331
Community Events / Re: Regarding the Regarding the structure of the next Competitive Season
« on: December 02, 2013, 12:33:46 pm »
From what I can see, the main problem is caused by the attempt to drag any and all mildly competitive play under the dominion of the Muse points system. Counting points for clans rather than teams is only coming up as an issue becuase every scrimmage is expected to be a part of the new system, which is detrimental by discouraging more casual scrimmages and by tying point gain strongly to quantity of scrimmages played, so producing results that don't in any way - other than coincidence - reflect the quality of the teams participating in the season.
As long as the present structure is retained, regardless of what penalties are imposed on large clans, the point-accruing system will remain a measurement of the quantity of players and free time available to a clan, and it will continue to be down to other events to measure the actual playing standard of teams. Sure, they could add arbitrary caps to weekly point gain, essentially meaning any active team could hit the ceiling and the final results really won't mean that much. Or the structure could be changed in a reasonably fundamental way to produce results that will reflect clan skill without requiring a time and manpower investment that is beyond all but the largest clans.
The other issue is much more simply explained: few people is excited by or interested in the points system as evidenced by the fact that only one clan really put any effort at all into collecting points. The time investment might seem more worthwhile if a fairer and more interesting system was adopted.
Maybe we could get closer to this state of fair and interesting results if only one point per season per specific clan defeated could be claimed. So if the "Lizard People" beat the "Snake Clan", they only ever get 1 point even if they farmed wins off them for months.
For any given matchup, only one clan could hold the point; so if "Lizard People" beat "Snake Clan" and gain a point, if "Snake Clan" win the point back in a rematch the "Lizard People" lose the initial point - or you could maintain a running tally of the scrimmages between each clan; so "Snake Clan" would have to overtake the "Lizard People" first win by winning twice against "Lizard People" to reclaim the point. Some kind of system could be in place to encourage rematches. It would also be made clear that scrimmages for points happen with prior consent of both teams involved; separation of friendly and "competitive" scrimmaging should be available to those who want it.
This remains in a way a quantity based system, but reduces the significance towards point gain of the time ceiling (as many clans should have the time for the 10 scrimmages or so to fight everyone in the season) with a skill ceiling: only an undefeated team may claim the maximum number of points and similarly the amount of points you have is directly proportional to the number of clans you've beaten. Assuming every possible matchup is played - not unrealistic with the current fairly small pool of active clans - you get what could actually be quite an accurate indication of how the clans compare. Additional points could be thrown into the mix, for example each map title would still come with a point, and points could be awarded for winners and runners up in acknowledged tournaments or events.
Yes, this system would mean not all scrimmages would be a part of the competitive season. But do all scrimmages need to be a part of the season, to the point of stifling smaller clans and making them feel there is little point in participating?
As long as the present structure is retained, regardless of what penalties are imposed on large clans, the point-accruing system will remain a measurement of the quantity of players and free time available to a clan, and it will continue to be down to other events to measure the actual playing standard of teams. Sure, they could add arbitrary caps to weekly point gain, essentially meaning any active team could hit the ceiling and the final results really won't mean that much. Or the structure could be changed in a reasonably fundamental way to produce results that will reflect clan skill without requiring a time and manpower investment that is beyond all but the largest clans.
The other issue is much more simply explained: few people is excited by or interested in the points system as evidenced by the fact that only one clan really put any effort at all into collecting points. The time investment might seem more worthwhile if a fairer and more interesting system was adopted.
Maybe we could get closer to this state of fair and interesting results if only one point per season per specific clan defeated could be claimed. So if the "Lizard People" beat the "Snake Clan", they only ever get 1 point even if they farmed wins off them for months.
For any given matchup, only one clan could hold the point; so if "Lizard People" beat "Snake Clan" and gain a point, if "Snake Clan" win the point back in a rematch the "Lizard People" lose the initial point - or you could maintain a running tally of the scrimmages between each clan; so "Snake Clan" would have to overtake the "Lizard People" first win by winning twice against "Lizard People" to reclaim the point. Some kind of system could be in place to encourage rematches. It would also be made clear that scrimmages for points happen with prior consent of both teams involved; separation of friendly and "competitive" scrimmaging should be available to those who want it.
This remains in a way a quantity based system, but reduces the significance towards point gain of the time ceiling (as many clans should have the time for the 10 scrimmages or so to fight everyone in the season) with a skill ceiling: only an undefeated team may claim the maximum number of points and similarly the amount of points you have is directly proportional to the number of clans you've beaten. Assuming every possible matchup is played - not unrealistic with the current fairly small pool of active clans - you get what could actually be quite an accurate indication of how the clans compare. Additional points could be thrown into the mix, for example each map title would still come with a point, and points could be awarded for winners and runners up in acknowledged tournaments or events.
Yes, this system would mean not all scrimmages would be a part of the competitive season. But do all scrimmages need to be a part of the season, to the point of stifling smaller clans and making them feel there is little point in participating?