Update!!

GoHeat 3 · 01-29-2013, 12:12 PM

I just realized the best part! When you Scramble something it shows the +1 wit animation!

**QuantumApocalypse** · 01-29-2013, 12:12 PM

(01-29-2013 11:46 AM)jaxxinjr Wrote: Not mentioned anywhere yet, my bramble can move FOUR hexes! Am I seeing things??

It was like that on release... Tongue

jaxxinjr · 01-29-2013, 01:03 PM

Re: new league points

So my first league win after update, I got 22 pts, loser only lost four?

He is a master, #3 in league, with 236 pts
I was master #14 with 115 pts

Point spread seems strange, very lopsided.

**QuantumApocalypse** · 01-29-2013, 01:20 PM

(01-29-2013 01:03 PM)jaxxinjr Wrote: Re: new league points

So my first league win after update, I got 22 pts, loser only lost four?

He is a master, #3 in league, with 236 pts
I was master #14 with 115 pts

Point spread seems strange, very lopsided.

Seems to take a different approach to going up and down the boards. Instead of moving you up and kicking you down, they go down a bit and you rocket up, causing the overall points to soar. Every one will be moving upwards, and you go down when someone overtakes you, rather than falling.

It also helps discern the inactives, who remain near the bottom with litte points.

CombatEX · (This post was last modified: 01-29-2013 02:34 PM by CombatEX.)

(01-29-2013 10:57 AM)onealexleft Wrote: - In short, we're hoping that your league and your division points become reflective of your skill and help differentiate players a bit more. A 1000 point Master Leaguer should be more skilled than a 300 point Master Leaguer (assuming similar time played).

Thanks for the info and I think it sounds great as a whole, but the last part in bold worries me. The problem with the system before Seasons was that if a player had been playing for much longer they would have more points despite being the same skill as someone who had played for less time. Is this going to be the case once again?

A 1000 point Master Leaguer can be less skilled than a 300 point Master Leaguer if the 1000 point player has played for longer?

Of course, this is always going to be true to some extent, someone who just started won't have as many points as someone who has played for much longer. The issue is striking the correct balance. As long as the 300 point player who is more skilled can catch the 1000 point player playing games at the same rate in a reasonably short period of time (after 15 games or so?) then there is no issue. If the more skilled 300 point player started 2 weeks later and then plays games at the same rate as the 1000 point player and takes 100 games to catch up, then there is a problem.

EDIT:

hm, now this is interesting.

(01-29-2013 01:20 PM)QuantumApocalypse Wrote:
(01-29-2013 01:03 PM)jaxxinjr Wrote: Re: new league points

So my first league win after update, I got 22 pts, loser only lost four?

He is a master, #3 in league, with 236 pts
I was master #14 with 115 pts

Point spread seems strange, very lopsided.

Seems to take a different approach to going up and down the boards. Instead of moving you up and kicking you down, they go down a bit and you rocket up, causing the overall points to soar. Every one will be moving upwards, and you go down when someone overtakes you, rather than falling.

It also helps discern the inactives, who remain near the bottom with litte points.

If what you guess is true, that's downright terrible because it's just going back to the old problematic "activity point" system. Perhaps I'm biased, but I liked the point system we had before the update. I only finish 2 or 3 games a week and was still able to stay at the top of my league (and I'm playing primarily STs now so it's accurate that I should be around there). I've also looked at the other top players in my league and for the most part they are reasonably high on the top 200 too so it seems the point system was working fairly well. Now, I do agree with OML's statement that there was an issue with all the 0 point players at the bottom. However, I don't think reverting to the previous "activity points" (or fun points as someone once called them) is the best solution. Maybe I'm just jumping the gun though and am not understanding how the point system will ultimately work, but jaaxinjr's example is rather disconcerting.

Maybe the best way is too try bonus pool? Yea, it's not being original, but it works.

**connor34911** · 01-29-2013, 02:34 PM

Yup. That's what it seems like to me. I also had a similar point situation where I gained 21, loser lost 3.

alexjiang1 · 01-29-2013, 03:00 PM

Same here, +22, -1 for opponent

ElPared · 01-29-2013, 04:27 PM

that's good, it seemed before like I would drop 4 or 5 places after losing like 2 games, but I'd only go up 1 or 2 places after winning the same amount. This way seems a bit more balanced.

**QuantumApocalypse** · 01-29-2013, 05:46 PM

(01-29-2013 02:27 PM)CombatEX Wrote: If what you guess is true, that's downright terrible because it's just going back to the old problematic "activity point" system. Perhaps I'm biased, but I liked the point system we had before the update. I only finish 2 or 3 games a week and was still able to stay at the top of my league (and I'm playing primarily STs now so it's accurate that I should be around there). I've also looked at the other top players in my league and for the most part they are reasonably high on the top 200 too so it seems the point system was working fairly well. Now, I do agree with OML's statement that there was an issue with all the 0 point players at the bottom. However, I don't think reverting to the previous "activity points" (or fun points as someone once called them) is the best solution. Maybe I'm just jumping the gun though and am not understanding how the point system will ultimately work, but jaaxinjr's example is rather disconcerting.

Maybe the best way is too try bonus pool? Yea, it's not being original, but it works.

It's probably better and less confusing for 'fun' points to be the main concern for players, especially for those who are somewhat basic and not on the forums. The focus on boosting hidden rankings was quite unintentional and stated previously as not the main focus of the game. Rather, competitive nature within leagues themselves. While people on the top 200 mightn't be too elated about the game becoming fun point orientated, it'd definitely boost the fun and competitive spirit within the lower leagues and skill levels.

Eijolend · 01-29-2013, 06:10 PM

The zero-sum system before basically didn't measure skill, but only how much you improved since the league started (which is better than activity only). I'm glad there's some change to that.

Different points lost/gained are needed if you want to force the score to converge towards a rating more in line with your hidden rating (considering SC2 does something similar).
Of course without knowing the formulas beneath it's hard to say whether the change does that, so we just have to wait and see how it looks. Smile