Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

League Ideas

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
10/29/2020 9:47:11 AMGBrankPRO_Dregs before revert after revert
Before After
1 Yes yes yes. League refreshment promotes more play, more innovation and ultimately more fun. Newer up-and-comers can finally feel like they have a stab at the big league player's positions without having to first conquer almost a decade of rating acquisition. It also provides me with an incentive and timeframe to produce new maps for each league, to add to the freshness. 1 Yes yes yes. League refreshment promotes more play, more innovation and ultimately more fun. Newer up-and-comers can finally feel like they have a stab at the big league player's positions without having to first conquer almost a decade of rating acquisition. It also provides me with an incentive and timeframe to produce new maps for each league, to add to the freshness.
2 \n 2 \n
3 I agree with @Aquanim's notion that the latter option would be the better of the two, however, you may know that I'm of the fundamental opinion that the way our ladders work is somewhat flawed to begin with. In my model, we have a 1v1, Teams and FFA ladder. Casual rating can remain as for "all gamemodes". The flaw with what we have now is that both ladders represent multiple skillsets - Matchmaker: 1v1/Teams, Casual: Everything. 3 I agree with @Aquanim's notion that the latter option would be the better of the two, however, you may know that I'm of the fundamental opinion that the way our ladders work is somewhat flawed to begin with. In my model, we have a 1v1, Teams and FFA ladder. Casual rating can remain as for "all gamemodes". The flaw with what we have now is that both ladders represent multiple skillsets - Matchmaker: 1v1/Teams, Casual: Everything.
4 \n 4 \n
5 I've heard the logic behind finding an accurate representation of the player's skill and agree that it's good to have, but it shouldn't need to impose restrictions upon the shape of the ladders. 5 I've heard the logic behind finding an accurate representation of the player's skill and agree that it's good to have, but it shouldn't need to impose restrictions upon the shape of the ladders.
6 \n 6 \n
7 As a side note, the Battle for larger teams button in matchmaker is completely unused now, hamstrung by Sortie button. Personally, I don't want to risk high-stakes 1v1 rating on an unknown team. Others may feel the same. There's already a mental disconnect between large battle, matchmaker and competitive rating combined and so maybe this is evidence to suggest there should be a ladder disconnect if we ever want to see team games happen outside of casual rating. 7 As a side note, the Battle for larger teams button in matchmaker is completely unused now, hamstrung by Sortie button. Personally, I don't want to risk high-stakes 1v1 rating on an unknown team. Others may feel the same. There's already a mental disconnect between large battle, matchmaker and competitive rating combined and so maybe this is evidence to suggest there should be a ladder disconnect if we ever want to see team games happen outside of casual rating.
8 \n
9 Edit: If you go with the glow thing, you'll have to fix the fact that you can't actually get purple in Matchmaker rating. Or at least, I'm not sure you can unless you're #1 or #2 position.