![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
I played OpenClonk for a long time again and i have to say: wow! It doesn't look like a half-finished too quickly released Open Beta anymore and it makes a lot fun.So far so good! But now comes my idea.. I really tried to write a good English^^
Newton wrote in his post "A new year, a new release" that you now want to add a League. So I want to suggest a league-system now. In my eyes the old CR league isn´t so good for oc because oc ist freeware. (Multiaccounts/...)
The idea: For every game you play, you get points. When you play against strong players you get more point as against weak players. So far so good. But when you loose the szenario, you doesn´t loose points. You get +0 or when you be a newbie and play against pros you get even some points. So multiaccounds are pointless, because when you loose with your main acc. you don´t loose points. Furthermore this system shows more the skill of a player as the old system. The only problem is the inactivity. But even that can be avoided by 2 tables:
table 1: ranking by total score
table 2: ranking by added score per month
So that's my idea. I hope you like it, because I can´t write this system. (Not enough skill)
As layman I like this idea. This point system would also reward activity. But how will you remember the player identity? It's possible to create an league account online and log in via button in network game list. .ocp's alone are unsatisfactory.>But when you loose the scenario, you doesnt loose points.
So we have thousands of points within some months?
Hi and thanks for the feedback :)One point:
>Furthermore this system shows more the skill of a player
No. It would show how long the players played :)
Imagine a medium player who plays a lot of games - he would have a lot of points after some time. Now imagine the best player ever who wins all of his games but only plays once per week or so.
Your medium player would always have more points than your best player that way
> Now imagine the best player ever who wins all of his games but only plays once per week or so.
When the player 1 play so many games and against a lot of other players, then he is sooner or later better than player 2 how is playing one game per week. Moreover if you want to have a good rank in a league you have to bring activity.
Yes, but your system would not reward skill, but it would reward only activity. Imagine a normal player who has been playing for three years and who has a lot of points. And now a new, good player starts playing. The new player would have to play for years just to have the same amount of points! Not much fun for the new player, I guess.
>The new player would have to play for years just to have the same amount of points! Not much fun for the new player, I guess.
Because that table 2
>Yes, but your system would not reward skill, but it would reward only activity.
I wrote that this system shows more the skills of the players then the old of CR. Futhermore you can play thousands of games you have to play years to be the best player.
>When the player 1 play so many games and against a lot of other players, then he is sooner or later better than player 2 how is playing one game per week.
But exactly this is the problem. Players are farming. He can play hundreds of games versus newbies and is "better" than someone who played 20 games against pros? Farming then is rewarded than winning against good players. Of course I like the idea to reward activity but there have to be a way to lose points. If the host noticed that he is going to lose, he just quit the game because he has nothing to lose and re-hosting is more effective to get possible points.
Yes you're right. But I must say I like farming. In every (for me) good game with a league you can farm worse players. When you don´t like that, don´t play league. ;)Edit: When you have 1.000.000 points and play against a player with 100, you get not so much points as against one with 100.000 don't forget that. So you can beat farming.
Not necesserily. I have played OC a lot and lose almost every melee round ;)Besides, if someone does become the best player by playing a lot, a simple ELO system would also show that.
The system we have in the clonk.de league now is a mixture of points for playing (because of decay and newbie bonus) and skill. I think that's fine.
> if someone does become the best player by playing a lot
You must play and win.
>a simple ELO system would also show that.
Edit: Maybe that's right. But the system I suggest doesn't show only who is playing the most games. You must win and you get more points against stronger players. No system is perfekt, but I think for freeware, this system is the best!
Can't really add much to the comments so far - just must emphasize that it is really important to be stable against farming. League activity will be very different across the player base. You must be able to judge fairly players that only do a few games every weekend and players that crank out ten per day. That's a factor of 100 between active and inactive players - all legitimately of the same quality. Sooner or later you just have to take points away, or you're just tracking what part of the world has holidays currently.
And while OC might be freeware, this doesn't mean that we have to make league play free of cost. My favorite idea is still to allow free accounts within the league system - but lock them down so they are unfarmable (maybe an upper limit for the points you can get?). Only once you've either linked your account to a CR registration or made a contribution to OC or something, you can unlock a cool "OC supporter" badge and get full league access. Something like that.
And while OC might be freeware, this doesn't mean that we have to make league play free of cost. My favorite idea is still to allow free accounts within the league system - but lock them down so they are unfarmable (maybe an upper limit for the points you can get?). Only once you've either linked your account to a CR registration or made a contribution to OC or something, you can unlock a cool "OC supporter" badge and get full league access. Something like that.
>you can unlock a cool "OC supporter" badge and get full league access. Something like that.
Sounds cool for a small player base. But I suppose that doesn't scale well.. :)
A random idea I had was that you could "bet" your league score (think virtual coins). So that the players decide more freely how much they are willing to play for. That's not true ELO obviously, but still encourages skill more than time and might be an incentive for high players to continue playing (since they could still play for a smaller amount instead of risking a lot of points).
The tricky part is how to get new coins/points into the economy while keeping low accounts non-farmable. An idea would be to link that with the settlement league and give coins for winning some of the harder settlement scenarios [that implies that new accounts start with 0 coins and have nothing to bet].
Activity reward would just be taking X coins from the lowest-activity-players and giving them to the highest-activity-players.
A nice side effect is that you could integrate that into the spectators GUI and let them bet on players during a game ;)
Why wouldn't it scale? We should find some way to automate it, obviously.
And hm. Your system would not, in fact, reward skill, but instead realistic assessment of that skill. You can be a bad player (and correctly only bet relatively low amounts on your win) and still gain effectively unlimited amount of points if other players are wrong enough about you and over- or under-bet. The best skill estimate in that kind of system would be the average betting rate. That sounds somewhat interesting - crowd-sourcing the whole process - but also really prone to manipulation, and basically meaningless without a significant population. Not sure this would work.
And hm. Your system would not, in fact, reward skill, but instead realistic assessment of that skill. You can be a bad player (and correctly only bet relatively low amounts on your win) and still gain effectively unlimited amount of points if other players are wrong enough about you and over- or under-bet. The best skill estimate in that kind of system would be the average betting rate. That sounds somewhat interesting - crowd-sourcing the whole process - but also really prone to manipulation, and basically meaningless without a significant population. Not sure this would work.
Yes, it would estimate real skill a lot worse than any ELO system. My hope is that it would be a better incentive for the players, more transparent and therefore increase played games (with league active).Also it would be easier to counter account pushing with new players than in an ELO-based system.
That might have side-effects I didn't think of yet, though.
>Your system would not, in fact, reward skill, but instead realistic assessment of that skill.
Have to show a league the skills of their players? I mean when you want to habe a lot of points you must be reasonably good. But I think contest between the players is the most important thing. Because that makes fun. When you know: Mhh, he is so good, i never can beat him. You will never try it. But if weaker players also have the chance to get a good rank it will be interesting. If you only want to show the strength of the players organize a tournament not a league.
I was talking about Zapper's proposal - just to be clear. And yes, you can make a game out of pretty much anything, but that doesn't make it a good game. Whatever you call it, leagues are in the business of putting names on a list, and given human nature this means you better have a damn good answer if somebody asks you why you put somebody else in front of him.
You´re right. But a good system have to notice other things too: prevent/reduce using of multiacc. , increase activity (who invested a lot of time to be first place and after 3 weeks he has got 0 points because inactivity), ...Like Zapper said. For a little community like CR your system is great and it works. But not for a game which is freeware and have a little bit more players. (You want to have more players in OC or?)
I'd say Peters system is especially good for a very large community :3 [law of large numbers etc.]What I meant was that Peter wanted to activate acounts based on community contribution. That's what works better with a small group.
Very creative title for the topic there
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
