| Author |
Message |
|
|
Time manipulation allows for wrong outcomes in marchups. Currently rules will reward a player who is able to play games they are winning slowly and ones they might be losing faster, such that when time expires in a tournament the game they are losing is at a higher round count than the one they are winning. Current rules will deem this player the winner even when they may barely be holding a lead in one game and nearing complete defeat in the other. The good thing is that there is a simple fix to make sure the rightful person/team advances.
Rules for deciding who advances 1v1 tournament in order:
1. Most points (win=3, draw=1, loss=0)
2. Most number wins completed before time expires.
3. Least number rounds in wins completed before time expires
4. Most bases captured in time expired losses
5. Highest total value units killed
6. Highest number rounds in time expired losses
7. Coin flip
Rules for deciding a game winner in time expired games remains the same.
Rules for deciding who advances team tournaments and tournaments with group play
1. Most points (win=3, draw=1, loss=0)
2. Most number wins completed before time expires
3. Least number rounds in wins completed before time expires
4. Highest total value units killed
5. Highest number rounds in time expired losses
6. Coin flip
Rules for deciding a game winner in time expired fans remains the same.
These new tournament advancement rules should eliminate most of the cases where a player/team advances simply from time manipulation and especially cases where a player/team advances despite not doing as well as their opponent(s). Also these rules should be fairly easy to implement from s programming perspective.
Nothing is a bigger a turn off to new players as getting a time manipulated loss in a tournament despite obviously having played better overall. The above rules do not completely remove incentive to try to time manipulate, but it does nearly eliminate the rewards of doing so.
To fully eliminate time manipulation, in addition to the above rules, programming should be added to 1v1 to not allow an individual to advance one game of a tournament further than 1 round of the mirror game. However, this is likely to be more difficult and take more time to program and implement.
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Xavi.
|
|
|
Xavi,
There is clearly abuse of the ladder system going on. If you look at the leaderboard just outside of the top 100 at the score 2220, you will find an abnormally abundant amount of players at exactly that very score. If you closer you will find they all have non-real records that are like 250-5. If they really had that record they would be much higher than 2220. I suspect they are racking up bot wins to get there, perhaps ranked FFA bot games but I am unsure.
I think it is completely messed up that people can bot to near the top 100 players. I suggest we fix the possible gaming of the ladder system in the following ways:
- Do not allow bot wins to count, or cap the score which you can obtain from them at 1600.
- If possible, remove all points gained/lost from bot wins/losses from all players
- Allow only random ranked games. Do not allow custom ranked games to be created.
Others can add more suggestions to make the ladder a more competitive and representative look of the player populations skill.
Bakes
|
|
|
|
In team tourneys you get to pick race. For group play shouldn't the first tie breaker become the head to head matchup followed by rounds in wins?
|
|
|
![[Search]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_search.gif){kind=icon}
![[Recent Topics]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_recentTopics.gif){kind=icon}
![[Login]](/templates/default/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Login
