Suggestions for Improving Seasonal Duel Rankings
- 1
- 2
Post: 50
Besøkt av: 130 users
So players have made some suggestions already in the 'Farming' forum, but i wanted to address the farming issue first.
The next step is to consider changes to improve the competitiveness, while keeping it enjoyable.
For this discussion, again i'd like to keep it very specific. One issue i can see already is the notion of turning the rankings into a tournament. Tournaments are already a 'thing' and if someone wants to host a tourney, full support. I'll even host if that's what players want. I do think this is a great way of determining a champion and bragging rights in a community this size. So don't suggest tournaments please - we can always do that, and there are various ways of randomizing maps or having sets.
BACK TO BASICS: A BRIEF discussion on ELO. {And the source of the flaws}
So ELO was originally used to rank players in a gaming community (originally chess) that was so large, players could never expect to play a significant percentage of that community, so ladder rankings and tournaments often were poor assessment tools to compare players who had never played each other, or even played a common opponent.
See the problem...
{Hint.. this community isn't large enough for ELO to work}
ELO is fundamentally flawed for a small gaming community in which basically every one knows each other. In order to do well in AW ELO rankings, you study opponents, specialize in a particular map or strat that plays to your strength, and do other things to give a slight advantage against an opponent you already know (admit it, you probably know most other duelers better than your own aunt). As a result, things like farming become far more tempting ways of boosting elo if you want first place. When there are millions of gamers in the community, you simply can't study them all, so not knowing your opponent has a 'leveling' effect and removes those variables that are introduced when you are familiar with a player, making statistical analysis possible, and this became the start of ELO... a statistical analysis used to rank players.
So yes, ELO is flawed, and rank limits aren't the magic bullet. But that doesn't mean there aren't some great suggestions to improve AWs ELO system, which is the point of this thread.
Once we have some suggestions, we'll take a look at the list and see if we can't agree on a format that will make the season competitive and fun. I've already seen some workable suggestions, so if it becomes an 'ego' battle over competing suggestions that are all workable, i might do a survey monkey and let the high ranks go with what is most popular.
So the topic at hand:
What suggestions do you have to make duels more competitive and enjoyable?
The next step is to consider changes to improve the competitiveness, while keeping it enjoyable.
For this discussion, again i'd like to keep it very specific. One issue i can see already is the notion of turning the rankings into a tournament. Tournaments are already a 'thing' and if someone wants to host a tourney, full support. I'll even host if that's what players want. I do think this is a great way of determining a champion and bragging rights in a community this size. So don't suggest tournaments please - we can always do that, and there are various ways of randomizing maps or having sets.
BACK TO BASICS: A BRIEF discussion on ELO. {And the source of the flaws}
So ELO was originally used to rank players in a gaming community (originally chess) that was so large, players could never expect to play a significant percentage of that community, so ladder rankings and tournaments often were poor assessment tools to compare players who had never played each other, or even played a common opponent.
See the problem...
{Hint.. this community isn't large enough for ELO to work}ELO is fundamentally flawed for a small gaming community in which basically every one knows each other. In order to do well in AW ELO rankings, you study opponents, specialize in a particular map or strat that plays to your strength, and do other things to give a slight advantage against an opponent you already know (admit it, you probably know most other duelers better than your own aunt). As a result, things like farming become far more tempting ways of boosting elo if you want first place. When there are millions of gamers in the community, you simply can't study them all, so not knowing your opponent has a 'leveling' effect and removes those variables that are introduced when you are familiar with a player, making statistical analysis possible, and this became the start of ELO... a statistical analysis used to rank players.
So yes, ELO is flawed, and rank limits aren't the magic bullet. But that doesn't mean there aren't some great suggestions to improve AWs ELO system, which is the point of this thread.
Once we have some suggestions, we'll take a look at the list and see if we can't agree on a format that will make the season competitive and fun. I've already seen some workable suggestions, so if it becomes an 'ego' battle over competing suggestions that are all workable, i might do a survey monkey and let the high ranks go with what is most popular.
So the topic at hand:
What suggestions do you have to make duels more competitive and enjoyable?
Playing the same style is not an issue in the first place. In fact, most duelers play the same which is "Europe+ 10k" even most of the tournaments are "Europe+ 10k" so if we apply Lev logic which is broken, there will be no longer people dueling or playing cw games since playing "Europe+ 10k" all the time is not good in his opinion. In my case, I do something totally different which is Euroasia 1 turn minute with a flexible amount of starting funds and not the traditional duel which is Europe+ 10k or 5k, and that is what bothers him. So it is in fact the opposite, but anyway, players should be allowed to open the games they like, the other players have the right to either play or not play them. Nobody forces anyone to join any duel you have full control over clicking the "Enter game" button or not.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Hosting tournament is easy, but working on it is hard.. Host started tourney and just dissapear without any word... No one else took his place and what we got? We got this https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=48840 Tournament which last for 6 months already.. What was these deadlines then if this happend?? Host left and pavle and pheno is not playing their match.. I know, you didnt host this tourney etc.. But its hosted by supporter(part of aw team), admin/mods/supporter should take apoc place and finish it already.. Thank you. 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
I personally think that the skills required to play games of different sizes it is qualitatively different, not quantitatively. For istance in 3k games every single unit is important, if you make one mistake you lose the game, in 50k duels its different, you can recover from many singles mistakes, the skills in 50k game is macromanagement, in 3k - 1k games is micromanagement, is just different (i'm not saying one is better then the other, just the same in different ways). Applying strategies and tecnique is also different, in 50k games much people (not everyone of course) just build troops everywhere and send them toward their opponents, it's not a complex game style, why should it bring more seasonal elo or anything? The only difference is that they took more time to do so, i personally dont believe in the equation (time played = skills). Most time winning a 50k world game only imply clicking faster, its about speed, not about strategy. A longer game doesn't give players a better opportunity to prove themselves, it gives the opportunity to prove in a different way, compared to a different duel. But one's again this is my opinion, i'm of course open to vote or anything to see if the community agrees. I can agree on inserting the number of duels played in the counting of the seasonal elo, even in a small share ofc, but seems like we all agree on this. While using the number of turns instead of sp might be slightly better, but its still meaningless, for the reasons set above, playing less turn and a faster duel, it doesnt show less skills then a long one, it shows different ones (micro vs macro management). I sadly see the point that there is a moral element to this problem that won't be overcome, but at least we can avoid to make it bigger by favouring duels with more sp or more cities captured, since its in those that a player can master a narrow play style for the specific map using a specific strategy, if you play the same thing in duels with micromanagement you get predictable and you won't end far, you forcefully need to have a folding fan of different playstiles in your background. I understand that its not a big share, maybe it should be like this, maybe it shouldn't be there at all, once again i suppose we should turn to the community. Maybe solving this challenge as you rightfully said, it is impossible using code, but maybe its solvable in a "human way", if everybody agrees that there is some immoral conduct, players and moderators, if they think togheter the same thing, maybe there can be a "personal" solution, coming from those who are in charged. btw brianwl i'm of course open to vote it to, or set up a poll or survey after it's been discussed, hoping the community can agree that it needs to be addressed.
Dear Yacer, I will answer you here for the last time, since you already know how wrong you are, and you are just trying to hide the answers to your illogical statements, i will focus next on trying to help anybody improving the duelling experience, since that's our goal. Playing the same style (in the same map using the same strategy in order to get to the top duel list) it is an issue, as brianwl said himself, and as anyone but you (and maybe your 3 friends) acknowledge. It is evidently NOT the same in playing Europe+ 10k since "playing Europe+ 10k" is not a playstyle (god, looks like i'm talking to a 9 year old kid, anyway...) in fact, in this classic mode, we can find perhaps the widest range of diversity of strategies and gameplays used. The "flexible amount of starting funds" of your duels that are a copy of a copy of a copy, is between 10k and 15k, as i already stated in the proper thread about this : https://it.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=49086 , and the immoral farm that you are doing, it doesn't bother me, it bothers the entire community as you have seen yourself. "So it is in fact the opposite" do you even read yourself back? Of course people have the right to open games they like, as i already said in the other thread, the problem comes when they get to farm elo in a certain way. 
---- 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Repeat a lie to make it a fact. 1. You have not defined what farming is yet. Is farming playing the same style over and over? or is it playing with low rank players? or is it playing fake duels with your friends so you get elo? or is it playing too many duels in one day? Because as far as I know you do most of these, anyway I will still wait for your definition of farming. 2. It would be useful to define what a style is from your perspective. Is a style playing the same map? Is a style playing the same turn duration? Is a style playing the same strategy? Is a style playing the same starting funds? or is it all of these combined? Because as far as I know, players play Europe+ with 10k, 4 minutes turn-duration, fixed picks, and mainly fixed strategies most of the time. So will you prevent players from playing such games? I guess not, you only cry over me playing Euroasia 1 or 2 minute turn duration and you try hard to make a customized rule against me only, but it is not working with you because it applies to all players. It is really ridiculous that you talk about logic when your logic in the first place is broken, it is like saying "Brazil's system of play is always 4-3-3 so it should not be allowed to participate in the World Cup, they have to change their play system, their players, and their coach otherwise they are farming" which is really silly. Also, btw, the community is not only you and your clan mates, there are many players who play like me and the number will increase, so get used to it and manage your anger issues.
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
To define things and words is actually an important need, that even in other threads have been brought to light. Many has definded farming in different ways in many topic related to this. I would say that farming elo (seasonal precisely) is setting duels with the sole and mischievous prupose to make you win in a precise way. That may include some of the things that has been listed : -playing the same way over and over without changing not even once, with the same outcomes -playing only with lowranks -organize fake duels with people who let you win(this is actually illegal, i dont even know if it can be defined as farming since its likely worse, its like intentional feeding) -playing many time in this same way or circumstances in the same day / week / month and also others like -set a time limit with the predetermined intention of facilitating the strategy in question, whatever it is -exploiting trainees by dueling them and taking easily elo -playing with alts or feeding elo trhough alts In my opinion those are some of the topic that stands under the definition of farming, there can be more, those came to my mind in this moments. Of course i do none of those, i always changed duels, i play both lowranks when nobody else join and highranks or elo (as stated above) i never organized any "fake duels" or whatever, and so on, i will leave theese statements to those who can't think about anything else.... I can also clarify, even if vocaboulary should be enough, what i mean by "playstyle", because i used this term to define the critical situation where we're at nowadays with this new narrow way of duelling. Playstyle is not "the map", "the time duration" , "the starting funds" since theese 3 are (of course) settings, as well as "europe 10k+". Its, combined, the strategy you pick, and the way you play : for istance "aggressive" is a playstile, "infspam" is a playstyle, "latemove and jew" is a playstyle, "rushing" is a playstyle, last but not least "marines spawn" is a playstyle. This and other playstyles can be (of course again) combined. For example the playstyle we (not only me or my clanmates of course) have problem with nowadays with specific players is : "CO marines spam+caprush", the problem in question is also defined by the time duration (1 minute only, so opponent can't properly face the threat) even if, i reapeat, it's a setting and not a playstyle. And theese actions and duels and player/s can easily fall under the definition i set above, or others given by other players. 10k Euope or Europe+ is not fixed picks (many have been sperimenting even lately italy to counter germany, or france to counter uk), is not fixed strategies of course, many strategies works in many countries and according to many playstyles. I can't imagine who can think otherwise and i won't give credit consider him/them. I invite the community to express their opinions and how they think about it, at least the competitive one, so maybe we can come up with something.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
The reason i offered to host is i can put hard limits on when games need to be finished and warn players ahead of time not to join if they have no time to play. I have a track record for ending tournaments on schedule, but no one has asked me to host.
----  
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Agree... just not sure then what metric can be used to measure this. Ideas? The only reason i mentioned number of turns is that i would predict two skilled players, each good with micro and macro management would be more likely to have a longer game, regardless of the map they chose. Of course two completely unskilled players could also have a long game, but when a skilled player matches up with an unskilled player the game tends to be shorter, so i figured number of turns might be a way of providing some (not a lot) balance over the course of the season. Also, you got me thinking... low starting funds games are less forgiving. So maybe low starting funds games could be weighted bit more. The only issue i have with this though is first turn expansions in low income games can sometimes depend a lot on luck. If you fail taking a city (for instance Lux attempts taking Belgium and Netherlands in a 1 k game, and gets bad rolls on both battles) you are almost guaranteed to lose. But if you are successful taking both, you have a strong advantage. Thoughts?
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
This makes more sense... i can see how each of these factors could provide some balance over the course of a season, and also encourage players to play, rather than camp, when they get to first place.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
there's a few ideas expressed over the years... one of my favourites is 2 game sets where you pick your opponents strat, and then a bunch of mid level countries are randomized for both players. (e.g. on a 5 or 10k EU map, Poland, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Sweden, Greece, Volga) For the second game, The players then reverse strats and countries, so they have exact same starting conditions.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Who have to ask you ?? You are admin, you have power!
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
I see your point about turns, it makes sense, even though in competitive, at least lately, are always more rare the duels with two skilled players, so it risks to favour the farmers, but maybe i dont know it can be used together with a rank (or better elo) limitation for duels, maybe it can work perfectly that way. I dont know if low funds duels should be weighted more, probably the same or i dont know, it make sense anyway since we acknowledge they are less forgiving, but this still need to be put togheter with the limitation to avoid farming i suppose. Anyway its not just about low funds, cause a 1k world duel its not much different from a 10k one, its just longer, probably you ment low funds and little maps like europe or idk middle east or anything. Its also true that first turn expantion can be based on luck, but in case of fail or rolls that ruin the game from the start i usually give tie, it is good manner, but indeed its not a rule so i dont know (it should be? not through code though, maybe just an agreement rule or something). I Can also agree with the lastest 4 factors mentioned, the fourth maybe is a bit tricky as we discussed, probably needs a parallel rule about ranks or elo restriction. But they seems the most reasonable ones, defenetly better then sp or rank, each sorted by their percentage to be decided i guess.
Oh this is a very interesting idea, you mean that duels should only be this way, and anything else is just 1v1, or you mean this 2 game set just as a playoff of top duellers? Both way is interesting to me btw, keep it up.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
I dont remember, but i think there was a idea about top 8 where they will play about 4-5 different mods, like eu+ east, eu west, middle east etc.. So skillest player win... This is just farming noobs now..
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
Yes, something that like has been proposed. In my view, this would be a good test of skill. If there is some support from the dueling community, i can start a forum post that would hammer out the details, and then we'd put it to a vote among the most active members of the dueling community.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
The original idea was a seasonal map rotation. Winter is NA, Spring is Eu, Summer/Asia, Autumn/Africa. (This is just an example). And the top 4 finalists similar to the current Clan War season would compete. Failure to compete would lead to disqualification and the runner up would take their place. It was a simple idea. This would give players who excel more in certain map/settings to have a better chance during that season. The idea was ultimately scrapped because the Meta team voted against it. The meta team thought that tournament trophies were already a representation of who is the best. And there would be no reason to have any more Master of East/West tournaments if this idea was implemented.
---- 
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Every year same disussions and same problem.. Farming noobs and camping when reach 1300+.. All of them do the same.. What Staff do? Nothing! They just start new discussion every year and ask pLaYeRs about opinion.. Players are stupid and they dont care about system improvement, they are selfish and care only about themselfs, so dont ask players! Admins should do something what they think will make this whole duel system better.. For example, i dont like your idea at all mecoy, but i would love to see it cause it will make this whole system better, or any other idea which will make system better. Just do something(admins) as you did with cw system.. Cw system is now great, something has to be changed with duel system either or we will have same useless discussions every year.. Duel trophies became worthless and meaningless.. MAKE DUELS GREAT AGAIN!
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
|
I would like to say that only certain ways now well know of farming noobs (like the Eurasia 15k 1 min of Yacer and players like him) shall be removed from seasonal duel rankings. Lev, me and a lot of other players do sometimes duels that aren't on the EU+ or even the standard map settings (like duelling on new world map, ancient map, whatever other map like Destoria or East Asia, etc).
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
i don't duel... dave doesn't duel... not sure if Sid duels much. But these discussions are necessary. The exact same discussions preceded the CW system changes... just give it time.
----
Laster...
Laster...
|
|
Well, already 1year of disscusing, i hope something will change for next season, game is dead enough, maybe changing duel system and more prizes will make more players play it..
Laster...
Laster...
|
- 1
- 2
