While it would be difficult to argue that the 2016 ladder system isn't superior to the 2015 system (which was basically a "he who plays the most games wins" affair), I believe there is room for improvement.
Let's open this thread for discussion on how we can improve the ladder system for 2017.
I suppose the ideal system to aim for is an ELO type system , such as is used in the chess world. While certainly a worthy goal, I wonder if such a system can be implemented in time for the 2017 ladder? Any volunteers who have coding expertise and the free time to devote to such an endeavor in order to roll out an automated ELO system by January 1st, 2017?
While we wait on that, why don't we use this thread to suggest easy to implement, practical systems that we can use to make the 2017 ladder more competitive? Yes, I think a more competitive ladder is a good thing.
Here is my submission. I think it is simple, elegant, and rewards winning while encouraging actually playing CM games, rather than winning the minimum number of games to be a participant of the ladder, and then sitting on your laurels for the rest of the year.
Points will be awarded based on (1) the victory level achieved by the winner, and (2) the size of the battle. The loser will receive negative points in like fashion.
Minor Victory - 10 points
Tactical Victory - 15 points
Major Victory - 20 points
Total Victory - 25 points
Tiny Battle - 10 points
Small Battle - 15 points
Medium Battle - 20 points
Large Battle - 25 points
Huge Battle - 30 points
Example: The winner of a Major Victory in a Medium battle would receive +40 ladder points. The loser would receive -40 (negative 40) ladder points.
When I came up with this, I wasn't sure what do to about Draws. How about we give both players +5 points as a "boobie prize" or "participation award" ?
Let's open this thread for discussion on how we can improve the ladder system for 2017.
I suppose the ideal system to aim for is an ELO type system , such as is used in the chess world. While certainly a worthy goal, I wonder if such a system can be implemented in time for the 2017 ladder? Any volunteers who have coding expertise and the free time to devote to such an endeavor in order to roll out an automated ELO system by January 1st, 2017?
While we wait on that, why don't we use this thread to suggest easy to implement, practical systems that we can use to make the 2017 ladder more competitive? Yes, I think a more competitive ladder is a good thing.
Here is my submission. I think it is simple, elegant, and rewards winning while encouraging actually playing CM games, rather than winning the minimum number of games to be a participant of the ladder, and then sitting on your laurels for the rest of the year.
Points will be awarded based on (1) the victory level achieved by the winner, and (2) the size of the battle. The loser will receive negative points in like fashion.
Minor Victory - 10 points
Tactical Victory - 15 points
Major Victory - 20 points
Total Victory - 25 points
Tiny Battle - 10 points
Small Battle - 15 points
Medium Battle - 20 points
Large Battle - 25 points
Huge Battle - 30 points
Example: The winner of a Major Victory in a Medium battle would receive +40 ladder points. The loser would receive -40 (negative 40) ladder points.
When I came up with this, I wasn't sure what do to about Draws. How about we give both players +5 points as a "boobie prize" or "participation award" ?