The New Point System

[laYahooz]

I hadn't completed a game yet but for some reason I rose to 17 in my division?????

[zoraster]

I like the idea of leagues, actually. The biggest problem with them is that as currently structured they're pretty much just an arbitrary division of players rather than anything meaningful. The fact that the leagues are divided into divisions furthers this. For example, when you launch a league match in a league with multiple divisions, it seems no more likely that you'll get someone in your own division than anyone else's. A league and a division should be a place where people feel like they're competing against each other. I'm fine with cross division/league matches, but as it works right now, these divisions are pretty silly. The division between leagues is more mysterious than anything else.

[TheGoldenGriffin]

I am in a game and a player is rank 1 in his league but he plays like a rank 80 and when i saw his division, there is him and one other player both with 0 points. Does this count as a problem with the matching system?

[RandyDogz]

Any system with a large spread between points won by winner/lost by loser is going to favor active players. But maybe this is the goal? I imagine league promotions/demotions are pretty rare after you've played for some time. Playing solely to get promoted is a long term goal, you need something to hold your interest in the short term. As a developer, I'd want to make the people playing my game a lot feel good about how they are doing! Activity based points encourages players to play the game, rather than sitting and thinking about the game in fear that one wrong move will drop them back to the bottom of the league. That's sorta how I was feeling under the old system. To this extreme, this could frustrate people enough to quit the game.

I think if we assume i) matchmaking system is working and most people will be around 50/50 w/l, and ii) most players are playing to win and not game the system - this system probably isn't bad. Is it a perfect reflection of skill? No, but we have the top 200 list for the hardcore players. I think it's a pretty good balance between giving feedback on how your doing vs. helping OML encouraging people to play!

Another thought, if a big concern with the new system is the inclination to give up games your loosing, maybe just make the points lost on giving up much higher than playing it out? A quick change to the popup after clicking give up can explain this.

[phineas94]

(02-02-2013 01:27 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  What/who are you responding to?

@CombatEX - Not responding but merely continuing on from my previous posts, taking into account what posters had said inbetween, in the hope of enlightening myself and eliciting a response/discussion from others.

(02-02-2013 01:27 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  Or is this just another idea directed towards OML?

---

Do you appreciate how offensive this sounds or was that your intent? And in a way I suppose all threads concerning game mechanics are voiced in the hope that OML may listen, after a seeming majority (or vocal minority) is in favour, otherwise all this would be a pointless exercise in sounding off.

(02-02-2013 01:27 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  Oh I thought by 2 clashing systems you meant the new and old one. Actually you mean hidden-rating vs points/league.

Correct. Sorry if that wasn't clear though it would be an achievement for something past to clash with something present

(02-02-2013 01:27 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  I disagree with the fixed point on win/loss idea simply because that still clashes with hidden-rating which gives players far more hidden-rank for beating highly rated opponents. Waiting a few weeks like you suggested before deeming the new attempt a failure is advisable.

So far, as mentioned previously, I much prefer the new point system but I still don't understand how a league with a fixed win/loss point system would clash with your increase/decrease in hidden rating - the two are completely separate - no matter who you beat or lose to everyone gets the same points, in other words, a league. Please explain.

(02-02-2013 03:24 AM)zoraster Wrote:  I like the idea of leagues, actually. The biggest problem with them is that as currently structured they're pretty much just an arbitrary division of players rather than anything meaningful. The fact that the leagues are divided into divisions furthers this. For example, when you launch a league match in a league with multiple divisions, it seems no more likely that you'll get someone in your own division than anyone else's. A league and a division should be a place where people feel like they're competing against each other. I'm fine with cross division/league matches, but as it works right now, these divisions are pretty silly.

Exactly

(02-03-2013 02:29 AM)RandyDogz Wrote:  As a developer, I'd want to make the people playing my game a lot feel good about how they are doing! Activity based points encourages players to play the game, rather than sitting and thinking about the game in fear that one wrong move will drop them back to the bottom of the league. That's sorta how I was feeling under the old system. To this extreme, this could frustrate people enough to quit the game.

Again, exactly. So lets hope this new system matures into something we can all live with....and if not , I will keep on banging on about fixed points, and again with the caveat, as long as the balancing equation is put in place (Please see previous posts) which is the only way to avoid the problems with "assuming similar time played".

[phineas94]

P. S. does this thread ever get bumped to the the top after a new post?

---

Hooray, yes it does. Damned computers!

[phineas94]

So what do people think of the new point system? After a quick skim through OSN (I love that site!) it seems that in most divisions there isn't a runaway leader (especially if you discount players who have been recently promoted, who I think should start in their newly promoted division on 0 points or at least in the lower order) as feared by those voicing their concerns about activity points. I know I'm not nearly as active as the top 2 in my division but I still remain hopeful that I can pip them to the post - probably won't though

Top 200 ranked players all seem to be near the top so it is going some way to show skill ( The ST divisions are a little more mixed but there seem to be a lot of relatively inactive players for whatever reason - friendlies, tourneys, poor matching with opponents, or maybe they're just dead). The points attributed are a lot more pleasing and understandable than the last system. It would be interesting to hear other opinions though.

[Ser Purple Wolf]

I was demoted to gifted. Mostly my fault, but I should've payed more attention.

How I felt,
"Oh I'm rank 13 in my masters league, I dont need to worry about a demotion."
Boom!

[phineas94]

(02-22-2013 07:54 AM)SerPurpleWolf Wrote:  I was demoted to gifted. Mostly my fault, but I should've payed more attention.

How I felt,
"Oh I'm rank 13 in my masters league, I dont need to worry about a demotion."
Boom!

Were you recently promoted before your demotion? And therefore had high points (carried on from your earlier division) and subsequent high division placement. Or is this a case of not understanding the whole hidden rating vs division points thing? I assume the latter to be true in which case there's a problem. I can understand why this would be frustrating. I can't see how OML could explain this system to players "in game" (unless they start displaying hidden rating for all players and publicise the thresholds for each level of skill) so the forum is our only source for answers which obviously excludes a large number of players.

So I'll take that as a "no" vote for the new system although the same could have happened with the old one so maybe a "don't know"?

See you back in soon AND PAY MORE ATTENTION!

[Ser Purple Wolf]

No I was a master for a good while, I was even playing a couple people in the top 200. I didn't realize I could get demoted that quickly, especially since it took forever to get promoted. I was having a bad week and couldn't be bothered to actually try.