From the DGM's Desk: Unit Reports, ACC in the GJW, and More!


From the DGM's Desk: Unit Reports, ACC in the GJW, and More!


A bit of an update today on a number of my focus areas, including unit summaries from last quarter, a quick hit on a co-op checklist I'm working through, a GJW related ACC updated, and some general thoughts from the Dark Council. I'll close with a list of open positions I've seen advertised. Enjoy!


Unit Performance Summaries for Jan-March 2017

"Click to Enlarge"

Above you can see the metrics we track quarterly for each unit, covering Jan 1st to April 1st. We do not directly compare units due to differences in unit size and the way in which units run competitions and instead look for trends quarter to quarter. We do tend to emphasize the participation ratio metric as a method of seeing how many members a unit is reaching, and then we look at the relative standing of a unit's total participations when compared to this ratio, along with the number of competitions being run, to get an idea of how units are appealing to their memberships. Although we often make suggestions to Consuls based on these numbers, they are not the only way we evaluate units.

As a whole, we had nearly 250 active members in units participating in at least one competition. Compared to last year, this was pretty similar on a per-unit basis for this time of year. We did see a post-movie decline in roster sizes across the club, as last year, and the 'bump' in joins from Rogue One was smaller compared to TFA. These metrics are useful in comparing over more distant time periods as we try to keep the same approximate set of metrics from quarter to quarter, and we are just starting to look at the club across the last couple of years of the same general leadership team.

We continue to evaluate this method of tracking unit performance, as well as the units themselves. We add new categories as the need arises, such as the inclusion of CGs this quarter, or remove those that are problematic - such as the previous "average entrants per competition" metric. These numbers are hopefully useful not only to us, but also to the summit members, to be able to easily see a summary of their unit's general activity over the last quarter.

Co-Op competitions checklist

The last year or so we've seen a swelling of co-op competitions. The activity generated by these competitions is usually quite high, and I think it is a good opportunity for members and leaders to get a lot of exposure to one another. Members also seem to like them quite a bit based on feedback we've heard, and overall react very positively to the events - usually more than leaders running them!

We differentiate co-op competitions from Feuds in the nature of the competition. Co-ops can be as casual or competitive as summits want, while Feuds are a type of Vendetta event pitting two units against one another for rewards, sanctioned by the Dark Council, and overseen directly. In the case of co-ops, the DC takes a very hands off approach, typically only asking to be kept informed of decisions being made and offering to help in breaking ties in event grading and the like.

At times, this has lead to some issues where expectations differed between summits. In order to avoid this, I've been working on a 'checklist' of sorts to assist in planning of co-op events. The goal here is not to create a 'policy' units have to policy, but a set of helpful guides to ease communication. I've taken the feedback from the last year and attempted to distill where issues have occurred in a way that can allow summits to make sure they are on the same page. For instance, one checklist item asks which summit members are in charge of posting announcements about new phases or fiction related to the event, and for what phases/rounds, while another asks if explicit graders have been defined for each competition from each unit.

To that end, I'm soliciting members feedback... If you are part of a unit that has recently taken part in a co-op event and you would like to express some idea you had that could allow summits in the future, please email or message me on Telegram @DJB_Mav with your feedback!

The ACC in the upcoming GJW

The Dark Council has been planning the Great Jedi War, and due to a variety of real life factors, we are currently aiming for a start date that is mid summer. One of several decisions we have tentatively decided on pertains to the ACC in the GJW. The ACC is unique to the Brotherhood and has a long history as one of our competitive events that generates huge interest. On the other hand, there have been complaints for ages about 'spam to win' ladder sort of events where individuals earn points based on number of wins alone (and some combination of lost points for timeouts and/or losses). Yet there is not enough time in the War to have a large, open bracket tournament such as what we saw in Fading Light, and we firmly believe every member should have a chance to earn participation from events.

The solution? After discussions with the CM and Voice, we are currently tentatively planning a two-phase ACC event. Everything I share with you here is subject to change, so please keep that in mind.


The first phase will be an open ladder event and will occur before the GJW itself, where any member may participate and challenge other members. Participation during this phase counts for participation in the GJW, even though it will occur before the war. Members will earn placements based on number of wins (exact formula to be determined), which will count towards GJW point totals for each unit. Once the GJW itself starts, there will be a second phase, wherein a small, select group of members will compete in a bracket tournament. Consuls will be able to select one champion to represent their unit, drawing either from their highest placing member in the ladder, or another member of the unit, at their discretion. Finally, we are likely going to automatically advance the first place individual from the ladder to the bracket during the War itself, allowing any member to 'play their way' into the bracket tournament. This small bracket will take place during the war, and will be handled similarly to Fading Light in terms of grading (albeit with far fewer matches). Members placing in the bracket tournament will earn far more for their unit than placement in the ladder tournament, but they will count towards the same event for participation purposes.

We are currently working out the full details of the event, but I wanted to share with everyone the rough plans we have so far for the ACC. What this does mean is you can expect more updates on the GJW, and specifically on the ACC event for it, in the coming month.


How decisions are made

We've been getting a few questions lately about how decisions are made by the Dark Council. The vast majority of our decisions are made collectively, involving not just Councilors but also the summits of the Brotherhood, former Grand Masters, and the Star Chamber - and this involves everything from position appointments to major policy decisions. We try to run decisions by people quite ahead of time - 'socializing' decisions - and collect feedback and data prior to making a decision.

While it is not always the case that everyone agrees with our course of action, we listen to feedback and attempt to incorporate it. Both the Grand Master and myself have been swayed by discussions with Consuls and the Dark Councilors in regards to policy decisions or appointments. So we welcome feedback and frequently solicit it, either explicitly or implicitly through the way we discuss changes. At the same time, the best place for us to gather and respond to feedback is typically email - it is difficult for us to sort through the hundreds of Telegram messages a day, and we often will miss discussions in channels. So if you feel passionately about a topic, reach out by email.

A Note On Judging Competitions

With the introduction of possessions and credits, minor mistakes when entering in competition results and the like cause greater and greater headaches down stream as adjustment takes far more work than just changing placements. Please take the extra time to double-check every entry you make into the system when judging competitions. While mistakes happen and we are okay with that, we would like to cut down on the manual editing of competitions and membership credit details as much as possible!

News post policy page

It has come to my attention that quite a few of our members and leaders haven't looked over our News Page Policies and Best Practices, although it is linked at the top of the page to post news! I would strongly suggest leaders check it out, if only to get an idea of what categories they should be posting under, and what different groups can see different categories.

Open Positions

There are several open positions that are accepting applications, so if you are looking for a job, head on over and read up on the requirements. Even if you think you might not be the most experienced member, give an application a shot - or at least reach out to the position that posted the application - you may find yourself surprised!

-Aedile in House Liath of Clan Tarentum
-Quaestor in House Dinaari of Clan Taldryan
-Proconsul of Clan Arcona


That's it for now, all! Thanks for tuning in, and a special thanks to the Herald's staff for making me various report graphics and the like over the years!


Nice run-down, Mav. Love the unit report stuff.

Loving the idea for the ACC ladder, Mav, and the Co-op checklist should be a huge help in the future. Great work!

ACC you say? Heeeeey Drac up there ^.

Great as always to know feedback is heard. Good work everyone.

Thanks for the report Mav!

Hmmm. Going to have to chew that one over a bit because I both like and dislike the concept.

Personally, I would much rather see all 8 positions in the bracket be determined by score from the first phase. I can see the appeal of giving every clan a place in the bracket, but I'd argue that they already have that due to the open nature of phase one, which is specifically tied to the GJW even if it technically takes place earlier.

Looks like I'm gonna need to start practicing my combat writing.

The point was made already, but I do agree that the Phase 1 of the ACC portion should tie in directly to the Phase 2/GJW ACC event, and the "winners" of Phase 1 making up the initial combatants. Phase 1 can be run in two ways, but in both cases you would be running separate ACC competitions for each Clan. You can run a straight-up bracket-based competition. You would need to start soon, but you would get sign-ups for each Clan and then set-up a Hall for each of them and go from there. It would be 2+2 and 3-day limits. Some Clans would have larger brackets than others, but I would say at most it would be a 32-person bracket and timing would be based on that. That means 5 rounds, with each round taking roughly 14 days (12 days for fighting plus 2 to grade). So overall you're looking at ~70 days or a little less than 2 and a half months. In this end the winner from each Clan would move on as that Clan's "champion" and everyone else who fully participates gets participation credit for the GJW. While this gets you the most "skilled" competitor, it also leaves out anyone who may have wanted to participate a little later as you can only participate if you signed up right at the beginning. Anyone else joining later would not have a chance at all

The second way is doing the open-ladder idea, except for each Clan. Same things apply with a Hall set-up for each Clan and then they fight among themselves. You can have this open for a set amount of time, and it allows for most people to join in at various times to participate. Winner of the ladder based on whatever point system is made becomes the champion. I prefer this method as it maximizes participation.

If you really wanted to have an 8-man bracket, then you can always make like a random Rogue/DC bracket for them to fight it out and participate too. Just makes it nice and clean in the end.

At the end of the day, it really should be the members themselves winning the right to fight for their Clan, rather than it being a choice made solely by the Summits

I agree with Halc, clan qualifiers would be the fairest method to do this, preferably in such a way that doesn't spamming (ex. Only counting a certain number of matches)

Hi all,

We are not dictating to units how they choose their 'champion.' Units are free to run internal qualifiers as they desire. We have no interest in running different ACC events for each unit for the GJW. I considered this option, but find that logistically it is a little unfair as units have highly variable numbers of members interested in the ACC, and basing GJW placement points off of any such outcomes seems wildly unfair. Remember, 'Phase 1' will be awarding some amount of placement points, in addition to its participation points. But by all means, push your summits to hold their own qualifiers :)

Regarding Alethia's suggestion, I also considered that option, but I feel it creates unsavory situations in which a unit might try gaming the system by encouraging members not to be too prolific if it might mean knocking out an objectively 'better' ACCer. Match spam ladders have a habit of rewarding a mix of skill and free time. Our goal with the two phased approach is to allow units to select an individual to represent them (for instance, through Halc's idea above), while also having every individual member - no matter the specific circumstances of their unit - a shot to participate and ultimately place in an ACC event, maybe even advancing to the Bracket tournament.

I am more than willing to assist any Clans that wish to run an internal qualifier to determine their "champions" in the GJW ACC event. As outlined above, there would be quite the time table involved in doing this properly, so I would recommend having your summits reach out to me as early as possible to get that going the right way.

Other than that, as Mav says, it is very much up to the units how they want to determine who their representative contenders will be. Our goal is to reward all types of ACCers. Not just whom others have predetermined to be the named threats.


I think the general notion (and HAlc can correct me if I'm wrong) is that the clan qualifier should take the place of "Phase 1". If a clan chooses to go that route, would that option be avilable?

Do you mean if a Clan chooses to pick its 'champion' from the results of Phase 1? That is certainly an option and one I intended to make clear in the original announcement. It is one I encourage for units, as well, although if a unit would prefer a different method than the open tournament to pick a champion, they can reach out to Atra.

Keep in mind Phase 1 is a GJW event in terms of rewards, as well. It is not merely a means of selecting a person for the bracket and getting members participation. I don't think it would be a good idea for us to replace it with internal Clan competitions because I don't see how it would be feasible to award those competitions (e.g. with Seals or Novae) or grant placement points in a fair way, given the wide discrepancy in unit size and interest in the ACC. The point of the 'open to all' pool idea of Phase 1 is to allow every ACCer, no matter how popular the ACC is in their unit, to have a shot at placing in an ACC event or at least getting in the games they want.

I'm just trying to understand how Phase 1 is going to work without being something that rewards spamming.

Love the rundown, Mav.

Referencing your comments above, Arden, the reality of the ACC remains that there will be folks who fail to post in the slotted time assigned to them. In that sense participation points with a proper formula could work, I think.

Overall I'm optimistic of the idea, but I'll wait for more updates on the subject.

You need to be logged in to post comments