slime wrote:The only reason I am repeating this is because I feel as though it got lost in the discussion and a couple of people have agreed with at least the theory of it. Why not just say, players can match against whoever they want as an official match, it just won't count for nearly as many points/elo as normal official matches. For example: Myself and plasma kaz (as both members of the team BZB) cannot find a match. We sit around and wait but none come. So we ask around, "would any two people like to official match us?" For the sake of discussion, let's say dexter and hurricane are around. They agree to an official match, even though they are not on the same team. So it is effectively BZB vs dexter/hurricane or BZB vs players. Say BZB lost, so we would lose 2 points. Say BZB won, so we would win 2 points. These points gained/lost are regardless of any player strength, it is a set number (naturally, the number can be whatever is decided on). Dexter/hurricane would gain or lose no points, just like in a normal fm. However, it would be a much more competitive match than a normal fm.
This idea would:
1. Increase activity
2. Not pollute the ELO pool (1 or 2 points per win/loss would not make a difference, as red-der's earlier graph points out)
3. Keep competitiveness
4. Choice of teams would remain in the players' hands
5. Require less and easier coding
I would like to hear the cons of this idea, because the idea maker can never think of them themselves. This was just my best try at thinking of a solution that can be considered something like that of a compromise. I can definitely appreciate what red-der is trying to do with his idea, but I'm worried there are just too many cons right now. However, whatever is decided on will have my support, and I will do my best to offer my opinions whenever I can.
The objections and pitfalls of red-der's initial proposal are not going to disappear. There are two alternative suggestions I'd like to point draw out.
1. Have the two teams in a separate system (but supposedly "GU-council-supported")
2. Players have their individual statistics tracked in a more match which is basically an "official funmatch" - from the old/dead funmatch league.
3. No one mentioned this, but a monthly cup based on how many matches, caps, flag saves, etc.
My thoughts on these are not necessary at this point. I have however held those ideas for more than a year.
Firstly, slime has a good summary/example of "the moot point that most people can probably accept/agree/relate to". Along with this claim I say to cut out the other wibbly wobbly timey wimey mentioned moot points:
1. "No teams are on, so no one gets to offi. Wouldn't it be nice if there could be an offi?" No, because offi's mean something. If not even one team is actually a team, then it's just a serious FM. The effect of writing it on paper doesn't make it "offi material..." - e.g. you look up the match logs and it says Team A beat Team B 3-1. You don't feel anything. Being loyal to a team is difficult enough, being loyal to half the players is not right. While the idea of more recorded matches has potential good, the particular framing of what would be FMs as offi's should be put aside because it is not going to happen without necessarily degrading the value of offi's.
2. Based on the previous point, there should not be two league teams in the official ladder. If there are going to be two league teams, it had better be a separate ladder.
My actual criticism of slime's idea:
His proposal is more palate-able to me than other versions, but all the original counterarguments are still there:
First point of discussion is "Dexter/hurricane would gain or lose no points, just like in a normal fm. However, it would be a much more competitive match than a normal fm."
1. So it is exactly like an fm but not only is it recorded and counts for points for BZB, by some non-descript psychological enchantment, dexter/hurricane take the match as seriously as if it were an offi. They would curse/rage as necessary just like in an offi. I will give this some validity since dexter/hurricane gets the opportunity to lower BZB rating, however there are some scenarios that are not quite like that and may incur some off-remarks. For example Frank and I are going to "offi" against Dead Turtle and etigah (not same team) because in my timezone, if Loki isn't on then the "1-team offi" is usually in our favor just because of the players online at that time. If no one is concerned about that, then the suggestion of 2-point win/loss seems purely "honorary". No one cares about 2 points, but they care that the match is recorded? I don't claim to know what people care about, and there's nothing wrong with caring about different things. Just from my view the practicality of this solution looks thread-bare.
Winloss change is high enough for people to care => good, lots more offi matches. Just that Ice (and probably most other teams) will get naturally get free points. The more active teams get inflated, the inactive do not. (Technically this can be desirable in design, but the elo is already in place).
Winloss change is not high enough for people to care but somehow just the match being recorded and the opportunity to play with a teammate is more valued than fairer teams and practice value => Offi, Ice vs teamless. This just doesn't "strike the match" for me; unbalanced offi's are often not worth the time regardless of points.
Winloss change is not high enough for people to care and not the above => then it will be an FM, Frank/eti vs sq/dt, to maximise practice by balancing the teams.
Basically, I do not understand how "having a competitive FM vs dex/hurri" does not solve your problem. Either you want the thrill of points or being on record, no matter how much it counts, or for some reason dex/hurri does not have an incentive to match you hence points will give them that incentive, or they do want to match you, but they also want to help BZB get more official matches either to give you points or lower your 3000th match countdown.
In my opinion, the motives behind the proposals are important. Some of the supporters of the variant probably just want a yes/no response, and while they support a discussion, they may be afraid to explain plainly why they support one design decision over another. Players have different motives, and if we never ask about them, then the supporters will just group up and say "look at how many of us there are", which is not a representative approach.
slime, how does your proposal benefit you more than simply FMing against dex/hurri? You claim it would increase activity (for which I assume FMs already count as activity), so I infer that currently you would not be sufficiently motivated to FM against dex/hurri, or they would not be motivated to FM against you. So what changes that suddenly you would be matching?