About some rule - Page: 2

Thread started by Viilee on Thursday, 2:36pm August 13th with 32 replies. Views: 4,258

jUZE
Posts: 1,169
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


Atm the rules are like this because with this system there cant be any misunderstandings. You play till you win or till all players leave, i assume every player, even the ones with very basic english will understand this.

A more complex rule could be:
+ If more than half of the opposing team leaves, you can leave too and claim the remaining rounds.
- The problem with that is that and ive seen this a lot on CB, people try to take advantage of this, the winning team would have some issues and the moment they are with less than half of their lineup, the other team would quit and claim "well they were playing 2v5 we claim a win". What they usually forget to mention was that they were losing hard and for some reason 3 people disconnected and werent back in time.

Thats why we keep it simple, play till you win or till they all leave, if you win the first map very hard, im sure you can play 6 min extra to get the remaining rounds.

Quote from head on the 13th of August 2015


Or you could state that a team needs atleast 4 players to play and if they drop below this amount of players and are not 4 at the end of next pause time (meaning side change or map change) then you can claim a win. Would reduce the waiting imo

This is the cod4 rule but I get why you want to keep it clear and simple for the players but this rule is a time waste tbh
Posted 3:32pm Aug 13th 15
head
Posts: 1,166
Level: PLATINUM
Reputation:
I forgot to add that we could tweak these rules untill we feel that people cant abuse it but i dont think that this is a major issue and to avoid confusion it might be best to leave the rule as it is?
I rather not solve disputes about "we played vs 2 guys after pause, we claim win". If we see that this becomes a problem, but i doubt it will be, we can modify the rules. My memory might be failing me cuz of the sun but i dont remember anybody complaining about this untill now.

Shared lineup rule is on our list but if we add it we must be sure that teams/admins can check it and with the current system its very hard / time consuming. Increasing the number of joinable teams is also on hold because of this. We dont want 7 teams with the same lineup in the top 20 for example.
Posted 3:36pm Aug 13th 15
Viilee
Posts: 433
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


Who is writing these rules? People who are objective and look from same point on both sides. The rules aren't made by a poll because community is pliable, one guy writes +1, next 50 of them will put +1 just for the lolz..

Point of rules is that they work good in most of cases, on top of my head, imagine case where 4/5 players are from same street/flat, leading 19-1, and they lose electricity for 10 minutes? Should they lose that match just because someone in another match can't play several rounds 5v2?

Quote from miss on the 13th of August 2015


Well like i wrote ON PURPOSE! LEAVE ON PURPOSE! You can see whos getting 999 and who just ragequit. Even from demo u can see it.
Btw, i think u are good admin etc, and u know how to handle ur job. But something annoys me. I have played this game soon 10years. And i have seen many things in this scene. So i know the guys. And then u are the "main" admin of this game, and u havent seen as much i have seen. And u dont even play this game.
So maybe sometimes u should listen players who have "grown" in this scene from the day 1 to this day.
I dont mean to sound cocky. I just want to improve these rules, that it would be easier to play this game. I just want these rules be made by common sense, u know?

Maybe that "last player quits" rule looks good on paper to u, but its totally brainless in practically.
Posted 3:48pm Aug 13th 15
Viilee
Posts: 433
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


I forgot to add that we could tweak these rules untill we feel that people cant abuse it but i dont think that this is a major issue and to avoid confusion it might be best to leave the rule as it is?
I rather not solve disputes about "we played vs 2 guys after pause, we claim win". If we see that this becomes a problem, but i doubt it will be, we can modify the rules. My memory might be failing me cuz of the sun but i dont remember anybody complaining about this untill now.

Shared lineup rule is on our list but if we add it we must be sure that teams/admins can check it and with the current system its very hard / time consuming. Increasing the number of joinable teams is also on hold because of this. We dont want 7 teams with the same lineup in the top 20 for example.

Quote from head on the 13th of August 2015


I understand ur point aswell. But i have played this game daily over 2weeks now. And every day it happens in some match. That opponent wont leave, cause he wants some "fragmovie material" and keep playing and hiding in his spawn. Its annoying when u lead 11-1 and 3 of 5 players left of opponent team and u have to take 10 round meanvhile they camping in some corner. And when we would have another match alrdy, but we cant use our server cause of those 2 mongols.
Posted 3:56pm Aug 13th 15
Viilee
Posts: 433
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:
Btw, jikser doesent play anymore so we can change this rule!
Posted 3:59pm Aug 13th 15
head
Posts: 1,166
Level: PLATINUM
Reputation:
I assume that you want the rule change so that those few players who cant handle a loss and want waste your time cant do that anymore. I say a few because when i played the game active I didnt really played against these people, I didnt hear people complain about it either.

I see people write "leaving is not the same as 999" and ye its not the same but do you really think that it matters? If somebody wants to waste ur time, he will close the game in task so he gets that 999 that he needs.

(we saw the same thing with the timeout rule that was linked to technical issues)

The rule you are suggesting with 50% might look good in your case but we need to make sure that we do whats best for the entire ladder, not just for a few matches. Ive seen what some people do to get a win.
Posted 3:59pm Aug 13th 15
hitzoR
Posts: 386
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:
@head What about changing autoaccept time to one hour or something like that instead of full day? It doesn't happen so much atm when there is almost no activity, but few months ago some tards refused to accept matches right away, so those stood open for next day. The problem is about this "maximum 6 open matches" rule. We got 2 timestamped disputes from april or may. So we can have only 4 matches open. And when we were playing like 5 or 6 mixes per day, it happened so much that majority of enemies didn't enter score right after match (cause of frustration from match or just being retarded) and we simply cannot play (we ofc didn't want to create another mixteam and play against some lowranked team just because of this).
Posted 4:53pm Aug 13th 15
myss
Posts: 1,426
Level: PLATINUM
Reputation:
We're closer to extending autoaccept time to 48-72h like on Clanbase, then shorting it to 1h. This way people won't need to dispute match when requesting demo. But this also needs developer help since it's hardcoded into ladder settings.
Posted 4:55pm Aug 13th 15
graejx
Posts: 861
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:
on cb it was 5 days it's way better here to wait only 1day
Posted 5:05pm Aug 13th 15
Viilee
Posts: 433
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


@head What about changing autoaccept time to one hour or something like that instead of full day? It doesn't happen so much atm when there is almost no activity, but few months ago some tards refused to accept matches right away, so those stood open for next day. The problem is about this "maximum 6 open matches" rule. We got 2 timestamped disputes from april or may. So we can have only 4 matches open. And when we were playing like 5 or 6 mixes per day, it happened so much that majority of enemies didn't enter score right after match (cause of frustration from match or just being retarded) and we simply cannot play (we ofc didn't want to create another mixteam and play against some lowranked team just because of this).

Quote from hitzoR on the 13th of August 2015


Or maybe easier way: Remove that cap of 6 matches =D Its so ridicilous.

edit: whats the point of that?
Posted 5:28pm Aug 13th 15
hitzoR
Posts: 386
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


Or maybe easier way: Remove that cap of 6 matches =D Its so ridicilous.

Quote from Viilee on the 13th of August 2015
Ye, that could be the way too.

@miss Imho shortening it to one (or two or four maximally) hours would reflect in ladder being more up to date and also reducing enemy manipulating with ranks (for example if some team lose, they'll wait for enemy to drop points in next matches, so they can lose less points). If they request demo, they can simply dispute match and wait for demo. If I'm right, admins are solving disputes after some time (few days, definitelly more than 48 hours).
Posted 5:43pm Aug 13th 15
head
Posts: 1,166
Level: PLATINUM
Reputation:
Its not good if people have to make an instant dispute for anything that cant solved within a few hours.

On CB people had time to ask demos, work out issues on their own before making a dispute and getting an admin involved. That is why we would like to change the auto accept to 3 days. Its not as long as CB but still gives teams the option to fix their issues on their own. We would also change the max open matches, since longer auto accept means more open matches.

As an admin you dont want to spend ur time solving disputes that could be avoided if teams have more time, its not good for the teams if they have to make a dispute and the admins are spending their time on solving useless disputes.

If a team loses and and they wait for the opponent to drop points, they would lose more points. You lose more points vs lower ranked teams, you lose less points vs higher ranked teams.

There are a lot of things we would like to change but all those changes take time and at the moment we are spending most of our time on disputes / democrey / CGAC. We would rather spend our time hosting more cups, etc
Posted 6:08pm Aug 13th 15
hitzoR
Posts: 386
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:


Its not good if people have to make an instant dispute for anything that cant solved within a few hours.

On CB people had time to ask demos, work out issues on their own before making a dispute and getting an admin involved. That is why we would like to change the auto accept to 3 days. Its not as long as CB but still gives teams the option to fix their issues on their own. We would also change the max open matches, since longer auto accept means more open matches.

As an admin you dont want to spend ur time solving disputes that could be avoided if teams have more time, its not good for the teams if they have to make a dispute and the admins are spending their time on solving useless disputes.

Quote from head on the 13th of August 2015

Ye, but u're solving disputes after few days. And in these few days, teams can solve it on their own (demo request > upload > checking demo and if its clear, they accept match and dispute is gone - admin isn't required).

It works like that atm, so why it can't work with shortened autoaccept duration? There will be always some useless disputes, just because some ppl are stupid and imho nothing will change about this with longer autoaccept duration.

Anyway if u want to make autoaccept duration bigger, u have to set it to atleast 7 days: some time to request demo (this isn't stated in rules, but i assume that it's 48h, because players must have demo for 48h after match) + 48h for demo upload + 72h to make timestamps. And 7 days is just too big period of time.


If a team loses and and they wait for the opponent to drop points, they would lose more points. You lose more points vs lower ranked teams, you lose less points vs higher ranked teams.

Quote from head on the 13th of August 2015

Ofc, u're right, I just made a mistake about this, I meant it the other way ofc (they lose - waiting for enemy to win next game).
Posted 7:24pm Aug 13th 15
NetworkENZIE
Posts: 307
Level: BRONZE
Reputation:
I would like to add one note for 'ragequit' thread:

If players close the game in task, they will get 999. From this time the players from his team (or if they ALL do this, then the enemy team) should call timeout. If I am right, if the dropped connection/refusing to join back on server takes longer than 5 minutes, once more pause should be taken (on case they get 999). That's OK and I have no problem with that. If they get 999, I will wait as long time as they will need to get sub or fix the problem.

But if players SIMPLY DISCONNECT, it should end up by winning for enemy team. So If I am right, Viilee get same idea as me - if players RAGE QUIT (which can be seen as 'player disconnected') then the enemy team should win, once the server quits more then 50% players

(at least after 5 minutes of timeout)

5v5/4v4 - 3 or more quit
3v3 - 2 or more quit

It's the point of this rule.

---------------------------

In case of autoaccept time - in my view it should be also longer - at least 4 days, but only in case of:

Demo request must be done in 24 hours after the match and demo must be uploaded latest 48 hours after the request.

Then players got at least 1 day for watching demo (always they get almsot 2 days, because usually players request the demo immediately after the match has finished. So they get aprox. 1 days & 23 hours to watch the demo until the autoaccept (if you know what I mean)

---------------------------

In case of elo / winning-losing points - it will be nice to do it like this:

Once the challenge is done, the points are counted. If teams will play 100 matches and they rank will increase/decrease, still it SHOULDN'T CHANGE the number of points for THIS match, no mater when it will be accepted.

[Example: Team A will create a challenge against team B - if team A wins, they will win 50 points and team B lose 50 points (or if team B wins, they will win 20 points and team A lose 20 points) ... this is undersstandable ... and now - if the match will not be accepted and team A wins next 5 matches and their points will increase for 120 points, they will STILL WIN those 50 points (or lose 20 points)]

I am not sure if this is working here right now, but I am not sure.
I know that teams were waiting @clanbase fot closing a few matches which should increase the enemy points to accept the lost against them to lose less points.
Is the same working here, or not?

Posted 12:46pm Aug 14th 15
head
Posts: 1,166
Level: PLATINUM
Reputation:
The auto accept should be increased just because just like on CB we want to give time to the teams to fix their own problems, this will result in less disputes or atleast less disputes with no information other than (dispute started because scores dont match).

In case of demo, in case of score, etc etc all those things are possible but the system doesnt know what the issue is with a match. People not accepting the score straight away is an issue, the system doesnt know if a team violated a rule but refuses to accept a loss or if they won and the other team is faking the score.

The waiting to accept and all that stuff is a problem we had on CB and its very hard to fix because the system cant know everything and it needs an admin to "solve" the matches according to the rules. What we are trying to change is the way you become rank 1, atm its all based on points and we would like to bring back the CB system.

top 5 teams become rank 1 if they beat the rank 1 team, if the rank 1 loses from a non top 5 team they lose their spot... im sure you all know how it works.

We have an entire list of things we would like to change, ideas we have but all those things require some coding.

The default win if 50% leaves might sound good now but as a person who solved so many conflicts about this issue, i dont think its a good idea. If they want to fuck with you and waste your time, im sure they will find a way, no rule can change that. The current system is there to ensure that teams dont make these bullshit disputes.
Posted 1:31pm Aug 14th 15