Author Topic: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)  (Read 10557 times)

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #30 on: June 22, 2015, 03:42:41 pm »
It wouldn't make sense to let ranged engagements continue after the time limit because those can last quite a while especially with cover. If ships are brawling within 500 meters then combat won't last long. If it lasts longer than an extra 10-20 seconds then call the match.

Offline MagKel

  • Member
  • Salutes: 53
    • [TB]
    • 11 
    • 40
    • 31 
    • View Profile
    • The Brotherhood of GOIO
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #31 on: June 22, 2015, 06:09:22 pm »
why not using the log as a definition of engagement?

Once the timer is out, if no hostile damage is recorded (component destroyed) for 20 consecutive seconds, the match is ended.

this would either force the hand in a sniper match or let a brawl continue until a side reaches 5 kills.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2015, 06:11:20 pm by MagKel »

Offline sparklerfish

  • Member
  • Salutes: 124
    • [Clan]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • DJ mixes and original tracks on SoundCloud
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2015, 06:17:58 pm »
Hmm, it's true that ranged sniping engagements can take a looooong time.  I would be okay with something based on range or component destroys.  It just sucks when you're in a brawl and the match is clearly going to end in a few seconds anyhow, and the timer runs out.  Clan Clan frustratingly lost a very close match that way once when we would have won with 5 seconds more on the timer.

Offline Princess Tutu

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 7
    • [T.Pr]
    • 38 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #33 on: June 23, 2015, 04:07:45 am »
That's where I think the problem will be, defining reasonable terms of engagement and as mentioned by Skrim, teams calling unfair treatment.. The more complex the rules the more complex the arguments behind them if challenged..
Sometimes keeping it simple (especially since a lack of teams normally tallies alongside a lack of willing referee's) can make things easier for everyone if ever extra hands are needed to help behind the scenes..

The red part is just a normal part of competitions. Every single thing where the referee has any power has that. So we should ignore that aspect and ask the real question. How much power should the judges have?

Offline Byron Cavendish

  • Member
  • Salutes: 89
    • [TB]
    • 21 
    • 31
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • The Brotherhood
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #34 on: June 23, 2015, 06:11:25 am »
I wouldn't say it was unfair, and I think our ref did a great job. He made the call according to the rules. I would call it a shame though, as in that situation it was 4-4 and my team was 2v1 about to kill the enemy ship for the win. It was a gritty close range engagement and we were pummelling him as fast we could. I was so into it I hadn't even realized it was over for like a minute after! I was really keen to see how that game ended naturally. That's the shame, timers can sometimes ruin a thematic ending. I am also the man responsible for timers in the first place, so I do understand their necessity.

Offline Kamoba

  • Member
  • Salutes: 175
    • [♫]
    • 30 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Robin and Magpie Leather
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #35 on: June 23, 2015, 08:09:01 am »
About to kill?... I ran successfully for 2 minutes with 90% permahull, so still stage one, and only had armour breaks when Blackened charged us with his brawler side... I wouldn't say almost.killed... If I had of stood and taught, yes we would likely have died...

Offline Byron Cavendish

  • Member
  • Salutes: 89
    • [TB]
    • 21 
    • 31
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • The Brotherhood
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #36 on: June 23, 2015, 08:51:42 am »
Yes you did, I was referring to the very end of the match, when you were pinned against the canyon wall (if you were the junker?) and couldn't run anymore. We had the junker and galleon broadsides starting to chew and the mobula on my other side eating lumberjacks. Again I was really into it, so Im not sure when the match actually ended until my crew said sammy was yelling at me  :D

Offline Kamoba

  • Member
  • Salutes: 175
    • [♫]
    • 30 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Robin and Magpie Leather
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #37 on: June 23, 2015, 08:56:56 am »
I was the Pyramidion, and ahaa yes, blackies ship stopped chase and fire at match timer.
At that moment if he'd have charged us I predict we would of managed a maximum of 30 seconds survival.. :)

By that I mean, we would have died, unless I managed a miracle
« Last Edit: June 23, 2015, 08:59:24 am by Kamoba »

Offline nanoduckling

  • Member
  • Salutes: 116
    • [♫]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #38 on: June 23, 2015, 09:27:19 am »
As far as the rule changes go, there is no way to make the SCS 'fair' in the way people want. It has to be done in a timely manner and that time constraint forces rules which can give funky results. This is the same as many sports, the penalty shootout in football being the classic example of this. I've played in timed out matches or close to timed out matches where I'd have felt hard done by with all of the rule changes proposed. First kill, last kill, it is all the same to me, although anything is better than a coin toss. If someone wants to go back and watch past casts of the SCS and statistically analyse them to determine which rule change is least unfair, great. From a personal perspective I prefer first kill because it gives me a measure of control knowing if I have to fight or not, but that is just a subjective preference and not a reason to keep the rule. If the majority of participants want last kill I'm fine with that also.

I feel bad for the Brotherducks because they did have the upper hand, but I think they have a few mistaken impressions about what happened at the end of the match, so I will try to clear those up.

First, given the way the Brotherducks were flying (and to an extent had to fly given their galleon load out) we were well aware where they were with 4 minutes remaining. We could easily have avoided that final engagement and flown up to their spawns side of the canyons and played patty cake till the timer ran down and no one would have been any the wiser, it would have just looked like teams playing ring-a-ring-a-roses in canyons again. We didn't do that because we wanted to try for a straight win. If the last kill rule had been in effect we'd have moved into the centre of the canyons, shot at the galleon a couple of times and then just sat in there forcing the Brotherducks to brawl us. The only reason we attacked the Brotherducks on our spawn was we had the upper hand from the first kill rule. A more cheap team could avoid the engagement entirely, why risk it when you have a damaged mobula and have the last kill advantage?

As far as the final 2v1 engagement I'd point out that we delayed spawning our mobula by about 20 seconds until the Brotherducks were the other side of the canyons so they couldn't just turn around and blow the crap out of it. The structure of that engagement was entirely determined by the last kill rule. Had the match not had a time limit the pyra would either have escaped (because neither Sammy nor Byron is stupid enough to chase an enemy ship, get separated and leave their galleons engines pointing at an enemy spawning with arts), or the fight would have been considerably more even.

My suspicion is that the Brotherducks would have managed to get a kill, probably on our mobula as it spawned back in, largely because of the high quality of the lumberjack gunning we had seen. If the Brotherducks had chased the pyra then our mob would have had 30-40 seconds of free shots on the galleon, probably resulting in two 1v1 fights, slight advantage to the Brotherducks because the pyra would have to recover from running away and the galleon could tank if things went south. If they had let the pyra go and forced us to spawn I think they would have killed our mob. However, if you think the match was a forgone conclusion then we very much disagree.

I felt both teams fought well, and the Brotherducks almost pulled off a great come back of which they can be proud. I also think if there is going to be a serious discussion about rule changes it should be done dispassionately, analytically, and not on the basis of recent subjective experience. If someone wants to do a serious study of the past SCSs, come up with a reasonable assay for 'likely victor', apply it to a decent subset of past draws and then determine which rule is superior then subject to reading their report for any major flaws they will have my support whatever rule they side with.

Offline Skrimskraw

  • Member
  • Salutes: 160
    • [GwTh]
    • 21 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #39 on: June 23, 2015, 09:31:55 am »
the way I see it and why the rules are as now.

they were changed to this current set of rules because of fundamental problems with the competitive scene.

1. referees are doing this of their free will.
2. even with as Little as engagement rules etc. different referees make mistakes constantly, from forgetting to time the matches, to keeping an eye on chat.
3. the infamous pause rule. the pause rule in itself is already the biggest headache for referees. there are no exact rules on how to call it. muse still havent implemented pausing, so this rule to me atleast seems to be the furthest that SCS should go with having. else the pause rule should be removed completely to make the game more "fair" to the team that might lose advantage to it.
4. mo' rules mo' problems - anyone remember the clusterfuck called R&D invitationals? the incredible amount of rules that suddenly changed midmatch etc? coming from that I feel like SCS is the only place where you can relax and just play the game, even if you lose because of a first kill.

all this being said, it comes Down to logicalia and the other organizers plans for this event. when me and velvet ran it we pushed time Down to as Little event time as possible, aswell at taking pressure of the referees that we had to call in, even on emergencies.
However dont listen to me on this, if the teams that participate wants the rules to change, the organizers should follow on that notion. If the organizers Arent willing to run this for the teams, then why should the teams participate? its just finding the limit of what the organizers are willing to do and use time on, contra what the teams want as rules.

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2015, 09:40:40 am »
different referees make mistakes constantly, from forgetting to time the matches, to keeping an eye on chat.

I am pretty sure you thought about me there ...

And as a former organizer myself. We thought about alot of different things aswell on how to handle timed out matches in the elimination phase. There just is NO fair way of handling this. You can always argue for the one or other thing and there will always be a situation where one is better than the other.
There is just no way of handling this thats fair for everyone.

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #41 on: June 23, 2015, 11:39:32 am »
Let me make the case for last kill instead of first kill.

First the issues of first kills.

The first kill isn't representative of any major advantage. It literally puts the game at 1-0, at best 2-0. This still means the team needs to win two more engagements.
First kill encourages passive play. Once you get it, you have a significant advantage and incentive to play very defensively.
Why does it matter how well you played in the beginning, come backs should be rewarded, not thrown more hurdles.

Now the benefits of last kill.
More representative of momentum. Kills often make more kills happen, especially late match. I'm sure I'm not alone but for me 4-3 and 4-4 are basically the same level of being tied as they're both one engagement away for game end.
It is more dynamic. Have the advantage able to go to either team at any point in the match makes it harder to use the advantage.


Come do a thought experiment with me. Imagine you have two rewards. One is you can start a competitive match with an extra kill so 1-0. Or partially through the match you can get an extra kill going from a 2 to a 3 or 3 to a 4. While technically both options are the same 1 point, I think the second option is clearly better. Why? Because later kills mean a lot more for determining the outcome of a game than earlier kills

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2015, 12:13:58 pm »
But there is the argument that for last kill if two ships are killed and the game is tied (ex 2-4 to 4-4) then the other team respawns at full health while you may have damage. Last kill would make sense if one ship was killed to tie before timer ends, but I'd prefer an overtime if ships are in combat.

I think first kill is ok but stopping the match within 30 seconds of a kill doesn't make sense. If ships are in combat at the end add a brief overtime. If it's not done by then call the match.

Offline nanoduckling

  • Member
  • Salutes: 116
    • [♫]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #43 on: June 23, 2015, 12:30:44 pm »
As Blackened said, none of the options are good. I've been in matches that either were or could have easily have turned into any of the situations outlined. To know which one is better you need to do an analysis with actual numbers and proper operationalisations of the concepts involved, thought experiments aren't going to cut it.

As for 'if the ships are engaged, add a set amount of time', if that rule is introduced I am never refereeing a match, it would be like giving referees a ready wrapped time bomb. The situation is bad enough with the current pause rule without referees having to make subjective calls about what constitutes an engagement that will very likely determine a match. As far as I'm concerned the rules should be something that can be determined by a computer recording the match, or shouldn't be on the books in the first place.

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Sunday Community Skirmish #56 (Signups for Sunday June 21st)
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2015, 12:43:09 pm »
If a ship is shooting another that's an engagement. For example, if ships are hitting within the last 30 seconds of timer then add 30 seconds. It can be difficult to get a long range kill in 30 seconds so it would encourage closing distance.

It wouldn't be a judgement call if it was based on hits (or component destruction) at a set time before timer end.