*DAMN R6 Forum

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this or not, but the way the GHR FFA is scored is kind of lame. It doesn't actually rate how good you are, it rates how many games you play.

I have not played that many, but i have played with most of the people who are in the top of the FFA scoreboard, and i got 1st place a couple times. But players who play it more often, are ahead of me, even if the get last place every time. That doesn't sound like an actual scale of the best players, sounds like a competition of who can play the most games.

To try to help rather then to just complain, i've thought of one idea to make it more of a skill competition. Maybe we can have finals in the GHR FFA also. Have the scoring system like it is currently until the finals come, then make the top 20 or 25 players go into the finals, and then have the points that they made during the normal season effect how many points you get for beating them in the finals. Like if finals were going on with the current scoreboard, GhostSniper would give you the most points out of the rest if you beat him in an FFA.

Does this sound good to anyone else?  

btw, that was me writing that..

Yes it does...I have thought the same thing.

There was a better point system on the former BTs ladder.
But since it disappeared I can't remember how it works anymore.

[/color][/b]

there was an FFA ladder on the BTL? i don't think so...

if u mean the old c| FFA ladder... we're using pretty much the same system i think... just that you didn't notice this scoring problem, back then, because it wasn't nearly as active as the *DAMN FFA ladder is. :)

I apologize, it was a 1v1 lader, but it can easily be converted to ffa, with the right maths system.

FYI...
c|'s FFA ladder was waaaaaaaaaay more active then both seasons of DBL's FFA...

The old BTL had a diffrent way of scoring everything all together. We didn't use points we used placements... basically u move halfway up the ladder of who you beat. If you stayed inactive for a certain amount of time you then drop a rank, continue to stay inactive and you get thrown off the ladder. This was to keep the ranks always moving and people not sitting on a rank.

I dont think it can be applied to the FFA matches... Once MGL is up we will be using c|'s old FFA ladder system. Rules will be a bit diffrent. Scoring will be basically the same.

[/color][/b]

lol, no... c| FFA ladders were definitely not more active. go check yourself... the site is still up. http://www.thecollectiveclan.com/ladder/FFAladder.php (http://www.thecollectiveclan.com/ladder/FFAladder.php)

also... i think we're using pretty much the c| FFA system already... and the scoring is pretty unfair, in not only my opinion. i completely agree with the first 2 parts of Bonfire's post.

Eight and Civic, you little pissants. We are tired of it, you get me? Fucking tired of this little back and forth about who has the right to run a mac gaming league. Prime directive: shut the heck up and play the damn game.

[/color][/b]

umm, cool down, Aramarth :( :)

when did i say something about who has the right to run a mac gaming league? ??? where do you see us going back and forth about it? ???

we're simply discussing about the FFA scoring system and old (FFA) ladders... :)

Well the *DBL FFA ladder uses the same scoring system as the c| ladder!

We only changed the maximum players to 8 instead of 10. That's the only difference.

From the c| FFA ladder rules:

It's pretty much like the UT Elo point system, if you know it.

The problem is that the guys who play that much, pointing to the 4 BTs at the top, don't only play much they also have lost very less games and have an excellent win rate, if you look at their stats. For comparison Koon(80cbs) and Red Tigah(39) cbs don't have a big advantage because of their activness. Other players better win rates and only 18 - 20 games are above or close to them. So at all the system isn't unfair, the guys are just topnotch and btw play much but I'll think about a more simple system for next season, hopefully as simple as the sheep system which really raised the activeness and fun to cb. =)

And eight: it's not true our FFA ladder is much more active. Take a look here: c| FFA Ladder (http://www.thecollectiveclan.com/ladder/FFAladder.php). We have far more players and FFA cbs done(in the first 3 weeks of the season compared to the full 6 week played c ladder stats) and that's not only because of you BTs players ;)

Bye,

Mauti

How the hell do you think Koon got up there? By winning? Hell no, he hasn't won a single cb yet. Nothing against Koon, he's a great player and I consider him a good buddy, but this is a blatant example of play over skill. I know this is a fun ladder, but perhaps when a ladder that is "fun" is taking over the team ladder for the most part, that ladder should be taken more seriously. Just a suggestion.

Haha..... [GF] Wickedson  , that was awesome.

Right on, I agree with that first post.  One solution may be to LIMIT the number of FFA's each participant is allowed to play in per week.  When I played tennis back in high school we only changed ranks after every "round" or match.  If you failed to show then you were moved down below the last competitor for that week.  Point values were then assigned and totaled up to give a ranking that was ongoing through the season.

 Not posting as a BL admin



Ahhh.. but koon has wone a few maps per FFA match.. thats gives him points to get up there. The points are based on what place you come in each game of the FFA. JUst b/c koon has not won a FFA does not mean he has not wn a game during a FFA match.. I have seen koon get some good points off of some of the FFA's. Yes the peeps who have played alot have alot of points. Maybe you should play more to get more points as well. Its taken alot of fun but hard/frustrating games to get this many points (me eight and fuzzy have been just trying to beat out GS). It does not take long (if you are good and get alot of first places in the 4 games of the FFA matches) to get up to the same amount of points that some of us have. Hell Eight passed me in points and had played alot fewer games them I had.

Crypt you are wrong:

he also achieved few second and 18 3rd places which isn't bad in bigger FFA cbs. Further he played 80 cbs but there the top players have played between 20 - 35cbs less.

Bye,

Mauti

But at my current rate, after 80 cb's I'd probably have twice as many points as Koon. I didn't acutally look at the ladder so don't cut me down on that.

Everyone knows it's play over skill. But it's a fun ladder and should be treated this way, I won't post to this again.

Not posting as a bl admin


So what you are saying crypt is that the guys at the top have no skill???? You know what FU. the more first places games you get the more points you get.. thats how the guys at the top got o where they are.. alot of first place games (not FFA's but games).

All I can say Crypt is..... Come get some......

I didn't say that. You guys HAVE skill and are at the top but you do play a lot though. Happy?

stop the fucking bickering.

this was started to see if anyone agreed with me, and if they did how many of them do. I can see now that people seem to like the way it is, so unless more people speak up about possibly changing some part of how it is scored, then ill drop this.

there are two important things that arent mentioned in the discussion yet:

1. It's somehow strange to put the words "fun" and "ladder" in the same context.
That's why I agree to any suggestion in regards to a more balanced pointing system.

2. Host advantage! Especially Mauti should check that the overwhelming amount of 1st places are made by the hosts of that games.
Thx the host for the games but damn bs you need only 1 bullet where I need a series of bullets to hit a target. The tactical part of the game is zero in ffa's and that's why the host advantage multiplies so much here.

For part 2 of that.. it's kinda inevitable. We can't really change any of that unless we play on dedicated servers and such. And that would be a pain in the ass so.

correct.

you should also note that skill often equals frequent playing, but not the other way around. It is almost inevitable that people who play much get more points than the hypothetical super-skilled people that only plays a few (1-10) cb's. Another problem here is that you can't measure skill very good; you have to have many "samples" ( = CB's) that show skill ( = high ranks). Every measurement gets more accurate with more data.

Elandrion

I host a lot of FFA's.  I only do so because there is a lack of people hosting FFA's.  I love when somebody else is hosting because I don't have to keep up with everything and I don't have to post the thing.  And guess what?  I normally place well even when somebody else is hosting.  Last season I played in someone else's host about 20 times and had 1st place finishes in 15 of those games (unfortunately nobody knew how to post, so I ended up doing that for almost everybody last season).  So although the host may have some advantage, there is also a great amount of skill involved.  Also, I don't see how it's my advantage when somebody is in my server and they are lagging so bad that I can't even shoot them.  I have seen that more and more recently.[/size]

To add to what GS said...

I don't think the host advantage is that big of advantage to count it into the scoring and points. I've lagged on GS' host several times and still won the game.

So...

WTF is all about ?

I played very hard in this ladder, had tons of fun, played practically in the tougthest rooms (BT's) , and now a guy who didnt play as hard a did, as many times i did is crying about the scoring ?

WTF and F...U....

go play in BTs room all the way and u will find is hard to win there, i went close more than 15 times to win a game.

So SHUT UP AND BE A MAN, that means go play as..oL.