's time or effort to run a league with too few members involved.

My magic number is 6, but even that is low balling it. So, putting the question out to you guys.

Thoughts?

 

[Stark]

Six does seem like a good number to put the benchmark at - that way, with the current setup (not ruling out that it might change in the future), we'll have ten battles per competitor.

That amount seems fair, I'd argue.



We might get through the league pretty quickly, however. So if we do finish it rather early... that might be the time to sling in another one of those mini tournaments maybe.

 

[Sir Red]

Albeit six seems a bit small to me, I think it can work well as a good litmus test with the first runs of the league. So I saw that six as a bare minimum should work well enough.

My only fear is what LoN brought up, that all the battles could be finished in like a week or two with each person only needing five battles. Although that would give us time, like LoN also brought up, to have a mini-tourney. So if handled right, all should be alright.

Besides, hopefully there will be more interest in the leagues then the bare minimum.

 

[Linkachu]

Six is a small number, aye, and I wouldn't go any lower. My main worry at the moment is the Upper Baby Battling League numbers. Before the database was lost we had several members signed up for it, but this time the interest is somewhat lacking (three total so far). I'm hoping that'll change between now and the 1st of July, but if it doesn't I might close it for this season and try it again next January. Thankfully the Standard Competitive League is doing alright, so there's no worries there.

Time will tell what happens.