Ideas for the next the PvP season

I just use it from habit. Plus, it helps make it easier to see among a large amount of text since it helps make it "pop" out.

Also, I wouldn't say idea one is better -- the two ideas are really going for different things. One is more casual and one is more competitive. It really depends what Jon wants from the season going forward.

 

Slacker Category:
A Gary, Melvin, or Karen figure to the players who play the most games (win or lose) against Gary, Melvin, or Amy.
3 categories: 1 winner, 1 figure for each AI.
Maybe also a cardotron figure for the higher elo player who gets the most wins against Cardotron, but that wouldn't be Slacker.

 

lol. Meh hope that is a joke. It would just encourage people to play at weird hours when no one is online. And tons of them since win or lose...

Also, I think giving figures out should be something just for participating. Not some special reward to players that makes it super exclusive. That way everyone can get in on the fun -- although Jon would need to create some type of automation for checking.

 

Not to mention tons of tanking; I've gotten Cardotron at 1100 in the past. Checking the current active games, I see Mom is now at 993 (all the other AIs are goofing off).

 

I assume you'd have to have at least a positive standing for it to count. :-P

 

So even more tanking is needed so when you regain positive standing your ELO is still below 1000.

 

Do we have tons of slackers? Dunno. How many would be in the hunt for a Slacker Trophy? Hard to say, but it isn't something normally associated with slackers. The Slacker categories might well be won accidentally by unsuspecting non-forum-readers who'd have no clue why the figure showed up. I see a beautiful symmetry in that. THAT is exactly how a Slacker Trophy should be won!
In any case, why should all the goodies go to the type A aggressives? Tanking wouldn't necessarily be an issue, nor would timing. I can't look at the numbers until the server comes back up, but I suspect we have players in the proper elo range right now, and that is the key factor.
Side note: I've been playing around on the test server trying to find a build that would legitimately (i.e. while trying to win) lose to Gary about half the time. Yesterday I accidentally brought in a party of naked elves against Melvin and won, but it was touch and go for a bit while the fireballs were popping. Maybe a naked dwarf priest or two against Gary would give a realistic 50%.

 

Doesn't matter if we have slackers or not. If you give prizes for a certain thing people will do it, even if they don't normally. I'm also not sure why you'd call it a "Slacker" ... it is based on number of games against AI, that means it rewards non-slackers. It is simply those who play at off hours or are at the extremely low or high end of the spectrum. Additionally, why do you have to win 50% and lose 50%? After you get 2 VP, you could just purposely lose as to not drop your Standing. There's too many ways to game the system and no clear goal or structure for it to work.

It seems like you just want to create some weird category that you'd have a chance at wining?

 

Seriously? Pump the brakes. No need to go all smear campaign just because you don't like an idea. We all know Sir Veza only dabbles in MP, there's no way he's trying to set himself up for a win on any suggestion that requires the most MP games of any type! Though a little obscure, it was just a (very) creative idea to tie the AI's to the figures as prizes. And while this particular idea may or may not float (I kind of like it, though I do see the potential abuse problems), no need to come down so hard that no one else wants to offer their own creative ideas. That is what this thread is for.

 

No smear campaign at all... I'm just voicing my opinion. Seesh.

 

Me??? LOL! No Way! It would be way too much work to tank from 1400 down to Garyland. I simply couldn't do it on a game or two every week or two. I wouldn't expect anyone playing in the Cardotron range to drop that far.
Realistically, I think the most likely winners would be new players. Either new to the game, or SP-only players lured over by the figures. I could understand some of them doing a win-lose dance to maintain standing and still stay in elo range, and I really don't have a problem with it. To keep it up for an entire (though hopefully shorter) season would require a ridiculous amount of dedication. And if multiple players try it they'll be matched mostly against each other instead of an AI. I, for one, would find that much more amusing to watch than the standard categories.
The thing I'd want prohibited (if this category goes) is the use of additional accounts. Either be a noob or tank big-time for all to see. No cheating your way to the bottom.

 

Time zones are an issue at the very top, where the population is low, and a problem if the same format for rating was repeated. Specifically, one part of the day generally featured a lot more 1700/1600 players than the other, leaving it harder to reach the 1800+ ratings if you can only play when 1400s opponents are about.
I remember looking at the table a few times, seeing active players at 1700+ who I felt I had a disproportionately good win rate against, and wishing they were online when I was!

This issue only affects a tiny minority of the field, but as it's at the top, I'd suggest it's a strike against running the same format as before.

 

There are a lot more 1700+ and 1600+ players now than 3 months ago. And should be even more when the next season starts.

 

I stand in line of those which say shorter periods of time! Also, please do not count win rate/dont make it matter THAT much , i would have no chance if ch33se basically did not give me the win the last day. And i still had around 1200(!) more plays than him! (If i did the math right). Maybe implement the leaderboards in game, and make it deliver prizes automaticly? Because, I think season was almost as stressful on Flax as it was on the participants! It would also be easier to keep track of if it was a game feature instead of forum feature

 

? Rules should be changed so that you could win?
Taking win rate into account was very important because it encouraged playing better not only fast and many games. If ch33se was able to get more points than you then he deserved to win.

I always looked at the formula as games played * (win rate)² * log(standing) and I wouldn't mind if the win rate would be even in higher power than 2 if it only accounted games during that week of season.

 

How was it important and not unfair? It was called MOST WINS. There was a category called HIGHEST rating too. And one of them was easier to maintain due to some factors that have been mentioned in this thread... If i would have been 1600+ when the season started i could/would have gone for it too, instead of blitzing a half bad elf deck for 3000 matches. Im not the only one that think that was unfair, I spoke to MANY, in fact A LOT OF people mentioned they would have played more and gone for most wins if they started earlier and the win factor wasnt a deal, and few also said there were loads of "people that barely made an effort compared to others" in top 20 of the most wins. Maybe they said that to impress?

Sorry for being defensive and coming on so strong, but i feel i have a bigger say in this than most people, since i did play more/was more social/probably talked to people more about this than anyone else in game.

 

Win rate or some metric needs to be considered so those who just play forever with mindless builds don't automatically win.

 

I think a category called Most Wins should go to whoever gets the most wins.
If it uses other or additional criteria it should be called something else.

 

Well dont make it matter that much then. Point of season was to make people play more? Or? I dont think people could keep up with mindless builds. You actually had to win to get in most wins category, and you probably would get tired very, very soon if you "only spammed to win".

 

Oh, I definitely think it could be better labeled, but that is the easiest way to explain it succinctly.

We really have to ask ourselves: what is the purpose of having seasons? Is it to get more people to play or to challenge people and create competition? If it is just about getting more people to play then it needs to be less direct and more about just playing. Highest Elo reached and maybe "most wins in a certain amount of time" might be best? I'm unsure on how to do the "most wins" while keeping it neutral and not directly competitive.