Soldat CTF League Forums ~ Archive Forum Index
Author Message

<  General Discussions  ~  Sctfl 11 Suggestions?

s0ulblade
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:59 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 05 Mar 2007 Posts: 39
Well my last topic is starting to turn into an argument of sctfl's freeplay.

So maybe a new forum section or just a topic (like this) should be made for Sctfl 11 suggestions?

Heres a few problems (imo) :


- Well imo 2 cws a day isn't really that much, but 2 cws a day for 42 days?
Thats a bit of a hefty amount of cws? no?

- Also, i'm not sure how many clans did this but the 1st 20 cws were worth more points so you could just play noob teams for ur first 20 cws, gaining more points and then play the harder teams later.
This obviously means you could get more points just by the order in which you play cws.
However this rule is still a good one because it allows less active clans to play and still get a good amount of points (well if they are good Wink ).


- Clans towards the bottom of the table have only played a few matches in the entire league. They may of been active for the 1st week or so but some of them are now very, very inactive and some don't even exist anymore.

A possible solution:

- Cut the duration of freeplay in half, but keep the same rules. 3 weeks of 2 cws a day is better than 6 weeks of 2 cws a day.

- Have an initial "noob knockout" of 3 weeks:

Ok this is probably a bit of an "out there" idea.
You keep the same rules here as in freeplay.
(Maybe for each week only the 1st 5 cws give an extra 2 points instead of the 1st 20 cws)

Lets say 120 clans sign up (it doesn't matter how many sign up).

However at the end of Week 1 only a certain percentage of clans go through to the next week. So lets say the top 2/3 are allowed through.

Now theres only 80 clans.

At the start of week 2 everyone's scores are back to 0

Now lets say at the end of this week only 3/4 are allowed through

And now theres only 60 clans.

Then again for week 3 only 5/6 go through.

- This leaves 50 clans for the Freeplay which is when SCTFL actually begins and these clans are going to be at least quite active.
Its also less easy to "noob bash".

-The 1st 3 weeks ("Noob Knockout") wont require an amazing amount of actvity as you only have to win a few cws a week to get through.


err.. so yeah i'm sorry if its hard to read and also i'm sorry if this is actually a shit idea xP.

But it took me ages to come up with that idea Xo

_________________
View user's profile Send private message
DragonSlayer
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:20 pm Reply with quote
Administrator Joined: 06 Aug 2005 Posts: 1114 Location: Finland
Ouchek did suggest making freeplay shorter a few days before SCTFL10 started but it was too late. I think we might have to consider it for the next season. Even though I'm extremely happy with the activity we got and the last weeks weren't any more inactive than the first weeks, it's true that 6 weeks can be overwhelming for some clans if you have to keep up a steady 2 cw's per day rhythm on. Maybe 4 weeks (2+2 weeks) would be better.

I don't think the noob knockout thing would work out because then certain clans would avoid playing good clans even more than they are already.

_________________

AE/DragonSlayer
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PoKuaN
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:58 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 130
Couldn't agree more with that last part you mentioned DS.
Specially in the last week... I got HUNDREDS of negative replies, due to our position in the table.

_________________
Shadow Warriors - [SW] \\ @quakenet -> #sw.soldat
View user's profile Send private message
[SW] Perry
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:22 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 24 Sep 2004 Posts: 295
-Make the duration of freeplay shorter. I hated this neverending freeplay season. -_-"

-Cut the intercontinental bonus to +1 point...or leave it completely, its just an unfair advantage for the NA clans which they don't need cause they are good enough to compete, and +2 points are far too much imho.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PoKuaN
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:55 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 130
x^2

_________________
Shadow Warriors - [SW] \\ @quakenet -> #sw.soldat
View user's profile Send private message
DragonSlayer
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:07 pm Reply with quote
Administrator Joined: 06 Aug 2005 Posts: 1114 Location: Finland
Quote:
-Cut the intercontinental bonus to +1 point...or leave it completely, its just an unfair advantage for the NA clans which they don't need cause they are good enough to compete, and +2 points are far too much imho.

We have already discussed this one too, and I have to agree. Looking at the NA clans in top 16 and their positions, the +2 is just WAY too much right now in my opinion. I think it should be:

Before 20 matches = +2
After 20 matches = +1

Or then +1 for the whole season.


Last edited by DragonSlayer on Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________

AE/DragonSlayer
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
s0ulblade
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:07 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 05 Mar 2007 Posts: 39
[SW] Perry wrote:

-Cut the intercontinental bonus to +1 point.


1.

-I think thats probably a good idea, +2 points seems a bit much.
In this years sctfl |LP| managed to play as many cws as most european clans so i don't see why they should get this bonus.
Obviously clans still need that motivation to play against laggers so +1 should still be enough.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2.

-Also clans may not feel they need to clan war as much if the bracket was bigger like the top 32 clans? Surely it will be easier to get into this so clans will not feel the need to cw as much?

And another idea i had was maybe have two brackets:

- The top 12 (In sctfl 10 these clans seem to have a higher cw win:lose ratio than those below (in general anyway))

- The clans in the top 13-28 I.E 16 clans


- The top 12 bracket would have a week of rest/ training

- The remaining 16 clans have a small play-off until 4 clans are left.
- These 4 clans are then added to the 12 to make a new 16

This 16 would be the real play-offs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. About the "noob knockout" thing DS is probably right =]


Last edited by s0ulblade on Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:09 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
View user's profile Send private message
Ouchek
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:08 pm Reply with quote
Administrator Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 738 Location: France
The idea you come up with are the ideas we had before the season started but we prefered to let it as it was last season since it was succesful, thanks for your interest though.

Gonna think again about these there might be a few changes for the next seasons.

_________________


(@xurich) if I'm not devirginized before next sctfl season, I am definitely quitting
(@xurich) allow me to make that clear
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Vv00t
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:15 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 188
danger, long post ahead. read bottom section for summary Very Happy


A + B
[SW] Perry wrote:
-Make the duration of freeplay shorter. I hated this neverending freeplay season. -_-"

-Cut the intercontinental bonus to +1 point...or leave it completely, its just an unfair advantage for the NA clans which they don't need cause they are good enough to compete, and +2 points are far too much imho.


While it pains me, I have to agree on both counts with [SW] Perry.
At the beginning of sctfl10 I only agreed on A. The argument that NA clans had less clans to play with due to time difference seemed valid (and it was valid during sctfl9 imho). Nonetheless I have now arrived at the conclusion that +2 is indeed too much, since NA clans have proven to be able to keep up with the euros activity-wise.. [read: number-of-matches-wise]


______________________________________

C
Quote:
posted by ramirez in thread "sctfl10"
Remember that the better win:lose ratio you have, the less matches you need to play.


see, thats what I thought too. But it's not entirely true.
SN (and im only picking myself because i know my facts here for sure) had one of the best (still does i believe) win-loss ratios, and still we only managed to get into the playoffs (+at a decent rank) by doing a 10-match marathon on the last day (and yes, for SN that is HUGE, as you can see from the 1.9/day statistic that dslayer calculated)


What would REALLY make your sentence correct is, some kind of PUNISHMENT (pointwise) for lost matches.

Enik and me have been discussing this for a while now, and suffice to say its hard to come up with a system that is actually fair to everyone, so I can understand why this hasnt been attempted yet.. (and i can imagine other possible reasons too.. )

Anyway, our idea is, to base the negative points on the rankings at the time of the match/before the match.

Ive taken the liberty of postulating one possible system (with example values) of how this could work, to illustrate the idea:

IF one plays a clan "on the same level" - that is to say within 10 places from your own clan, there are no negative points at all.

IF one plays a clan that is ranked FAR below your own clan, and one looses, the "top" clan would get a harsh fine of, lets say as an example, -3 points. (this for clans that are like 30 or more places apart)

IF one plays a clan that is ranked relatively far below your own clan, and one looses, the "top" clan would get a medium fine of, lets say as an example, -2pts (this for clans that are like 15 or more places apart)

IF one plays a clan that is ranked rather close below your own clan, and one looses, the "top" clan would get a small fine of, lets say as an example, -1pts (this for clans that are like 10 or more places apart)


One important condition: this kind of system obviously cannot work from day 1 because everyone starts "on the same level". It would either need to be started once a clan has passed a certain number of matches, or once a certain time has passed (10 matches or 1 week)

PS all numbers are just examples.. this obviously would need to be adjusted to everyone's liking, IF it actually found supporters other than me and Enik, lol ;D

___________________________

D

Yet another suggestion:
No more ties unless its also a tie in caps. in other words: Caps-difference comes into play if rounds should be tied.

i.e. if one wins round 1 "1-0", loses round 2 "0-1", ties laos "1-1" only then its a tie.
However if the first round ended 2-0 (and the rest same), it's not a tie, because one clan made more caps then the other clan, so its a win. dunno, just a thought Razz

___________________________

E

YET another suggestion:
geez, this is getting long .. stop me while you can!
Anyway, i just remembered something that was suggested to me by an R7 player a while ago in sctfl9. (something along the lines of his suggestion anyway)

Theres always the trouble with intercontinental matches being "server dependant". So usually, (not always but .. you know.) the one who is "home" has a huge advantage because 2 maps (1st and 3rd if it comes to that) are played on "his" server.

Now, while this system offers an OK chance to all, it only gets REALLY fair if those two clans face off again, with the circumstances reversed (i.e. the other clan being home that time).

This of course does not always happen, and Id be willing to bet there are euro clans who abuse this by only playing each NA clan once, and force being home in that match. (I have to admit, I dont particularly look forward to being away in an intercontinental match either, but cant be avoided)

Now, my suggestion is this, and it goes not only for freeplay (where its difficult to enforce) but mostly for the playoffs.

Since during playoffs one has a lot more time to play one measly match anyway... How about playing each match TWICE.

Once, you play all rounds on the NA serv, the other time you play all rounds on the EU serv. Map choices must remain the same. After all is played, caps get added up from both matches, and voila..

At the very least, I find it more fair than (possibly) facing the disadvantage of the away-server in a knockout match.



_________

I know... fuck Vv00t and his mad novel writing skillz.
So heres a small sum-up for the lazy ones (you may wanna refer to them by their numbers, if you care to reply and comment)

A. Shorten SCTFL-Freeplay to 2x2weeks [supported]

B. Decrease Intercontinental Bonus in some way [supported]

C. Losses against "worse" opponents gives negative points [created and suggested by me and Enik]

D. If rounds are tied, Cap-difference is checked. only if that is equal aswell, it remains a tied match. [suggested by me]

E. Intercontinental matches should be entirely on one server during freeplay (one match on EU, one match on NA). during playoffs, 1 match is really 2 matches - again one on EU on on NA. [basic idea by some R7 guy, worked on and suggested by me]

_________________
View user's profile Send private message
chaka
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:41 pm Reply with quote
Gather Admin Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 208
sn isnt even top three of win:lose ratio
View user's profile Send private message
poop
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:01 pm Reply with quote
Administrator Joined: 22 Sep 2004 Posts: 1029 Location: USA
Quote:
-I think thats probably a good idea, +2 points seems a bit much.
In this years sctfl |LP| managed to play as many cws as most european clans so i don't see why they should get this bonus.


Its true, but you gotta understand that the only way we were able to play so many clanwars is to be online on euro times and recruit 12-15 members. yes, we had a total of 12 members on average for the whole season, playing matches with any and every lineup that was online at any time.

There is only 8-9 NA clans. Using 1 clan like LP to prove your point is not a good idea. Just look down the ladder at DC and Deth, who werent able to come online at euros times, and didnt have as many members as us and thus werent able to play euro clans and make the playoffs. The simple fact of the matter is NA clans have to be online at euro times and play euro clans to even have a chance.

Ill reply to other stuff later.

_________________
Have no fear, The Poop is here!
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Vv00t
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:22 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 188
r7, war, sm, i//i arent euro either.. so while it may not be a good idea to base it on LP, one has no trouble finding other examples of "int" clans doing very well.

_________________
View user's profile Send private message
poop
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:35 pm Reply with quote
Administrator Joined: 22 Sep 2004 Posts: 1029 Location: USA
Doing very well? SM is 8th place, war is 11th, and R7 is 16th. 2 of these clans barely made playoffs, and SM only got to 8th place by playing like 15 matches the final few days of season.

I think there is a misconception in your head that NA clans are less active then euro clans. The simple fact is SM is probably as active as say.. EF or BC.Crew, but they still finish below them in stats?

I just think this is euro bias coming in again here. NA clans average position in playoffs is 9.25, below the midpoint which is 8. 4 NA clans made playoffs, 12 Euro clans made playoffs. Therre is about 10 active NA clans, is there more than 40 active euro clans?

Your whole argument is that NA clans can play less matches and get the same amount of points. My whole argument is the whole point of the intercontinental system is that, to make it fair. NA clans still finish below euro clans in the regular season even if they are as active as the euro clans that finish above them because they dont have as many clans to play.

_________________
Have no fear, The Poop is here!
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Vv00t
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:03 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 188
lol I didnt really come here to fight with you over your paranoia of "euro bias", but I have to say, I didnt realize getting into the playoffs was such a lousy performance in your eyes, my apologies!

And well guess what, SN had to play 10 on sunday aswell. Many of the top16 clans played like crazy on the last day. that doesn't say ANYTHING about how well the intercontinental bonus works as it is, so its just smoke and mirrors on your part.

b t w - I used the word "activity" in my initial post, and I tried to explain how it is meant in that place. I was talking about the fact that a decent amount of NA clans was able to play as many matches as most EU clans, thereby reaching the playoffs, which in my eyes is no small achievement.
Wether NA comm is more active or less active or AS active, I frankly couldnt care less. Plus, its ridiculous to even try and compare the two.
But since you started it, yes there are 40 (and more) active clans in eu [do check your own sctfl stats for a taste].
So the 12:4 ratio you mention is, if anything, heavy on the internationals/NAs.

If you read correctly, my argument isnt that NAs play less and get same. It is that they play same amount of matches, and get more points. [or are able to do so anyway].

_________________
View user's profile Send private message
Blade
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:42 pm Reply with quote
Joined: 21 Sep 2004 Posts: 755 Location: Ontario, Canada (Mississauga)
Vvoot the ONLY reason us(R7) and SM made the playoffs was BECAUSE of the +2...I can honestly say that because if we lose 1 point we're 17th. And SM racked up so many Intercontinental matches that it woulda hurt.

And it's VERY difficult to stay active with you bunch as you can see, some Euro clans racked up over 115 matches. We barely reached 70... And we're considered EXTREMELY active in North America (other then LP)

If you want it to be +2 for first 20, +1 for afterwards, then you also have to put them into place for Ties. Because the WORST thing about the rules thus far is that tying a shitty NA clan got us the same points as tying Asylum or EF...

Give the Inter Bonus for Ties as well.


-4 weeks total.
-inter bonus for ties
-Take points away for losses vs Worse clans.

_________________
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger

Display posts from previous:  

All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Post new topic

Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum