The adventure exhaustion reset has nothing to do with game code updates. For updating the game server needs to be turned off while the new code is installed. This is a big thing and it's always separately announced. The daily reset is just a part of the normal operation of the game and has no disruptive effects.
Thanks for the new tiebreaking system! Yes, it will change how the game has to be played, but anything is better than playing as many games as possible in 3 hours. I wouldn't have raised time limit on waterways but there have been some timeouts so it is understandable. Am not against it either. Still, geomancy is a league I like the least because it's so slow and will still be. If it only requires 4 VPs now, it could also be 15+15 minutes per game.
Great changes overall. I am actually against changing the Waterways timer. I enjoy having a map where people are forced to think a little quicker. I have no problem with the timer on any other map either.
Duplicate figures give you an epic chest, not pizza. So now that I'm aware that there are pizza rewards you're reducing the amount? Awesome.
Hey now, you can't really have it both ways - pick one side of the fence or the other but no point in being an overall sourpuss, we already have enough cats running around as it is !
Yes, 70 pizza profit up front does sound like a benefit. However, Pizza is your currency. There for by having the pizza, it will allow you to spend it how you like. For instance on figures or convert to coins to buy what you want. Also in the long run, pizza is much more worth it because u can buy membership. If you calculate the extra loot we get from membership for even just a month, it is much more beneficial because your getting more "hits" per wins vs just one hit of about 4-5 chest. Hope that my view make sense.
Yes, we know that. But Blue Manchu doesn't want a huge influx of pizza easily available because that hurts the chances of people spending money on the game to get pizza.
Love the league changes. Tiebreakers are handles much better. I'm always time sensitive, so I try to get through my games quickly, and the old tiebreaker system got in the way of getting in and completing the league. Prefer how TB are calculated now, though people who disconnect can give lots of TB points, just something to watch for abuse. Giving MP chests for league games is generous. Had a good time with the leagues tonight.
This is a good stopgap solution to fix the problem of collusion/having to play tons of games to stay in first, and while it's certainly a HUGE improvement over the old system, it introduces other problems. It rewards people who get lucky and get easy wins by being matched against people 1000 rank points below them, and changes the mid-game incentives. You're no longer rewarded simply for winning games, now you're punished if you make strategic moves like letting one of your characters die, or giving your opponent the victory squares for a turn so you're better positioned next turn. I went 4-0 in the first league post-patch. One was an incredibly close game against a highly-skilled player, and after a long intense game I barely won 6-5. This is I feel most people would regard as a "good" game - people want to play games that are challenging, and close, otherwise what's the point? Another game was against someone with a ranking of 408, and I easily crushed them 6-0. Why is that worth giving me six times as many tiebreaker points? And if tiebreaker points aren't being used as an incentive to get people to play more games, then what's the point of even having them in the first place? Why not simply give out rewards based on number of wins (ie, 4-0 is first, 3-1 is second, etc)?
I think you make some good points. I see them making the tie breakers on won and lost points just to make ties more of a rarity. It is worth keeping in mind that the win still matters more than the points, it's just now the points matter too - so do you go for broke, or do you concentrate on wins and hope that takes your pod? A system that just rewards W/L (4-0 = 1st, 3-1 = 2nd...) essentially eliminates pods entirely which takes some of the tournament feel out of leagues. On the other hand it does eliminate the problem of having one or more 1700+ player in your pod for constructed leagues.
Agreed. That's my biggest concern with the new tiebreaking system and I can see it being problematic already from the first League I've played. It rewards swingy matches that rely on luck over skill and/or being matched against an opponent that is unfairly worse. What about if tiebreakers were based on the players' opponents performance in the given League? That would be similar to a Swiss format and would compensate for getting difficult match ups.
Define "Swiss" format. Are you describing a sort-of "inverse Victory Point difference" system, where a 6-5 match is worth 6 points and a 6-0 match is worth 1? That would be very different for player psychology. Rewarding you, in fact, for taking risks that sacrifice a point to the enemy. And you couldn't milk it too much by giving away too many points because an unlucky card draw could mean losing outright.
I completely agree with you on this one. Same similar thing happened to me. Here is my suggestion as far as this... Instead of making it (My stars) - (Opponent stars) = Points. Why not make it (My Stars) = My points, (Opponent stars) = Their points. I think this will be a good refection of how well one would play. So in the case of the close matches like 6-5. The winner will get his 6 points and the win in his pod. The other player, although they lost, they still get their 5 points which in return will give them a better chance of winning the tie break in case one occurred just because they played well. Also, lets say I'm in a game, and I'm obviously loosing really bad, however, I know that every point counts. It will give me a higher incentive to keep playing to try and get more stars versus just quitting and moving on to another game. The only thing this will not solve is if more than one player get 4 wins which means both will have 24 points. But hey, if you can 4/0, I think you deserve the first prize winning. (Pizza still split ofc) I think the incentive here is winning more chest at a faster rate with "equal" decks (for the pre-constructed). Also the match up is so random its kind of fun to relax and play without having to think about having to try and get more points or having to keep your rating up like in a rated match. Just pure joy of friendly games, but still with rewards for winning.
Looks like the Leagues are still bugged. Instead of getting another chest I got 80 pizza again. Same with others in the Lobby from what I've seen them say. No, Swiss tiebreaking systems usually look at how many wins the enemy has in the League: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buchholz_system So let's say you're 3 wins and 1 loss and you're tied with another who has 3 wins and 1 loss... it then looks at who you fought. If one person fought people with 4 wins in the League at the end and the other person fought people with only 1 win in the League, then the person who fought the "better" opponents (those with 4 wins) will break the tie. That's the problem they want to solve more than any other. They want people who both get 4 wins to not constantly split the prize.
Again, your right, they still need to figure out how to solve this. However, out of all the league you played so far. What would you say is the percentage of people who tie at 4/0? I have only played about 10 and I can only remember 1 that had more than one people at 4/0. Now I know your a good player Stexe, but even when you 4/0, how often would you say that other people also tie you at 4/0. Or would u say if you 4/0, you most likely win that pod?
A lot. Something like 30% to 40% of the times I went 4/0 I ended up splitting the prize with someone.
Hmm, the ratio is drastically different than my experience, and of course I'm assuming you played like 15+ league perhaps as well. How about a 3 system tie breaker. 2 of which is already implemented, the only one left to implement is what I posted above 1st tie breaker = Wins in your pod 2nd tie breaker = # of points accumulated (What I suggested above) 3rd tie breaker (this one is for the 4/0 ties or any ties with same points) = (# of stars) - (# of opponent stars) (the system they got right now) and after this if there is still no difference then, a tie was meant to be
Yeah, I was thinking about something similar where tiebreakers are more about points accumulated during a loss than the difference except in the circumstances of a 4-0. It probably wouldn't change much, but it might remove some weird edge cases.
