about: Team score modification (Activity factor)
About teamrating and activity:
Slowly i come to the conclusion that I would really prefer a rating that reflects the performance of a team in a certain time frame over that the rating is affected by the teams current activity rating.
This means, that i favor something like resetting teams rating after a season (1/2 years - 2 years) than multiplying it with an activity factor or having rating decrease during time, because:
- Rating decreases during time
This means that a team that hasn't matched since long will have a low rating, though they still might be hard to beat.
- Multiplying with an activity factor
The rating will be an arbitrary value of which we won't be sure what it means.
For this reason I would like to bring back into the discussion the 1vs1 league and like to encourage a debate about whether or not it could be applicable for the ducati league.
League and Ladders
(taken almost 1 to 1 from the 1vs1 league)
The league consists out of the following three ratings:
- Seasonal ladder
whether the ladder is montly or if another time frame would be more apropiate i leave open for discussion.
On Season start, each team starts with 0 points.
- Hall of fame
Hall of fame should also display the sum of the total seasons won for each team.
The Hall of fame is never reset, which means that teams long gone will still be in the Hall of fame and never be forgotten.
Hall of fame includes teh winner of a season as well as the runner up.
- Overall ELO rating
It remains that an ELO rating reflects best how strong a team is (meaning how hard it is to beat it).
- +1 when match was lost
- +2 for a draw
- +3 for a win (maybe +4, +5)
* Maybe the points you get should consider the ELO rating of the two teams matching, maybe not.
* Maybe the points you get should consider the match length if different match length (15min and 30min) are introduced in the league. So maybe +1,+2 and +3 for 15 minute matches, and +2 +4 and +6 for 30 minute matches
Points it adresses
What I like about the Monthly ladder in the 1vs1 league is that also if you have lost a match, you win points. So to become king of the hill, you have to play as many matches as possible and win as many as possible. Also, as you don't loose points, you won't have teams camping (not matching) their position at the end of a season when they are on top.
For those that don't match frequently, or for those that don't care for points, they still contribute to their teams ladder position and don't have to worry about decreasing the ELO rating of a team when they match.
As the ladder reflects the performance of teams it also encourages to play as much as possible and gives some reward for teams that stand no chance but match anyways (Currently with the ELO ranking they would loose points).
So if you keep loosing 0-28, your team can still think "oh well, we just gained some point" and will have more points than a skilled but inactive team. As playing a lot but still loosing helps to climb the ladder, the frustration is less and will bring them to match more by which at the same time they improve their skill faster.
no penalty for inactivity
Though inactivity needs to be fought, the idea of a penalty factor will likely discourage some players to participate. We shouldn't put penalties on people that match infrequent, rather reward those that play a lot.
Teams that are inactive for a whole season, can just pick up the thread in the next season. All they miss is the chance to be in the hall of fame for that season where they are inactive.
Since the league is seperated in seasons, the end of a season marks a good point for some to change teams for a season or more when they have the desire to match with different people that they cannot unite in a single team.