KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 CNCNET staff wants to add points for just participating in games to the ladder. Not even if you win. To me this is one of the stupidest ideas ever for a competitive ladder. Thoughts guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 See this topic for staff comments http://cnc-comm.com/community/index.php?topic=4126.0 :down: :down: :down: :down: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahj Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 say player A ) plays and wins a lot of games, vs above average players . lets say 10 games player B) loses most games but plays in 50 games, and gets participation points, more pts than player A. player B wins ladder... In this particular scenario, should player B not be rewarded for being more active than player A? Also, the math is pretty close here. If Player B wins the ladder at 50 points (50 losses), Player A could easily be a runner up being only 10 points behind. Overall, I think activity should also have a bearing on leaderboard position. Furthermore, we haven't even begun discussing map and player quotas or additional experience gains/losses. Once implemented, Player A could easily surpass Player B! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 lol? r u kidding? no you get rewarded for being the better player and winning games. not losing and or participating in more matches. as ray just said to me "participation points? lmao back in the day we had to earn our pts" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahj Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Sounds like someone is just too lazy to implement any math into the ladder besides +. Laziness. The leaderboard is open source. You're welcome to contribute. In the mean time, I do have a full time job and can only contribute when availability allows. As stated, those features will be added but until then, we're keeping it simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 the more and more people that see this dont worry tahj will get it. lol @ rewarding activity over skill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFrodo Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Lame really, XWIS algo for ranking is pretty good. But what Sean is makin is not even in the same league, Its just shit. Hey Olaf, ur help wud be appreciated on this ladder matter, this is also a community server. Seriously The UI is nice, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 wait what sean is doing? sean3z doing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFrodo Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Yer, Tahj is him . It was nice; back in grade school they would give us participation certificates even if we didn't get a pole position in a race or some competition etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 lol tahj is sean? sean u should know better wtf is this shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 10, 2015 Author Share Posted July 10, 2015 -_- sean should def know better. lmfao at participation pts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phenomena Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 sigh I just read like 6 posts and had to reply here first off all Tahj and every1 else at cncnet, thank you for showing progress in the ladder, its a great step in making your server that much better! Also...although TRZ means well, he is a complete arrogant prick at times, so dont take his criticism as hate also, ignore mecha completely. Now on the topic... participation points could work, if points else where work accordingly. I noticed that (as of right now) its ONLY 4 points for a win, and 1 point for loss. This is 4 points for a win vs any opponent. I believe one should earn more points based on your opponents rank. For example, if a player with 150 points and rank 500, beats a player with 670 points and is rank 1, then the winner should receive say 50 points instead of 4 There should also be a form of negative points...to keep players from only newb bashing and never losing anything Maybe have an elo system, have everyone start at 1000 points? That way you can eliminate the "participation" points all together, and have a simple positive/negative system the old ladders worked something like this, each player has 0 points winner +32 loser -0 next game, same winner +29 loser -0 next game, loser wins +38 -10 And say rank 1 with 600 points beats mechaceasel with 0 points rank 1 should receive only 1-2 points for the victory, whereas if mecha won, he should receive more, old ww ladders were +64 (most amount of points you can win in 1 match) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoftLadSTEJ Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I think any ladder is better than nothing, and I applaud Sean for continuing to devote such effort to this ungrateful community. Even the participation points could be a good thing, because then TS becomes like the NHL where the teams get a point just for playing. ;d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFrodo Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 This is 4 points for a win vs any opponent. I believe one should earn more points based on your opponents rank. For example, if a player with 150 points and rank 500, beats a player with 670 points and is rank 1, then the winner should receive say 50 points instead of 4 There should also be a form of negative points...to keep players from only newb bashing and never losing anything Exactly, back in high school we use to play Counter Strike on our neighbourhood LAN. The "dedicated" server for it had two ranking systems. First was mostly, who had most kills and whoever played all day long had most kills. and the second ranking system was very skilled-based, look at death kills ratios, number of minutes playd, headshots, efficiency (bullets on target) etc. So an XWIS style algo could be an easy way out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole40k Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 Instead of 'participation points', how about 'losing bonus points' instead? Lots of sports have that -- would be quite simple to implement say for example, for games that last over 15/20 minutes, or for games that end where both players have a similar number of key structures. Just a thought. Either way, I am not necessarily against the idea of 'participation points' -- just the way you've sold it, or should I say 'the way Trz has sold it'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 It's a great topic, and something we're always open to a good discussion on. Maybe a little less of the attitude but it just shows the community is passionate and cares, so no harm done. Just bare in mind, you don't have to fly off the handle here, we're creating this from the ground up and have to start simple, build up and evolve. Like tahj has mentioned you can follow and contribute (pull requests, submit issues) to the leaderboard as its opensource. Please feel free to do so. Right now, for release 1 and to get this out the door you can find our list of features we're aiming for. https://github.com/CnCNet/leaderboard/blob/refactor/features.md We have a lot of work to do, so if you wish to post your suggestions and not flood us with a wall of text, construct your ideas clearly so we can discuss internally and implement if we see fit for releases in the futre. Leaderboard suggestion: Suggestion: Advantages: Disadvantages: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHANIVORE Posted July 11, 2015 Author Share Posted July 11, 2015 iwont hold back imo . participation points to me just makes no sense. is the ladder right now a representation of participation points? or are the points broken? i hope they are broken because the ladder makes no sense to me atm. i dont know if its to boost activity, or help new players but i feel like this game used to be super competitive, now we are just holding noobs hands to further them along. which in the end just hinders skill. we all got kicked/banned/ had to work our way up the ladder. in the old days. not handouts. i appreciate all of the work thats gone into this server as far as anticheats, and the new spec options etc. but to me the best part about ts was always the 1v1 ladder and clan ladders. that even xwis had. all be it poorly updating the hall of fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plokite_Wolf Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 ASIDE the fact that we shouldn't still be talking about this because someone leaked the info on the ladder without permission... CNCNET staff wants to add points for just participating in games to the ladder. Not even if you win. To me this is one of the stupidest ideas ever for a competitive ladder. Thoughts guys? Tiberium Wars and Kane's Wrath (for sure, don't know about Red Alert 3) give losers a small number of points if they lose one or two matches. I think if they lose more than that, 0 points are awarded until the next victory. Nothing new here, just a glorified version of the TW/KW mechanism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFrodo Posted July 12, 2015 Share Posted July 12, 2015 Aside from participation(spectator or loss) points, the scale is linear. Anyone could just spam games all day for a few days vs a newbie. gg rank 1 The Ladder?or Leaderboard?: Suggestion: an XWIS style algorithm. I think it includes factors such as time playd, buildings/units built and killd, and weak/strong opponents and win/loss streaks. I'm sure you two have better idea of how that algo works. Advantages: rewards skill (althou there could be different opinions as to what really qualifies as 'skill'), makes players work to get high rank Disadvantages: should include; minimum # of games playd to qualify for any rank and minimum # of opponents playd to qualify for any rank. Also you could lose games on purpose like the first 5 and then win some games, those wins give a higher point score(on XWIS ladder). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ehy Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahj Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Update: Looking into the usage of Microsoft's TrueSkill system for release 2, since ELO is only designed for 1v1. (Thanks @ehy!) This framework also comes with the advantage of inherit matchmaking capabilities (w00t). If we can at least get the foundation integrated, we can expand by adding other factors such as OOS and units killed/built. Also, D/C should count as a loss; and Iran just made several (awesome) changes that will help us weed out spectators and other factors for TS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amokk Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 units killed/built I do not understand why that is important you win or you lose. like in chess does not matter how you mate the king just matters that you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFrodo Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Update: Looking into the usage of Microsoft's TrueSkill system for release 2, since ELO is only designed for 1v1. (Thanks @ehy!) This framework also comes with the advantage of inherit matchmaking capabilities (w00t). If we can at least get the foundation integrated, we can expand by adding other factors such as OOS and units killed/built. Also, D/C should count as a loss; and Iran just made several (awesome) changes that will help us weed out spectators and other factors for TS. What's OOS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phenomena Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 mr frodo not sure where you got that idea, but units built, killed etc have never meant anything with the ladder its just been how many points does each player have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cn2mc Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 IIRC, on WOL/wchat there was a system (for TD even), which would sometimes take into account kill-counts and possibly also structures remaining to determine the outcome of a ladder game in case of a disconnect. Sometimes that resulted in the funny act of D/C-ers selling everything and setting their own men against each other before pulling the plug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now