*DAMN R6 Forum

Alright here we go! I'll discuss any changes in season 5 step by step.

Point 1: a new ranking system called Combat Point System:

The disadvantage of the skillpoint system was mainly tactical use because the points you get for a win was very dynamical and was depending on the progress of the season: MPs idea about static points would solve this problem easily:

The first 20clans have Combat(Purse) Points ranging from 250 - 10, all other clans start with 10 combat points.

If you beat a clan you only get the purse points, so the points you get only depend on the rank of the clan you played and not on the seasons progress. The points/rank would be like that: 1st 250, 2nd 230, 3rd 210, 4th 180 5th 170, 6th 160, 7th 130, 8th 120, 9th 110 10th 100 11th 90 12th 80 13th 70 14th 60 15th 50 16th 40 17th 30 18th 20 19th 15 20th 10.

Beside that you would get points for players (# * 3)

About points for losing: One of the main aims is to make cbing always fun no matter if you lose or not so I'm not sure how to handle this, because we have to add penalty points or we will have a masses instead of skills system. The clan with the most done cbs will be the #1 if we don't add penalty points:

The 20percent loss like we used in season 4 kept the season always exciting but I think as a consequence some clans kept cbing lower ranked clans. So we should maybe make a relation between rank and risk(difference between purse points). For example you always lose the purse point difference: If 1st was defeated by 2nd, 1st would only lose 20points because the risk for 1st and 2nd is very high. If 1st loses against 20th he would lose 240points because the risk to lose was very low.

But what happens if 20th loses against 1st!? He can't lose 240points - here we could 2 things: first say that if you battle higher ranked clans you don't get penalty points at all, this would increase battles against top clans but the better ranked  clan would always risk more to agree to a cb or we say if the difference is negative(20th: 10pts - 1st: 250pts = -240pts) you lose 20percent. I would like to hear your input about this please!

Further you get penalty points for being inactive(not cbing once in 7days): 1 week: 20percent loss, 2 weeks 40percent loss, 3 weeks 80percent loss. Top 6 clans may even have to do 2cbs/week. Your suggestions!?

There won't be forfeit wins anymore when you never started the cb: e.g. you setup a cb and one clan doesn't come you won't get a forfeit win - only the other clan gets penalty points (20percent)

Ok that would be the general new scoring system(cb limits will still remain to avoid getting cheap points)!

Another question is to add a challenge system or not!? Generally I'm not a fan of this simply because it is a ladder where you play when you are in the mood to do so and when you have fun. - A challenge mode would make it more "you have to play now...". Further if a clan doesn't battle, is inactive, he loses very much points so he doesn't prevent other clans from moving up. What's your opinion about a challenge modus?

Point 2: The finals! I think the finals in the Ghost Recon ladder were fun and exciting so I would still stick with them but make the time period shorter: Only one final weekend which will be announced at the start of the finals so everyone has time!? (Friday first round, Saturday 2nd round and sunday final round!?) All in all the finals would only be for the "big" *DAMN competition ladder(one/game) not the subladders which will be more stats and fun ladders for the casual gamers than the official competition ladder so a clan doesn't have to play more than one final/game. What is your opinion about the finals? The competition ladder game modes will be discussed in part 2 season5!

Point 3: season length: one user mentioned that 90days may a little bit long to keep players playing ONE game constantly so we may should reduce the season's length to 50days - main season would run until wednesday before the final weekend(6 weeks;46days) 47th day is pause and 48th - 50th day are the finals. I think that would make the seasons more exciting and create a new cb behaviour. Again your opinions please?

Game modes like 1vs1,siege ladders and the official game mode for the *DAMN competition ladder will be discussed in part 2 of season 5 improvements. Please post your opinions in a constructive way and don't forget to add your suggestions.

Bye,

Mauti

     Overall, I like it a lot, Mauti.

     My thoughts: I'd like to see more points for players, to encourage large CBs as much as possible. Larger games are what the game was designed for, and they're just more fun, not to mention allowing a vastly greater range of tactics. At 3 points per man, the incentive to go to the extra trouble to arrange a large CB is just not there. If you're CBing the top-ranked clan, you're looking at a point increase of 250. Getting a dozen or so extra points by including more people is not worth the effort.

     On penalty points for losses, I initially was against the idea as I started reading. After some reflection, I decided that your implementation, where you lose points depending on the difference between the two clans' ranks, is quite good. Now, upon yet more reflection, I've realized there's a rather large flaw in it. You want to include penalty points to prevent the league from simply being dominated by the clans who can CB the most, which I approve of. However, if clans are battling clans near their own rank, then the lost points are merely a drop in the bucket compared to the point totals that will result from the combat points system.
     To frame a hypothetical situation, assume a clan is ranked #2. They challenge clan #1, looking to gain 250 points. Now if clan #2 loses the CB, they've already "lost" (missed out on) that 250 points. Subtracting 20 from their existing total will make their total loss 270. That extra 20 points loss is not only adding insult to injury, it's not even acting as an effective "skill test". A clan that has done pretty well could easily have over a thousand points. Losing 20 as a skill penalty is not going to make a dent in that. Backing up a bit, you should also take into account that if the hypothetical #2 clan loses, their loss is not only those 250 points they were looking to gain. Their loss is actually 480 points, because of the 230 points that they just "gave" to the #1 clan, making it that much harder for #2 to become #1. Again, subtracting that extra 20 points is not very painful, and is not reflecting the losing clan's lack of skill as it is intended.

     This flaw could easily be corrected by increasing the penalty for a loss, but then we're back where we were with previous seasons, in which clans were reluctant to CB clans of their own level because of the potential loss of hard-won points. As counterintuitive as it seems, a system without penalty points may be best-equipped to display relative skill. No penalty for a loss means one less reason to avoid CBing, which should lead to a more active ladder. The clans which lose will simply not gain points and will be left behind by the clans which win on a regular basis.

     Penalty points could be assessed by clans which lose to significantly lower-ranked clans (e.g. #1 loses to #20, #1 gets bitten in the ass for it). However, adding such a system would be sub-optimal because more rules and more special situations leads to more administration bloat and potential for lawyering. So rather than make a special case where penalty points are assessed, how about going about it the other way and giving a hefty bonus to the underdog if they win? However, now that I type that out, it strikes me that that would put us back in the situation of enabling clans to sit idle for long periods of time and still make a comeback with a few well-placed CBs. While I'm an avid spectator of the epic struggle against long odds in the last weeks, the point of this exercise is to create a more active league. Therefore, adding rules which will benefit idlers is non-optimal. So in the end, I still think that the best system is one which includes neither penalties nor bonuses, no matter what the situation.

     I really don't like the idea of limiting the number of CBs between clans. However, I recognize the necessity of it to prevent the big, mean bully clans from picking on the weak, suicidal clans to gain cheap points. How about a setup like so: a clan may have unlimited CBs with clans above it, while you may only have X CBs with clans below you. This means that (over)confident clans may challenge the big boys as they wish, while the big boys will be somewhat restricted from using weak clans to gain points. Once again, though, doing something like that means adding cruft onto the league. In the interests of a more active league, the best solution would be to have no CB limits at all. CB limits contribute to clans avoiding CBs because they don't have the right men on, or because they don't feel up to snuff, or whatever. If you can only CB a certain clan 3 times, you don't want to waste a CB if there's a chance you might lose. Allowing unlimited CBs would encourage the view of CBs as a "try, try again" sort of affair. "If we lose, we can just come back tomorrow and try it again."

     Despite the benefits that I see for unlimited CBs, CB limits may still be necessary to work against the clans who are only in the league to win at all costs, no matter how it is accomplished.

     Anyway, enough for now. I look forward to other peoples' views on this proposal.

Picking one day off a weekend for playing is ok, but a whole weekend??
Could be pretty hard to get a team together for all the days.

A shorter final would be cool yes, but this is maybe alittle too much, besides playing a cb on a sunday night til the small hours would be pratically impossible , school and work on monday.

Dont really have a alternative suggestion for the length issue, but I do think that this would be too drastic.

Shorter main season on the other hand...yay  ;D

Looks good mauti. Im also for adding a bigger incentave for larger clan battles... also i think the penatly for loosing a cb should definatly be retained - like you said it should be on quality not quantity of Cbs!!!  I like the sound of it being related to the clans Combat skill points...

Damn i was going to write loads and loads but my heads gone blank.... gimme a minute!

Ok appologies for double post... But saw the game modes....

I would put a huge request up for a seriouse Siege ladder by DAMN. ITs a great game mode and probably the most played on GR by far. A lot of the big servers always run it, and it is played and enjoyed by many - and has huge possibilitys for clans and clan battles defence v offence...

ps.. before you say anything eight...yes i know there is a BTs Siege ladder ;)

Definately the other way around, a system of any kind that promotes playing at any situation is a good one. You cant control the quality of the cb's, they are what they are, but you can make a system that promotes playing. Wich I really hope that this thread will accomplish  :)

Lots and lots of cb's!!! that why were all here right?...to play games

Alright more points for players in relation to the purse points. Not a big deal and may also the loser should get half of the players points so all clans still get a bonus for playing larger cbs. E.g. (# of players ^2.25) * 0.7: a regular 4vs4 cb would bring additional: 15pts; 5vs5: 26; 6vs6: 39; 10vs10: 123 and 125points for all 12vs12+ cbs.

But back to the penalty points:

I'm totaly against a mass system: that's what I liked this season: no matter how much cbs you played the season was never predecided: out of nowhere |n| conquered the 1st place for a short time. E.g. DFA with 41wins and 42losses would have been probably 2nd last season. Which wouldn't be accurate. Nevertheless the system should support that you still play against 2nd when you are first and not play noobs ranked 20th or lower...  

An idea of how to add penalty points that depend on risk is that you lose 20percent of your points for a loss but each rank has also a percentage of this 20percent e.g. 1 rank below you lose 20percent of the 20percent penalty points, 2 ranks below 40percent, 3 below 60percent, 4below 80percent and and all others 100percent: You only lose points for cbing lower ranked clans so weak clans can keep cbing higher ranked clans.

I give you an example you cb a clan that is 5 ranks below you: You have 100pts - now you would lose 100pts * (0.2(the 20% penalty) * 1(100% for 5 or more lower ranks) = 20pts

If you battle only a clan one rank below you, you would only lose 4points (e.g. 1st vs 2nd) 100pts * (0.2 * 0.2) = 4pts. As a consequence #1 won't duck cbs against #2 because they wouldn't lose that much but they risk to lose full 20percent of their points if the play weak clans for some cheap and especially much less points...

Btw the purse point distribution must base on the number of participating clans: at maximum 20ranks or 50percent of all used and active ranks can have purse points or the whole system won't work - e.g. in the Rogue Spear ladder, with only 8 active clans, the first 4 ranks would have purse points all other have their default 10pts. A clan is considered as active by playing 1 cb/week, top 6 clans have to play 2cbs/week.

About the finals - may 3days is a bit short so may we should make one week! All in all I'm thinking about to change the main competition ladder for GR to a 5min, 3 respawns Warzone ladder and to elminate the "lead by 2 wins" rule so the average cb time could be lowered 50 - 70percent. Fast instant clanbattles!(but more about that at the part2)

However one question you didn't answer me was to have a challenge system or not!? And if the top 6 clans have to play more cbs/week than other clans to stay active!?

Bye,

Mauti

Yes for challenge system, god knows how many times we were denied a cb for some stupid "reason".

As long as it is within a reasonable timeframe.

(My view)

     The points for players still aren't enough. It usually takes hours, if not days, to set up any CB bigger than 4v4. When you get up to the mystical realm of 12v12 CBs, you're talking about at least a week of planning and rescheduling. Big CBs should be significantly valuable to encourage clans to participate in them.

     Your argument in favor of penalty points is flawed. You say that a clan with a lot of CBs played but with more than half of them losses could be highly-ranked. That's only true if nobody else is playing. If the league is active, then a clan which CBs often but poorly is not going to have any advantage, because each loss means that in terms of league placement, they didn't play that CB at all. With no penalty points, the ranks come down to number of wins, and who those wins were against. In other words, a skill-based system.

     Is there a full record of last season's GhR ladder somewhere?

     Warzone as a CB game is a damn good idea, but the games have to be longer than 5 minutes. Ten is a good number for Warzone, since it allows at least a couple of reversals. Five minutes probably means that whoever takes the base first is going to win, and if they lose the base, the game will often be a draw. I'll have to play some five-minute Warzone games and see how they play out.

I don't know if it is game skills if a clan manages to play 90cbs and wins the half and is than better than a clan that wins 25 out of 25cbs and against top clans!?

Everything where losses doesn't count are mass systems - we already made this experience in 3 years Battle League. All preseasons until 1st June 2002 worked that way! The season 1 - 4 worked fine with penalty points the only problem was that the number #1 ducked cb challenges from 2nd or 3rd and that midranged clans didn't dare to fight the #1 where the #1 wanted to fight them and I would work around this issue with reducing the penalty to only 4percent against one below ranked clan until 5clans ranked below you... Without penalty points the system won't work out, I can promise you that! (Btw even with penalty points the end score of season 4 goes almost after the win percentage and wins.)

Well where are the opinions from Bucc and Jeb, c| Boys, +MOD+!? Your opinions toward a challenge system: yes or no, and so on.

 "c boys? MOD? Any GHR players?

 RS? What's that? There's a RS ladder?! Oh yes! I completely forgot!"

     Last I heard, there wasn't an RS ladder.

Sorry for the delay, was off doing the baby christening thing and have family in town for it.  Not to mention some beta testing =P

OK, on the whole, I'm with ya, so I'll run down the list.
*****
Static points for beating places - yep, I think that's the key to solving many of the little problems.  It's easy to understand and calculate.  It doesn't reward you much for CB'ing low ranked clans, but does for CB'ing top ranked clans (no matter where you are ranked).
*****
More points for more players - I see where you are going Mauti, but I would suggest something a little more simple.  Let's say, for every player over 4 (per team) you have a +10% of the purse.  So a 5v5 would be (purse*1.1), a 6v6 would be (purse*1.2), a 14v14 would be (purse*2).  This would give a nice bonus, but not too big a bonus for a big CB amongst say 29th place vs 27th place.  
*****
Notice I said above a 4v4 up there.  I'd like to add the suggestion for future consideration that the minimum GhR CB be a 4v4.  These are bigger maps, and most agree that bigger CB's are more fun and a better test of the clan.  If clans can't get enough people online, they can grow (I'm saying this while playing in one of the smaller clans, and we aren't worried about 4v4's.)
*****
Penalty Points - here's my take on that.  First, with the static purses, they aren't needed as much (I'll repeat that so it's not taken the wrong way - as much).  But I do see Mauti's point and why it's needed.  So I go back to the spirit of it, what's it trying to do.  I then add in the Keep It Simple Stupid rule and come up with this.  The loser gets the penalty of (losers purse -  winners purse).  If it is a negative number, it's 0.  You don't want to punish a lower ranked clan for losing to a higher ranked clan, that's not the point.  You want to punish a higher ranked clan for losing to a lower ranked clan.  So, if 1 lost to 2, 1 would lose 10 points (while 2 gained 250 under the system).  If 2 lost to 1, 2 would lose no points at all (but 1 would gain 230).  This way it's easy math, and fair to the lower ranked clans.  
*****
Now, for the big one.  Having to CB once a week.  I really don't like this because of a few things.
1) If clans are afraid of your clan (and we all know this goes on), you could be avoided and lose ranking and points because of it.
2) This is compounded if you can't CB the same clan more then a few times.
3) Time zones.  This hurts clans in other time zones more the the US ones, but I think of them too.

So, the problem is if you have this in there, you automatically have a spot that can be abused (not will be, but could be).  The only way around this is a challenge feature.  And we know what luggage that can bring with it.

I understand the point of it, but I don't see a good way to pull it off.  It's just like if you have one day for the finals bracket, your squad was on for 3 hours, but had to go before their squad came on,  who wins?  Do both lose?  It's not like you have a lot of notice to schedule them, so who is responsible?  The same thing applies to making a clan CB on a set schedule.  They could ask 100 times in that one 7 day period and get turned down every time.  Is that their fault?  If they are trying but nobody will accept?  

Then, if you start looking at each of those and adding more rules to make things fair, you just over complicate things.  That's why I don't like this.  You can't make it fair and simple.  The closest you can come is a challenge feature.

Ok, there's a start.  More to come later I'm sure.

umm...personally, I'm with Bucc on most things. I see his logic.
(And congrats Bucc, on the baby deal, I guess)

Except the last bit... about a clan getting ducked by other clans, and losing their points for unintended inactivity.

I don't think this will be likely to happen, given the whole purse deal. A clan with a big purse will always be a ripe target for those with little or no purse, right?

It seems to me, that with the dissolution of at least one active clan recently, there will be a handful of active players in new clans, with a tiny little purse. The only way for them to climb the ladder will be to challenge the higher-ranked clans regularly.

One last thought, this hasn't been brought up yet.... I'd love it if we could deal with the 'draw situation' on the ghr ladder. Not sure how.... but a big reason for the cb's taking so long is the number of draws. (I'm not pointing fingers, I'm including myself here, if you like).

What if...I know this is insane...what if BOTH clans got penalized for the number of draws in their cb? Going for the draw is a major motivator for camping in cb's.

....you don't like the map? camp it out and try for the draw
....you lost a player early? camp it out and try to even the score
....you're playing a clan you're scared of? camp camp camp. wear them down until the good players have to log off.

If BOTH clans had something to lose for the draws, we'd have a lot more activity in the cb's.... because the draw would be the same as a loss for both sides. Just an idea.

i've liked what i've read so far, and the reason i haven't posted much is because i've been busy with work (i have about 2mins to post this before i leave).

Anyhow the combat/purse points system looks sexy. The only issue i see with using warzone as a gametype for the finals, would be that certain maps should not be played (you could probably set the rule to only play maps that are recomended for over 10 or 12 people).
I dont like the challenge system mainly because i don't think it would work to well. There are 30 or 40 clans that play GHR, and most of them aren't as active as the top 15 clans. If there was a challenge system the challenger should be limited to one challenge a week, or something like that so a inactive clan can't be beaten up on.

I'll think about issues for ending the draws today, because there are so many situations where i've seen 2 or 3 people die on the other team in a 4v4 cb, and it takes quite a bit of time to hunt them down. the system of the team with the most alive doesn't win because i've seen clans camp with 2 people vrs 1 to get a win rather than take a small risk and beat the remaining player.

i'll post more, and in greater depth when i get the change.

Alright thanks for your inputs so far:

Here is a small summary:

- Combat Point System with static points/rank(purse points) you can earn(purse points for at max 50percent of participating clans or 20clans).
- Penalty Points are the purse point difference; if below zero you don't get any penalty points to encourage cbing higher ranked clans.
- Player points are determined by amount of players and purse points you are fighting for: 4vs4 is 0 extra points; 5vs5 (purse * 0.3); and then increasing 5percent(0.05) per player until 9vs9; 10vs10: (purse points * 1) and then increasing by 10percent(0.1) per player so a 18vs18: purse points * 1.8;

- You have to play at least 1cb/week once you started cbing: Being one week inactive = 20%penalty, 2 weeks 40%, 3weeks
80% and 4weeks you get removed from the ladder.

- Season length has been shortened to 50days(7weeks) + 8 days finals.

- Challenge system will only be done for the finals at the moment

Alright that's about the general settings! I gonna write now part 2 about the game modes!

Bye,

Mauti
ps.: Typhy there are almost none active RS players out there - 4 out of 6 clans in the finals didn't play one game so my main focus is of course at the GR side. RS seems dead but of course your suggestions are welcome as well.

I think that there might be a problem here. I think the curve should be more drastic. Perhaps 400 or 500 points for beating the first place clan, which goes down in 50point increments till it reaches the 5th place clan (which would be at 300 points for beating them) then it gets lower faster for each clan after that. Because under the current idea you could beat a not so hard clan in 10th place twice without any problems, and get more points than you would for cbing the second place clan. This would make things less enticing to cb clans ranked low, and still get a good amount of points. And about punishment for lossing, it should be more drastic based on the lower the clan is that beat you. ie, you get beaten by the 15th place clan you should drop harder than if you got beaten by the 2nd place clan.
This would help things level things out much better.


Rather than waiting till the end of the season, the clans who start out the fastest will be rewarded the most under the purse point system.

I vote for a challenge system!
The way it is on "other" leagues...

challenger sends in the request... Giving info like who hosts an maybe a certain time of day they should stay away from... whatever..

The challenged clan then picks a few days... 4 or so... and first map...

the challenger then chooses one of these dates... and basically accepts and finalizes the challenge...

Now if your make a date with someone and they dont show then no forfiet... but if they challenge someone using a challenge feature after going through all of that i would then say forfiet...

my 2 cents

Alright I gonna rethink about the challenge feature! One thing that would be at least different is that you need to play at least i.e. 5games to send challenges and if you ignore 2 or challenges the system will auto disable the challenge ability for this clan or maybe adding a reliable rating to each clan.

Jeb after rethinking I agree with you that the purse points should have a bigger difference between the top clans and top 15 ranked clans:

1st: 500
2nd: 450
3rd: 400
4th 350
5th 300
6th 240
7th 180
8th 120
9th 110
10th 100
and then down in the 10pts steps.

This could work out!?! But pls post your changes/other suggestions Jeb, because season 5 should be formed as much as possible by the community like when we founded the BL 2000 we did the first BL rules together with all well known clans together.

Bye,

Mauti

Why not have penalty points?


I totally agree with that and I am gonna try to get some of the other clans to post on this.

Okay, here's my 2 cents:

Challange System:
I'm not completely sold on the challange system.  Sure we had plenty of people dodge CB requests from us, but almost every night that we went out looking for a CB, we found one, one way or another.  Had a few dry spells here and there, but all in all not too bad.

The worst thing about the finals this season was trying to coordinate a scheduled CB.  I realize for the finals, it had the be that way, and that's fine, but now extending that to the whole of the regular season, oh man, i already have a headache.  Trying to get another team, and more often our own team (and plz take no offense to this c| guys) to commit to a time to play a video game is like trying to grab a greased pig.  No one I know wants to plan their video game playing time that far in advance (including myself).  What if i feel like watching TV at that time, and don't feel like playing.  It's a video game...you feel like playing it, you turn it on, you don't feel like playing it anymore, you turn it off.  

Having to go to my team every single time we challange or get a challange, and find out who can be there at such and such a time, and then hoping they show up.  Being a clan leader and the guy responsible to coordinate all of this, i can feel the ulsers coming already.  That's the beauty of GameRanger and the Mac community.  You come online, you see some clans with the .cb tag, and then you go for it.  Yeah it always takes some time to get the ball rolling, but i think it would take even more time and WAY more of a hassle to try to coordinate all of these CBs in advance.


Season Length:
I'm liking the shorter season length idea.  c| definitely ran out of steam at about the mid way point, though to keep people training on the tight of a schedule for that long.  As for the finals, this is just a tough one all around.  Scheduling these CBs was a major headache, but actually shortening the time frame to get them done may work out for the better.  If you say, hey these are the 2 days, be there or tough, then it might pin people down to being there, instead of giving people a week to think about when they want to play.


Point System:
Oh man, i am beyond lost in this part of the conversation, but it seems that the masses are happy with the ideas so far, so keep up the good work guys!  what i do like is bringing back points for bigger CBs...was sad to see that go in season 4.  once i go thru all the info on the point system a couple of more times, i'll post some opinions on that.

Splinter, I'll try to break down the Combat Point System as it stands so far.

Each clan has a place on the ladder, based upon the points they've earned, just like it is now.

Each place on the ladder has a value assigned, called Combat Points (also referred to as "purse points" in a few posts).  This value is assigned to the PLACE.  So, first place has 500 Combat Points, second place has 450 Combat Points, etc.

When you beat a clan, you get their Combat Points added to your total points.  So, if c| was in 2nd place, and beat |MP| in 5th place, c| would get 300 points (plus any bonuses for extra people).  If |MP| won, they'd get 450 points.  

When you lose to a clan, you take the loser's combat points and subtract the winners combat points.  If that value is greater then zero, it is subtracted from the losers total points.  If it is less then zero, it gets thrown out.  So, if c| beat |MP| with those same places, it would be 300 (MP's Combat Points) - 450 (c's Combat Points) so 300 - 450= -150.  Since this is less then zero, MP's didn't lose any points (because they lost to a higher ranked clan, as it should be).  If c| lost though, it would be the opposite.  450 - 300 = 150, and 150 would be subtracted from c|'s total score.

So, if c| beat |MP|, c| would get 300 points.  If |MP| beat c|, |MP| would get 450 AND c| would lose 150.  

You get penalized for losing to a lower ranked team.

This works with any place, just change the numbers around.  First losing to 10th or lower can really shake things up, because not only does the 10th place team jump up, but most likely, the 1st place team would get passed by other teams since they would lose 400 points.  It puts a much higher risk on CB'ing low ranked clans.

Hope that helps.

Ok so then if i am in first place then i should stay away from cbing the lower ranked clans? Makes no sense does it? Or again i am not understanding it.

Why should i bargain off my 400 points? Just to some clan that started late or whatever? Or tactical... ladder use....

one thing that i that you mentioned was a inactivity feature...
This was one of my early ideas with the system (you can see it in the bts ladder), so basically a clan can't sit on top...
You drop 10%, or 1/4th of their rank or something drastic like that for every 2 week increment that you don't cb, however i think that this feature should only apply to the top 10-15 clans perhaps, i see a whole lot of clans on the GHR ladder that would be reduced to fractions of a point because of inactivity. What this hopes to accomplish is to assist in inactive clans moving down the ladder.

I say no to a challenge system, its just a pain in the ass. I know that there will be a flood of bullshit and bitching because of missed challenges or people not knowing what is happening.  The only problem with a clan not needing to cb would be the #1 clan, because the #2 and #3 clans have to do some work to get into the top spot. I'm still working on some thoughts to kill this issue.

Some other ideas while for the scripts, it wouldn't be hard to throw in a little feature to show which clan has the longest (current) winning streak, most games won,  and anything else that could be of good mention.

First Eight yes you understand it right - cbing lower ranked clans is more risky than equally ranked clans! In the previous seasons we always had the issue that the 1st, 2nd or 3rd didn't want to cb each other: now the combat point system supports exciting cbs between the top clans! So you concentrate more on quality battles and masses of cbs.

After I slept over it I decided not to add a challenge feature, at least not yet, I even think about to make the final cbs easier by setting up fix cb times for US vs US and US vs EUR clans. You have to play at those times or you can play earlier so you don't have to setup  a cb for hours.

Jeb as you can read it in the other threads highscores will probably be shown on each ladder site.

More about Warzone in the other thread!

Bye,

Mauti

The inactivity thing is messed up in its current state. With the purse system of gaining a lot of points by beating a clan of much higher rank, those clans that stay inactive for most of the begining season with have a destinct advantage. You only lose a percentage of your points so if you have 0 points to start with then you will lose absolutely nothing to inactivity. So if you decide to start playing later in the season you will get a lot of points because everyone will be of higher rank than you.

How about adding a constant amount of points for each week active?


I like the idea of a purse system. Although all the little numbers make it hard to understand. heh

There MUST be a rule where you can cb clans of close rank as many times as you please. The original problem that cb limits was supposed to combat was more experienced clans taking advantage of the weaker clans and gaining easy points. You do NOT want to limit those games between say 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.  The reason being is I distinctly remember last season where we were dominating. In my memory there was only 1 clan that was active, really good, and had a real desire to cb us. That clan was bts, and the only problem was that we could not schedule very many matches between us. We always had to keep in mind that we could only cb them a max of 4 times and so we had to make each one count. There were a lot of weaker clans that did not pose much of a problem for us and I didn't really enjoy beating these guys because many had already decided that they had lost before the game had even started.  

My idea for a rule that will make next season a better place.

Lower the cb limit between clans to 3. When you play someone who is within 5 ranks of you, it does NOT count towards your cb limit.

If necessary add this:
If you are below rank 12 you have no cb limits with those below you. *This is to encourage those weaker clans to play between themselves until they get better*  Amatures can play Amatures all they want, but unless they start going up in rank, they should not expect to get much fights against the champ. They still can fight the champ, although it is limited to how many times they can. They have to prove they have good enough skill to get close.

Valdar, your inactive penalties after you have done your first cb - but if you don't start cbing in the first 4 weeks you get removed from the ladder and all the previous weeks of being inactive count so if you decide you don't lose any points if you start later you can't allow to be inactive anymore or your clan will be removed!

"those clans that stay inactive for most of the begining season with have a destinct advantage."

No, that's the point of the combat point system: the guys that start earlier have much better chances to come into the finals because the points are always the same throughout the whole season!

To add a rule that you can cb the clans within 5 or 4ranks up and down as often as you want wouldn't be that difficult to add into the script! Any votes against this!?

Bye,

Mauti

I'm all for it Mauti, let them (us) CB as much as they can.

Ok NO CB LIMITS for season 5 - let's try it if it works out or if some clans battle other weak clans over and over again.

     If you have no CB limits, it will be abused.

     Having a rule where you have CB limits only against clans which are X ranks below you is sensible, but leads to some implementation problems. Clan "Super" CBs a low-ranked clan the maximum number of times allowed. Following that, the low-ranked clan moves up into the range where "Super" can now CB them without limit. After a while, the low-ranked clan drops back down to CB-limit territory. At that point, can "Super" CB them again? Yes? No? Only on alternate Tuesdays?

     I guess the easiest way to do it is to set a three-CB limit between clans, but if the clans are within a certain number of ranks of each other, the CB limit is totally ignored.

that's what I thought - you can abuse the system without cb limits but may due the system setup we should give it a try without limits or at least very liberal limits, cb limit = 7 (one for each week of the main season), and see if it works out!

Bye,

Mauti

That is what I said. At least, that is what I tried to say.  Anyway, I support Lothario's great idea!

Take bucc's example of c| and MP:
Say c| is in 2nd place(450 purse points) and |MP| is in 1st place(500 purse points).

If c| beats |mp|, c| gets 500 points and mp loses 50 points.
If |mp| beats c|, then mp gets 450 points with c| losing 0 points

In both outcomes 450 points are added to the ladder. Am I the only one who sees the problem here?

***Important***
Say c| and |mp| make the decision to exclusively play each other. Say that c| loses half the time and mp loses the other half of the time. If c| and |mp| play each other a lot then those 2 will quickly be off the charts.

You don't want a system where points are continually being added to the ladder. You need a big enough sinkhole, that will keep even the top clans within reasonable reach to the worst clans. This new system needs a 20% point loss or something like it.

     If the point system is going to be skill-based, then the best clans are supposed to be out of reach to the worst clans. I'm in a hurry so I can't think this through all the way to figure out if I'm right or not, but it seems to me that if two clans were exclusively fighting each other, that they'd be left behind by other clans who were consistently gaining points. If nobody else has worked it through by the time I'm back from work, I'll run the thought experiment.

The best clans are not supposed to be out of reach to the worst clans. The "worst clans" should have the opportunity to become #1. It is probably very unlikely, but if they drastically improve their gameplay they should have a shot at beccoming #1. The #1 clan on the ladder should have to fight to stay #1. They should not even be completely out of reach to a clan with only 2 points.

I honestly don't know why we have a massive overhaul of gametype and scoring. Last season worked out pretty well in my opinion. Sure you had clans that would dodge battles sometimes, but that is something we will probably always have. The battle dodging comes hand in hand with a competition ladder. You will not stop people from desiring to play with their best or until they get better, unless you completely get rid of a ladder that focuses on skill(which the purse point system has done in it's current state).

Like I said earlier, you NEED a big point sinkhole like what last season had. Why not keep what worked with last season and tweak what needs changing? This complete overhaul has a completely new list of problems and many of these problems will only reveal themselves after we have finished with season 5.

     When I said "the worst clans," I wasn't referring to low-ranked clans. I was referring to clans which lack skill. A low-ranked clan which has skill can take on high-ranked clans and beat them, and thereby move up in the rankings. A clan without skill is shit out of luck, which is entirely appropriate.

     By the way, the intent of a system which lacks big point losses is to encourage CBing. Big point losses have a negative psychological effect, in that clans aren't eager to risk their hard-won points. Without the worry of losing massive numbers of points, clans will (hopefully) CB much more freely. Even without point losses, clans shouldn't be able to run away into the realm of superhigh unattainable scores. Assuming that, say, the top ten clans are all equally active, their points will increase in parallel throughout the season, so the top of that group shouldn't be dramatically out of reach, points-wise, of the bottom of that group.

Balance is Key!!

bah i dont even know where to start.  Try to imagine these point scenarios mid-season.  What are the points and ranks gonna be like?

I rooted for clans like GG, |one| and DFA the whole way.  They we're skilled players all developing their team play throughout the season, and they all got close to making finals.  DFA's 40-40 record and high ranking in the end totally reflects their improvement.  That was a perfect scenario that worked.

We should not overly encourage or discourage cbing at any ranks.  We should however encourage all cb's period no matter what the rank...


PURSE POINTS

As for raising the purses by Jeb's recommendation, I'm not sure I agree with that.  Quick brief:  the purse points were raised to avoid a higher ranked clan getting more points by battling a lower-ranked clan multiple times rather than battling another high ranked clan just once.

Main reason i disagree:  

- The high ranked clan battling the lower ranks is taking a huge chance to lose big points each time it plays the lower ranks.  
- Where as by playing the higher ranks, it's taking very little chance and yet reaping huge rewards.  

The first purse amounts were correct, and maybe still could afford to go lower.  There is a perfect balance in the numbers here somewhere. The system should encourage playing between all ranks evenly.


PENALTIES

The minimal subtraction penalties amonst the highranked clans are not workin for me.  Most especially when the award is 30-50x greater than lowest clans in the same scenario.  If I was in 1st I see no reason to battle any clans lower than 5th.  This seems it would lead to a runaway ladder of elite skill.

I like flat percentage penalties (10%) better if any at all.  Keep it similar to last season in penalties, and reward winners depending upon the rank of their opponent.  YES, now that i think about it.  This makes sense.  I think we've been over compensating here.  Last season's ranks seemed fine to me.  The only difference here is that instead of penalizing losers you're rewarding big winners.  Last season wasn't like that, we'd get the same amount of points beating |db| as we would BTs.    

When playing a higher ranked team it's natural to expect the chances of losing to be greater.  The penalty is that your close running opponent has just gained your high purse points against you.  Take the end of last season for example with the shuffling of 1st place.  Taking the lead wasn't based on earning points so much as it was the leaders getting huge flat penalties for losing.  This would be opposite since this season one of two close ranking opposing teams gain the lead based on points they win against you vs points you lose in huge penalties.  

POINTS SUMMARY

Everything is relative here and needs a perfect balance.  If you dump the penalties then ignore what I said before and keep the high purse points.  that is my vote
   

I like no limits
I dont like challenges
I like the shorter season
I like the shorter finals (week-long)
 

Alright after rereading all threads I think I have to rewise many of my previous done posts and remember  the old skillpoint system its advantages and disadvantages and why we change to the combat point system and that the combat point system should just fix what didn't work for the skillpoint system!

About penalty points Valdar is right that he says they must be relative to your combat points: so I probably will use my older penalty point pattern where you lose 20percent against clans ranked 5 clans or more below you, and for the clans 1 - 4 in front of you or 1.-4 below you, you lose 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18 percent because the clans already get your points and may take your rank. You still won't get penalty points for clans much higher ranked than you(5 or more). I think that will keep up a good balance between cbing all ranks together with my first posted purse point pattern.

About cb limits:

cb limit = 3 times but won't count if the clan is 4 clans up or below you ranked. Once you have reached the limit you can't cb anymore except he comes back into the +/-4rank range!

Ok I think that's something we can work with. This system encourages cbing with a fair balance between all ranks but without inviting/allowing to cb weaker clans over and over again but supporting the weaker clans to fight the top clans because they don't have to lose much. Once you are a top clan(top 5) you don't get this benefit anymore and you have to prove your real skills!

Bye,

Mauti

wow.

Been of play Americans Army for so long I haven't dropped by to check the how the BL was progressing.

I haven't read it all yet but it looks pretty cool. nice job Mauti.