Elements PvP League - Suggestions and Feedback

[Onizuka]

blarp: 2
honeydew: 0

To be perfectly honest I'd like to know where this was played. It wasn't in etg chat, for certain.


New rule for future leagues should be that all games have to be conducted only in main ETG chat or some league officialed alt chat where you can go to show you want to play in. Not Kong chat where you can avoid the majority of the players and play people with 0-1 posts.

[inthisroom]

Why not count matches ONLY vs people who actually play the required number of matches for the entire season, that would also avoid playing vs naive noobs that are picked on Kong and are just there to take a loss.

Another way might be to raise the required number of matches by 5 or 10 and only count the ones played vs the highest ranking players one faced.

Third option, instore a true championship mode where people have to sign up and where everyone plays everyone, don't accept new players during a season.

[dragonsdemesne]

Why not count matches ONLY vs people who actually play the required number of matches for the entire season, that would also avoid playing vs naive noobs that are picked on Kong and are just there to take a loss.

Another way might be to raise the required number of matches by 5 or 10 and only count the ones played vs the highest ranking players one faced.

Third option, instore a true championship mode where people have to sign up and where everyone plays everyone, don't accept new players during a season.

I thought about suggesting your first one there awhile ago, but the problem is that this leads to a chain reaction.  For example, suppose I play 29 games in league.  I am disqualified, and so my games don't count.  Inthisroom, who suppose has played 31 games, played 3 games against me.  He -thought- he was qualified for league standings, but now 3 of his games don't count, so now he is disqualified, too.  Onizuka, who suppose has played 36 games, 4 against me and 4 against inthisroom, is now disqualified.  And so on...

Something bugs me about the second option, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

The third option could work as well, having it so that there was, say, a one week signup period for league, and then disallowing anyone else to join after that.  I think that might reduce
league participation too much to be viable at this point, though.

[Vangelios]

Why not count matches ONLY vs people who actually play the required number of matches for the entire season, that would also avoid playing vs naive noobs that are picked on Kong and are just there to take a loss.

 Take it easy, always have surprises, for example I've seen the 1st on the list to lose the last. When I joined my 1st league I lost to the last and then I won of the 1st, we have to have a system able to attract real players interested, noob or not. and filter those players who only do numbers,

Another way might be to raise the required number of matches by 5 or 10 and only count the ones played vs the highest ranking players one faced.

I do not think this really necessary

Third option, instore a true championship mode where people have to sign up and where everyone plays everyone, don't accept new players during a season.

 The problem would be the withdrawal of some players and conflicting schedules,
however the idea of registration is good, we can divide into two inscriptions in the 1st month and the beginning of the 2nd month, after the beginning of the 3rd all players who do not have 20 matches are eliminated and can not participate.

[Zso_Zso]

Third option, instore a true championship mode where people have to sign up and where everyone plays everyone, don't accept new players during a season.

 The problem would be the withdrawal of some players and conflicting schedules,
however the idea of registration is good, we can divide into two inscriptions in the 1st month and the beginning of the 2nd month, after the beginning of the 3rd all players who do not have 20 matches are eliminated and can not participate.

Another variant of this: instead of registration/sign-up. anybody can start playing any time during the 1st month. But then no more new start-up after 1month.
Then at the end of the 2nd month, players with less than 20 games can be eliminated -- but others keep their scores so games against the eliminated players do not get "removed". That way, during the last month and final stretch, no new players are introduced and only players who were active enough in the first 2 month can play -- so no "surprise" results show up against unknowns.

[Vineroz]

Why not count matches ONLY vs people who actually play the required number of matches for the entire season, that would also avoid playing vs naive noobs that are picked on Kong and are just there to take a loss.

I thought about suggesting your first one there awhile ago, but the problem is that this leads to a chain reaction.  For example, suppose I play 29 games in league.  I am disqualified, and so my games don't count.  Inthisroom, who suppose has played 31 games, played 3 games against me.  He -thought- he was qualified for league standings, but now 3 of his games don't count, so now he is disqualified, too.  Onizuka, who suppose has played 36 games, 4 against me and 4 against inthisroom, is now disqualified.  And so on...

Easy fix: only games of players with really low game count are not counted. e.g. players with < 10 games (or it can be determined after the league ends). If there is someone playing 30-40 games, with most of his game vs these players, then he is very suspicious of cheating.

[Odii Odsen]

After a long deliberation, we (Cheesy111 and I) decided to give blarp a 30 point penalty for avoiding matches. This penalty will apply at the end of season, after the final ratings are calculated.

May I know why blarp gets a harmless penalty? I mean, he is doing his show again. Who the fck is honeydew? Who can tell me that honeydew used an account with more than 20k score? Where did honeydew suddenly appear? This isn't looking very legal to me. The whole blarp thing is just annoying as hell. I mean, how somebody can break the rules several times and gets just a 30 point penalty. If you want to know my opinion, I think honeydew is one of blarps fake accounts.

I would like to see a new rule for CL. Minimum score should be increased. Every player under (at least) 60k are free points anyways.

[Marsu]

Spontaneous idea:
(Brackets = alternatives)

Players [who are ranked 10 (20) or better] have the right to challenge the top 3 (6) in written form in this forum. The challenged player and the challenger have one week to play a match. If the challenger was available often enough and the match could not be played due to inactivity/dodging from the challenged player, the match is counted 2-0 for the challenger. One same player can not challenge another same player more than once a week.

It's basically just a more strict version of a rule that is already supposed to exist, but in reality doesn't. With posting the challenge in this forum, the challenged player wouldn't be able to hide his dodging anymore.

By the way, it's funny how one persons disgusting lack of the tiniest bits of sportsmanship managed to force us to think about rules that will probably (in case of Leagues) and have already (in case of tournaments) make/made these events less fun.

[Atom_heart]

Third option, instore a true championship mode where people have to sign up and where everyone plays everyone, don't accept new players during a season.

 The problem would be the withdrawal of some players and conflicting schedules,
however the idea of registration is good, we can divide into two inscriptions in the 1st month and the beginning of the 2nd month, after the beginning of the 3rd all players who do not have 20 matches are eliminated and can not participate.

Another variant of this: instead of registration/sign-up. anybody can start playing any time during the 1st month. But then no more new start-up after 1month.
Then at the end of the 2nd month, players with less than 20 games can be eliminated -- but others keep their scores so games against the eliminated players do not get "removed". That way, during the last month and final stretch, no new players are introduced and only players who were active enough in the first 2 month can play -- so no "surprise" results show up against unknowns.

I like this approach. However, it doesn't adress the 'dodging' problem.
Perhaps a sort of 'League Finals' could be added: at the end of the season the (let's say) top 5 players face each other, and the winner of this small group is the league champion. While the dodging problem still could arise, at least it would be pushed from the title to the 5th spot.
Still, it could lead to a non agression pact between the leading players, but I like to think that there is no way we reach 5 dishonest league players

[Vangelios]

I am in favor of a final league only if the score are preserved, then yes, the top 6 gladiators decide in duels organized, maybe a BO5, lol radical changes, but it would be much more exciting competition.

[justaburd]

I was thinking of a gradual ELO decay depending on how long one becomes inactive, where a longer inactivity means more score loss. This avoids people waiting out the last 2 months after reaching #1.

I justify it as a player not being active on elements/forum and thereby losing a small portion of their skill. Sort of like riding a bicycle. You don't forget, but you're a little rusty.

The exact formula should probably remain hidden and the ELO loss would necessarily have to correlate positively with current ELO. (You have more skill, so you can lose more of it within any given time period.)

Give people a grace period before the ELO starts decaying or something so it doesn't affect people who go on vacation or something (maybe 2 weeks?)

After two weeks, this ELO decay would be halted by playing a set number of games or something. If a pattern is visible where someone is clearly waiting 12 days, then having a match to prevent ELO decay, then the LOs would see it and be able to act accordingly.

[RavingRabbid]

I had an idea that may both solve a bit of the inactivity part and add a bit of variety.

When League Sign-Ups close, every player who has played 18 games (or 12 if he joined less than 2 weeks prior the closing of League Signups) is added to a tournament bracket. (seedings made on standings at the end of league signups.)

The tournament bracket games proceed as standard league games would, and they are reported as any other league game. They both count for the standard league and the tournament.

If two players have already played each other more than 10 times and they are to face in extra bracket, they get 1 extra game.

The winner of the bracket also receives a mark/nymph code.