LADDER/PYRAMID COMPETITION POLL

[Pigman]

Please read the part of this topic that relates to a proposed additional competition to run alongside the existing tournaments.

viewtopic.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopi ... highlight=

This competition will allow you to have meaningful games on a regular basis with some recognition of your efforts.

Two main alternatives have been proposed and as I have a vested interest/preference for one of them, as I proposed it, I will say no more here, but please read the above thread and make an informed choice as to which style you prefer, LADDER or PYRAMID?


Please note that at this stage we just want to know if you want to play and which style of competition appeals the most. If we get a meaningful number of votes we'll set up another poll to see which mods/vanilla you would prefer to play, as we can go with just one or multiple.

[RSE_Chris]

Good idea Pigman.

I vote for ladder (obviously).

[Pigman]

Hi RSE_Chris

And I've now cast my vote, let's hope it's not just the 2 of us!!

BTW, I'm not really concerned which gets most votes, just that there are enough votes to start a competition.

Regards

Pigman

[FATIGUES]

My personal vote has been for the ladder system being under the asumption that I am in understanding of both systems. With one suggestion if I may. What if we added another seperate competition. Based upon ones skill level they would enter these competitions in either the expert bracket or the novice bracket. This would open an avenue for people who are not as good as the "professionals" to compete as well. It would create the room necissary in the expert tournament. And in my opinion should create more involvment here at the site due to new interest instilled in a group of people who before simply didnt stand a chance in tournament situations. Kind of like a Special Olympics if you get my drift.

Now if I may be so bold as to suggest that if someone should enter one competition they would not be eligable to enter another with the intention of minimizing entries. I should also suggest that people who are at higher skill levels refrain from entering lesser competitions so not as to match Michael Phelps up against Michael J. Fox if you get my drift. In short lets give everyone a chance to compete in some way. So if you feel like you can play at the expert level and there are still openings at that skill level I should hope these places would be taken first before entering a lesser competition. Honor system of course but whichever competition one should decide to enter is they're preference.

I would also like to suggest that both competitions run simultaneously so as to keep things organized. I myself would like to compete though I must concede that I am simply not good enough. This new competition will open the door for many people to become involved here at Armada Fleet Command. And at the same time give the average Joe such as myself a chance to devellop they're skills.

Cheers,
FATIGUES

[beepo]

My only problem with FATIGUES ideas are who is to say who is more experienced than someone else. I have been playing this game since it came out. I still find something new.

[FATIGUES]

Right then if you feel confident enter as expert. Think of the novice tourny like training wheels on a bike. Youll learn new things and mabee teach someone something. Somone new who could use your help. Lets get new people involved here at the site. Would you agree that to many people getting your butt kicked 6 or 7 times would be discouraging. Im resiliant as hell so me gettin kicked arround a bit dosent bother me. But I should think theres a lot of people out there who after gettin mauled a few times without having gone 30 turns is pretty disheartening. Common folks lets be open minded for a moment. Read my posts carfuly and before speaking be objective in your responce. Ive noticed many of my posts are skimmed through and people miss a lot of what Ive said. With all due respect to you folks I dont like repeating myself.

[Pigman]

Hi FATIGUES

To be fair either ladder or pyramid competition recognizes differences in levels of players and pits you against players of similar strength, particularly once it's up and running and settled down after initial games to establish pecking order.

IMO pyramid does it better, as it only allows you to challenge a player on the rank above you.

In the Hall of Fame thread, I discussed the pyramid type arrangement first when discussing my old school chess club, where you could be ranked as pawns, knights/bishops, rooks, monarchs and ultimately "champion".

As a pawn you would be challenging knights/bishops only and these players would only be one level above you in ability, so if you keep losing you stay a pawn, but as soon as you win a challenge you're promoted to Knght/bishop level.

Once at that level you can challenge the rooks and so it goes on.

Very simple really and it stops complete noobs from challenging champs, so it tries to make sure that all games don't have a foregone conclusion.

I just think that noobs or less experienced players would rather be a rank at a level with other similar players and could graphically see that their rank is only a few levels from the top, rather than be in a low position on a ladder and get fed up and leave.

Just my thoughts.

Regards

Pigman

[RSE_Chris]

There is a big problem with having a 2-tier solution, where good players and not so good players are seperated:

We don't have enough people entering tournaments as it is. This would mean there are 2 groups with a small amount of people participating in each.

The idea of the ladder, especially, is to have a ranking structure of every BOTF player. From this you can see exactly where you are in relation to other players. You will also get better at MP by playing games, so when you do get better you can start challenging for top positions. You cannot do this if you're in a lower group, and swapping groups again would not be ideal because we don't have enough MP players.

Furthermore, you only get better by playing people of higher skill than yourself.

We have to draw a line somewhere between idealism and practicality. As it stands we do not have enough people for a 2-tier ladder or pyramid.

[Pigman]

Have to agree with RSE_Chris completely on this. Either ladder or pyramid doesn't discourage noobs and inexperienced, as when they get better they can move up and whichever system is used they can challenge people of similar or just slightly better ability.

I personally prefer pyramid because it puts all lower ability players on same rank, with a relatively quick opportunity to progress to next rank, but no one is bottom of the ladder that way, as you share your rank with a number of players. The higher you rank the fewer players you share rank with, until you get to be captain at the top on your own.

Can't see the point of having 2 tiers to either system, the whole point in many ways is anyone can enter and find their own level and then improve if they put the effort in.

Regards

Pigman

[KrazeeXXL]

I followed the discussion interested and voted for ladder.

It's simple and approved. But I have to admit a little bit boring. Pigmans version sounds a bit more interesting and brings more tension into this whole thing. So it might be maybe more useful on a long term sight for a small community like this one here @afc.

Ladder reminds me on Starcraft and many 100k players, more then 10 years ago. For this big community it was almost a perfect system. But for a small community like this one, we have here, we could make it a little more interesting. Something with ranks sounds good and nice, so maybe some kind of mixture of both versions would be cool.

I like ladder that keeps it simple but I don't like to obligate myself for all time to keep my rank (both versions). So counting points sounds nice but I dunno who should count them Doesn't sound clear and a little bit like work and beside the time you already need for playing...

edit: and you should consider to link it somehow to the existing tournaments of course. (or at the end we have 3 different type of competitions with the one which JBl suggested in his thread)

[RSE_Chris]

edit: and you should consider to link it somehow to the existing tournaments of course. (or at the end we have 3 different type of competitions with the one which JBl suggested in his thread)

The main idea of a ladder is to be completely independent from any tournaments; it is its own league. If someone is trying to work up the ladder, yet loses out in the tournament, their progress on the ladder will suffer.

To keep things more competitive and fair for the not so experienced players, it is best to treat them as two seperate entities.

However, if people decided they wanted this, I think it would be better suited to a point-based pyramid than to a ladder.

[Pigman]

Getting confused

RSE_Chris said

The main idea of a ladder is to be completely independent from any tournaments; it is its own league. If someone is trying to work up the ladder, yet loses out in the tournament, their progress on the ladder will suffer.

Are you proposing ladder should or shouldn't be connected to other tournaments?

My thoughts were that you would only use other tournament results to help give you a starting position.

RSE_Chris also said

To keep things more competitive and fair for the not so experienced players, it is best to treat them as two seperate entities.

However, if people decided they wanted this, I think it would be better suited to a point-based pyramid than to a ladder.

Are you saying a pyramid is better than a ladder if it's also connected to other tournaments?

Either way I still don't think they should be connected apart from using tournament results to effectively seed players on the initial setup only.

Regards

Pigman

[RSE_Chris]

Like you, I don't believe the tournament should be connected, but for obtaining starting positions it's ok.

Pyramid would be easier if the tournament was connected to it, simply because they both use a point system. If it was not tied-in with the tourney, ladder would be easier, as points are not involved. If only used for starting positions though, it doesn't matter which.

However, if JBL plans on keeping the tourney currently starting as an 'on-going 102', then maybe it makes this thread obsolete, because we could simply maintain that instead.

To be honest, I'm losing track of all the current/suggested tournaments/leagues. I'm confused too.

[ruthlessferengi]

it make sense use tourney as a sarting position.
re: novice players tourney only - i novice is a relative term - Fatigues have been putting heat on me in UDM big time so he learns faster than i'd like for a comfy guaranteed win game:) novice yesterday, underdog today, champion tomorrow. Remeber Kingy:)

[RSE_Dissy]

ladder is independant entity (LEAGUE)

tournaments would be like CUPS

totally separate.

ladder scores calculated by ladder-server exactly like chess-scores on chess-servers like yahoo ches (noob=1500)
(ok=1600)

(amazing=1900+)

etc.

you have nice quirks like win streaks and loosing streaks on ladders too! and yes, all players shud play on same things so they can learn vs the best!

(edit: all you'd have to do is signup at the ladder's host website and then it's all gravy...people start playing as often as they want.. if you beat ppl below you you dont gain much so best to challenge above u)