Clan System Request for Proposals
11 Jan '17 10:013 editsmghrn55 wrote:
<<
I would like to toss this out there.
1 - do away with the gross point total. No longer relevant.
2 - use the rating change (rounded to nearest point) for each player in the challenge. ELO system will work. In-house formula will work too. Not that much different from ELO. Agree on a suitable K-value.
3 - do not use clan average rating as starting point. Start every clan at 0 at beginning of clan season. And then use rating change for each game in challenge to update the new clan net point total. Every game counts. No game tossing to close challenges.
4 - in addition to rating change, also award/deduct challenge points for the challenge itself. I would like to keep a reward for winning the challenge itself. Today that is 2 points per player in the challenge. That can be set to 1 point per player in challenge. Example - a 10 player challenge will award 10 points to winning clan for the challenge in addition to the ratings adjustments award for each game in the challenge. For losing clan, it can be decided whether to deduct challenge loss or set to zero.
A 10 player challenge that is close, for example 6-4 may result in rating award same as a 1 player challenge won 2-0. Larger challenges should have larger risk/reward attached.
This is a hybrid system which should bridge the perceived gap between current and new system.
5 - the challenge points will be awarded when the challenge has been decided, instead of completed as it is today. If a clan is ahead 6-4 with 1 game to play, award the points. This will eliminate game dumping. Rating points can be awarded when the game is completed or when the challenge is completed. This can be discussed amongst the clan community. Russ can analyse the complexities involved.
6 - eliminate the maximum 3 challenges between any 2 clans as the new scoring system should fix the imperfections. It is in everyone's best interest that the fluidity of challenges is enhanced.
7 - maintain a refereeing system to monitor any abuses of the system and administer corrective action accordingly.
This is open for feedback of course.
And all other suggestions are on the table.
Of course.
>>
There is a lot to read in your proposal. I have a had a long ponder and have missed some posts in between, so please excuse if this has already been addressed. I would like clarification on point 4.
Are you suggesting that, for example, if Clan A plays a challenge with five players and wins the challenge with 3 players winning their games (6 points) and 2 players losing their games, then clan A should be awarded not only 6 points for the wins, but 10 points for the whole challenge (whatever else may be going on with net ratings changes)? Or if a ten-player challenge, with 6 players winning their games (= 12 points) and four players losing their games, then Clan A should be awarded 20 points for the whole challenge, not just the 12 wins (whatever may be going on with net ratings changes)?
<<
I would like to toss this out there.
1 - do away with the gross point total. No longer relevant.
2 - use the rating change (rounded to nearest point) for each player in the challenge. ELO system will work. In-house formula will work too. Not that much different from ELO. Agree on a suitable K-value.
3 - do not use clan average rating as starting point. Start every clan at 0 at beginning of clan season. And then use rating change for each game in challenge to update the new clan net point total. Every game counts. No game tossing to close challenges.
4 - in addition to rating change, also award/deduct challenge points for the challenge itself. I would like to keep a reward for winning the challenge itself. Today that is 2 points per player in the challenge. That can be set to 1 point per player in challenge. Example - a 10 player challenge will award 10 points to winning clan for the challenge in addition to the ratings adjustments award for each game in the challenge. For losing clan, it can be decided whether to deduct challenge loss or set to zero.
A 10 player challenge that is close, for example 6-4 may result in rating award same as a 1 player challenge won 2-0. Larger challenges should have larger risk/reward attached.
This is a hybrid system which should bridge the perceived gap between current and new system.
5 - the challenge points will be awarded when the challenge has been decided, instead of completed as it is today. If a clan is ahead 6-4 with 1 game to play, award the points. This will eliminate game dumping. Rating points can be awarded when the game is completed or when the challenge is completed. This can be discussed amongst the clan community. Russ can analyse the complexities involved.
6 - eliminate the maximum 3 challenges between any 2 clans as the new scoring system should fix the imperfections. It is in everyone's best interest that the fluidity of challenges is enhanced.
7 - maintain a refereeing system to monitor any abuses of the system and administer corrective action accordingly.
This is open for feedback of course.
And all other suggestions are on the table.
Of course.
>>
There is a lot to read in your proposal. I have a had a long ponder and have missed some posts in between, so please excuse if this has already been addressed. I would like clarification on point 4.
Are you suggesting that, for example, if Clan A plays a challenge with five players and wins the challenge with 3 players winning their games (6 points) and 2 players losing their games, then clan A should be awarded not only 6 points for the wins, but 10 points for the whole challenge (whatever else may be going on with net ratings changes)? Or if a ten-player challenge, with 6 players winning their games (= 12 points) and four players losing their games, then Clan A should be awarded 20 points for the whole challenge, not just the 12 wins (whatever may be going on with net ratings changes)?
Back to Top