## Match Points and Lengths

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Twice a year we have a 30 mins official match Ducati for chesval event. Mainly all officials matches are 15 mins long , occasionally 20 mins. So if we can have a 20 mins default time lenght in ducati match , i will consider it equal to those 30 mins in hix gameplay.

life is too short , spread love around you.

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

I agree with gorgomol and suggest showing and emphasising a default match length for every map (20 for duc, 30 for GU) that will be the starting point for match scoring (i.e. a multiplier of 1), and from there you could go on with a common method (like proportional ratings, so for example you'd get 1.5x of the normal score for matches of 1.5 times the default length) or whatever suits each map. That looks consistent enough to me (you get a regular score for a default length match, more score if you play on the map more than it was intented to be played, and less if you play less)

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Yeah, I don't see any good reason for the scoring system to change when it's all automated anyway. The only difference here is that the resulting zelo from both Duc and GU would go to the same team.. doesn't have to be even values.kierra wrote:I think we should bring them together while maintaining their unique characteristics.

Why force change where it isn't necessary?

Part of the beauty of our leagues is the consistency and lack of alteration. The match length choices are a big part of gameplay identity for each league. If our goal is to simply converge the leagues, nothing about scoring and match length needs to change.. but that's just my opinion. :)

- kierra
- Lieutenant, Junior Grade
**Posts:**3960**Joined:**Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:02 am**Location:**outer Slovenia-
**Contact:**

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Since March 13 has come and gone

Looking over this thread, the consensus from players is:

1, ducati and gu each keep their prospective way of determining match points: .75, 1, 1.5 for duc; .67, 1 for GU

2. Match lengths: Duc 15-20-30. GU 20-30

Looking over this thread, the consensus from players is:

1, ducati and gu each keep their prospective way of determining match points: .75, 1, 1.5 for duc; .67, 1 for GU

2. Match lengths: Duc 15-20-30. GU 20-30

"Sometimes people try to expose what's wrong with you, because they can't handle what's right about you."

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

1. Shouldn't this whole thing be a new start? I don't think that keeping the evaluation system for both maps as it is, is a good idea. Gu players could feel at a disadvantage if a 20 minutes duc match is worth more than a 20 minutes gu match. While I agree that duc and hix ask for different styles of play I don't see why time is more valuable on the ducati map. My suggestion would be to either use the exact same formula for each map in the pool or to stop taking the length of a match into consideration at all.

2. I like the idea of a bonus for teams that play a lot of the maps.

2. I like the idea of a bonus for teams that play a lot of the maps.

- kierra
- Lieutenant, Junior Grade
**Posts:**3960**Joined:**Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:02 am**Location:**outer Slovenia-
**Contact:**

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Again, i repeat myself: the only 30 min ducati matches played are for the special event matches, like Chesval and monthly fm's.

If you look at the match page on duc site, there weren't any 30 min official matches in 2014 to the present.

There were 2 30 min officials in 2013, 3 in 2012, none in 2011. Whereas by comparison there were plenty of 15 and 20 matches.

duc's 20 min = gu's 30 min as each league's longest match time played. (starting point for match scoring multiplier of 1.

duc's 15 min = gu's 20 min as the shortest match time played. (multiplier .75 and .67 respectively)

If you look at the match page on duc site, there weren't any 30 min official matches in 2014 to the present.

There were 2 30 min officials in 2013, 3 in 2012, none in 2011. Whereas by comparison there were plenty of 15 and 20 matches.

duc's 20 min = gu's 30 min as each league's longest match time played. (starting point for match scoring multiplier of 1.

duc's 15 min = gu's 20 min as the shortest match time played. (multiplier .75 and .67 respectively)

alezakos wrote:...suggest showing and emphasizing a default match length for every map (20 for duc, 30 for GU) that will be the starting point for match scoring (i.e. a multiplier of 1), and from there you could go on with a common method (like proportional ratings, so for example you'd get 1.5x of the normal score for matches of 1.5 times the default length) or whatever suits each map. That looks consistent enough to me (you get a regular score for a default length match, more score if you play on the map more than it was intented to be played, and less if you play less)

"Sometimes people try to expose what's wrong with you, because they can't handle what's right about you."

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

But how can you have a fair league if one map is worth more than another.

- kierra
- Lieutenant, Junior Grade
**Posts:**3960**Joined:**Wed Mar 23, 2005 1:02 am**Location:**outer Slovenia-
**Contact:**

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Dear monster....one is not worth more than the other.

Its about equivalent matches played in duc-15/20/gu- 20/30. Think of it as a math concept

Bringing this portion to a close:

Consensus from players is:

1, ducati and gu each keep their prospective way of determining match points: .75, 1, 1.5 for duc; .67, 1 for GU

2. Match lengths: Duc 15-20-30. GU 20-30

Its about equivalent matches played in duc-15/20/gu- 20/30. Think of it as a math concept

Bringing this portion to a close:

Consensus from players is:

1, ducati and gu each keep their prospective way of determining match points: .75, 1, 1.5 for duc; .67, 1 for GU

2. Match lengths: Duc 15-20-30. GU 20-30

"Sometimes people try to expose what's wrong with you, because they can't handle what's right about you."

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

"Measure your words -- they determine the distance of your relationships"

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Cool, this is what BZiON will be going with thenkierra wrote:Bringing this portion to a close:

Consensus from players is:

1, ducati and gu each keep their prospective way of determining match points: .75, 1, 1.5 for duc; .67, 1 for GU

2. Match lengths: Duc 15-20-30. GU 20-30

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

I know we're past the discussion deadline, but I would like to make one final plea for a consistent rating system...

I believe the main draw of playing in a league is that there is a formal system of competition, with rules intended to foster a fair and equitable chance for everyone. Slime recently posted a very concise topic about how the effective removal of the rating system diminished the quality of the 1vs1 league. I believe strongly that a fair, consistent method of allocating points and rating teams is critical to a healthy league.

I have always thought that current team points could be re-calculated from match history, and you would end up with the same number we have now. I recently learned that is not the case. GU points standings would be valid if audited right now as far as we know, but ducati not only has a different system, but has used several different formulas over the life of the league (without retroactive application to match history). This is anything but a consistent system... it is, in my opinion, a very disjoined, unnecessarily complicated system, which makes one scratch his head.

The main argument I have seen for two different formulas is the historical argument. I know that the match history itself is important to a lot of people, and should be preserved in the merger. However, now we are looking at rating all of those matches from two leagues in one rating ladder. With different scoring formulas, merging both straight in introduces a fundamental inconsistency between the two current map styles. The tradeoff that we need to address is: is it better in the long term to make players adjust to a minor change to the formula, or to keep the time/points formula inconsistent forever?

I believe that the

Call it what you like, but keeping the two distinct formulas results in more points in ducati for the same amount of time. This, in essence, prioritizes ducati matches. Ducati players should be able to keep their preference for 20 minute matches, but in my opinion, a consistent

I believe the main draw of playing in a league is that there is a formal system of competition, with rules intended to foster a fair and equitable chance for everyone. Slime recently posted a very concise topic about how the effective removal of the rating system diminished the quality of the 1vs1 league. I believe strongly that a fair, consistent method of allocating points and rating teams is critical to a healthy league.

I have always thought that current team points could be re-calculated from match history, and you would end up with the same number we have now. I recently learned that is not the case. GU points standings would be valid if audited right now as far as we know, but ducati not only has a different system, but has used several different formulas over the life of the league (without retroactive application to match history). This is anything but a consistent system... it is, in my opinion, a very disjoined, unnecessarily complicated system, which makes one scratch his head.

The main argument I have seen for two different formulas is the historical argument. I know that the match history itself is important to a lot of people, and should be preserved in the merger. However, now we are looking at rating all of those matches from two leagues in one rating ladder. With different scoring formulas, merging both straight in introduces a fundamental inconsistency between the two current map styles. The tradeoff that we need to address is: is it better in the long term to make players adjust to a minor change to the formula, or to keep the time/points formula inconsistent forever?

I believe that the

*match history*itself is what our players most want to preserve, and that they would forgive a small adjustment to their team ratings (team ratings are always fluctuating anyway) in order to bring all teams from both leagues under one roof, with one consistent rating formula over the entire match history. At the very least, I believe it is worth an evaluation (which I am willing to do) to determine how much current team ratings would be affected if re-calculated and validated. Also, I will point out that some adjustments will*already need to be made*due to some errors in the bz-owl system that left a few matches with only one team listed, and messed up the date/time in at least one other.Call it what you like, but keeping the two distinct formulas results in more points in ducati for the same amount of time. This, in essence, prioritizes ducati matches. Ducati players should be able to keep their preference for 20 minute matches, but in my opinion, a consistent

*time * formula = points*would be the most beneficial for the league.### Re: Match Points and Lengths

That is the point I was trying to make. To me (being a player who prefers the hix map) this feels like an attempt to make league members play more on the ducati map. I do not understant why we shouldn't have only one formula for one league, unless it is not worth the effort (I don' know anything about coding etc.).Constitution wrote:Call it what you like, but keeping the two distinct formulas results in more points in ducati for the same amount of time.This, in essence, prioritizes ducati matches.Ducati players should be able to keep their preference for 20 minute matches, but in my opinion, a consistenttime * formula = pointswould be the most beneficial for the league.

- Bullet Catcher
- Captain
**Posts:**556**Joined:**Sat Dec 23, 2006 7:56 am**Location:**Escondido, California

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

Team ranking is done by an algorithm. As long as we preserve the basic factual match history (teams, date/time, score) it is possible to retroactively apply whatever algorithm(s) we choose. None of these scoring algorithms is "right" or even "best."

If we want, we can simultaneously apply as many algorithms as we choose (think of having different scoring systems available the same way a web site may have different "skin" themes available). Would this be confusing? Of course it would! But if it gives more players the opportunity to be happy about match results then maybe more of them will play matches.

Player A: "Ha! My team ranks higher than yours using the XYZ algorithm!"

Player B: "Let's match and when my team wins we will pass you in the PQR algorithm!"

There are so many possibilities.

If we want, we can simultaneously apply as many algorithms as we choose (think of having different scoring systems available the same way a web site may have different "skin" themes available). Would this be confusing? Of course it would! But if it gives more players the opportunity to be happy about match results then maybe more of them will play matches.

Player A: "Ha! My team ranks higher than yours using the XYZ algorithm!"

Player B: "Let's match and when my team wins we will pass you in the PQR algorithm!"

There are so many possibilities.

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

If there is not only one, true teamranking but several, ppl might care even less about the rankings than they do now.

### Re: Match Points and Lengths

kierra wrote:I'm fine with it because 15/20 min matches are played in ducati.....no 30 min matches are played except for special events like ChesVal.

so making 20 min in duc the equivalent of gu's 30min makes sense....both are the longest time length matches played.....so in reality they are equivalent!

It's not rocket science, and I don't see it being a detriment to attracting new players.

agreed.