Discussion in 'Feedback and Suggestions' started by Harwin, Jun 26, 2014.
Ah, a solid point!
Havn't read all the (long) posts in this thread but that's a great argument.
I idea I like best is having the tiebreaker points equal the number of VPs the loser earned in each of your four games. This would reward close games (whether you win or lose) and punish people who win from inactive timeouts (the exact opposite of the current system). Collusion is still possible, but it becomes much riskier because you have to let your opponent almost win.
Unless it's Stexe vs StexeGod or sth similar
I dislike this. Nothing would prevent someone from attacking his own guys (with ctrl) on the last turn to grab some extra TB so this wouldn't change anything. At least with the current system people change the way they play when they need X TB with the win and can't give VPs away (letting a guy being KOed or an enemy on the victory square for one turn) for an easier win.
Again true... such a difficult task to find a better system.
They just need to remake or remove the whole tiebreaker system completely. It is a bit silly and rewards those who get lucky by having easier opponents over those who are skilled.
Please be constructive or refrain from posting.
If you don't have anything more to say about Harwin's suggestion but "they should remove TBs altogether", maybe you might as well start another topic, explaining why you think that might be a good idea w/o derailing this thread.
Whoa, rein it back a little. I often come down on the opposite side of Stexe when it comes to opinions, but he's still welcome to voice his. The general topic of this thread is tie breaker modification and Stexe was commenting in that vein. It's not like he ran off onto a topic on card balancing or something. Unless it's egregious may I suggest we let the thread starter (or the mods) determine if something is "off topic."
Quote: "It's more fun to get lucky than to be good." - me
Yep. I think this is the whole point of pods and random match-ups. It's more like a lottery, or a turkey shoot with shotguns. For those who want a more serious test of skill there are ranked games and the occasional tournament.
Must try this!
Haven't got any suggestions myself for the tiebreakers but there are definitly 10 more important things to do than to change the leagus' tiebreaker system. It's not that bad atm.
Sorry for gravedigging, but I'd like to see some reward upgrade for "valiant" losers vs. just-to-sign-up-to-get-3-chest players.
I find results like below quite frustating:
Mind you, I have nothing against those players that just sign-up to get 3 chest for 50gp. I do that too, when I don't have time to play or I don't like the league. This time I signed-up and and went to do some actual work, only to come back later to see our pod leader had only one win with 30 minutes to go. I managed to get three games, but lost quite horribly all of those (still came close with 2/3 stars in one game).
I think the current tie break system is quite ok, so I'm not sure that tie break points need reworking.
Anyways, what I'd like to see, is rewarding the effort / time it takes to play. Award extra gold chest (ie. 4th place) to players that at least try to play and win, but still lose all the matches. Maybe award the extra gold chest or something for players that have lost all their four games, but got at least 3 x 1/3 x (max league stars) in their four games. For Oozeball that would mean at least 3 stars in four games, 5 stars in Monster Hunt, and 6 stars in other leagues (that I know of).
I believe you don't score stars by killing yourself.
Also, though unfair if you really tried, it perhaps balances leagues out a little since they're offering very (too?) good prizes anyway
How about for each match you score 6 + the difference.
So if you get beaten 6-0, you get 0 points for that match. If you get beaten 6-3, you score 3 points for that match. And if you win 6-0 you get 12 points.
That way you never lose points for playing more and losing matches can still improve your score.
Similar system was used initially and it made every league almost unplayable (although that was also because the nr of games wasn't limited to 4 which made it even more exploitable).
Anyway what happened was that players said: "Give me 5 stars and I will surrender". Both players usually benefited from it.
Anyway that last suggestion is clearly worse than our current system since it would sometimes allow such exploits.
I totally forgot about that, you're right. Maybe the current system is the best then. It is very hard to think of a way to give both players points that can't be exploited easily.
Yeah, I have thought and planned and plotted with a tiebreak point system extensively, but I haven't found a "perfect system" yet.
I don't like the current system for the reasons listed above (no rewards for playing unless you win), but removing tie break points wouldn't help much. I can say that the current league system could always be improved though.
I enjoy league games more when I get matched with people in the upper ranks. When I face someone below 1000, it's usually a slaughter and it isn't fun for either of us. I mean, when you have less than 500 items and you enter a constructed league with the best deck you can make, you have to give them props for trying so hard and playing so well, but sometimes people concede early because there is no real reward for them playing.
I thought about this when I first learned how tie-breaker points were awarded. It simply doesn't make sense to reward people for winning by as many points as possible without encouraging people to lose by as few points as possible. Glad to see it's already a suggestion.
You should be encouraged to lose by as few points as possible.
Your opp might be in the same pod as you. I rarely know my pod by heart so for me it's (almost) always a possibility.
Just to clarify, this is the exact same system we have now, but the loser of each match gets the number of victory points they scored as tie-break points. For anyone unfamiliar with the system we have now, it's this: http://www.cardhunter.com/leagues/#ties
Reasons for doing this:
It gives players an incentive to earn as many victory points as they can in a match, even if they're losing.
It causes players that earn at least one victory point in any match to place higher than those that don't play any games at all.
It rewards losing players for playing a close game, whereas the current system treats a game lost by one victory point the same as an instant resignation.
I really hope we get to finally see this in the expansion. It's a minor change, but would do a lot to ease some frustrations associated with leagues.
Separate names with a comma.