seasonal "point system sucks" thread

#1907
Topic created · 80 Posts · 535 Views
  • @cayorne said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    HOW THE FUCK IS THIS EVEN A THING, AND BETTER YET HOW DID THE ADMINS ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN???

    Wah wah how could this happen! I fucking hate the rgl admins and anyone involved with rgl! grrr I’m angry!

    forum staff have no control over the rules
    div admins have no control over the rules

    The 2 amateur teams have a .66 MP difference.

    How about instead of being a literal box of hair when it comes to debating a rule or trying to get something changed, how about you actually think about the situation instead of banging your head on the keyboard shouting “MP SUCK LOL GIVE US W/L” like a chimp. When it comes to arguing for a change you people can be completely fucking inept.

    This and the CSN vs b99 situation are the 2 most recent and relevant examples I can recall of a team with a worse W/L but more MP getting into playoffs over a team with a better W/L but less MP.

    Both CSN and Cat Lovers had 2 ff wins. CSN’s rgl page does not list 2 ff wins, but I believe their steel match was a FF. I could not find logs for this match when searching using logs.tf/dev features. CSN and b99 also had a .66 MP difference

    How about this, instead of changing from MP to W/L, you make multiple FFs have a linear decay
    First FF: 3 Points
    Second FF: 2 Points
    Third FF if that ever happens: 1 Point
    With Multiple FFs having decay in points, both b99 and It Is What It Is would have made playoffs over csn and cat lovers respectively.

    @lYnn said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    Add this to the post season survey and then don’t withhold the results 😳

    Every single season it was polled MP won as far as I can remember. It wasn’t polled in s9, idk about s8, here’s the results from s7

    Would you like teams to be ranked using Win/Loss or Match Points. We currently use Match Points.

    Results
    139 (36%) - Win/Loss
    211 (54%) - Match Points
    40 (10%) - No opinion

    @Makkawaffel said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    @Mothership
    So if someone is going to be mad, why not enforce what objectively makes more sense than changing policy every season or 2 to address people who whine?

    RGL’s entire ruleset is based on being as objective as possible wherever it is applicable. It doesnt even matter because when RGL is objective they just get slammed for not being subjective (such as the thank you letter to rgl post where antlers gets a long ban for missing his like 4th demo request and people want him to be unbanned because “he’s a community caster and a good member!”) People don’t want objectivity, they want whatever favors them in the moment.

    It’s also rare for RGL to quickly readjust rule changes after people complain. I don’t know where you get the idea that rgl changes policy every season. RGL will change things when they make mistakes, sure. Willmatic fucking up the schedule, trying to hide his fuckup by adding a week between reg season and then playoffs, and then removing it immediately after realizing he cant do that out of fucking nowhere. RGL removing the bans off of MAL players when it came to be known that the slurs said were from pregame and not from the actual scrim, despite them appearing in the scrim logs. These incidents have nothing to do with rule changes.

    Wrapping back to FFs having a decay, if you really think this won’t solve the issue of MP vs W/L, then find an instance where FFs have a decay wouldn’t matter in the case of a team with a better W/L but worse MP losing playoffs to a team with worse W/L but better MP.

    Technically, yes, if every team ffs against 1 team, then they’d get cucked with 6 MP and probably wouldn’t make playoffs. To avoid this, a logarithmic decay might be better. I don’t know and I don’t want to do the math for it, but it is totally something RGL could look into.

  • @Micahlele said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    People don’t want objectivity, they want whatever favors them in the moment.

    Honestly this a major point that needs to be assessed when these types of threads come into existence. No one really ever bring it up as its not objectively relevant to the direct discussion, however it is something that is not forgotten.

  • @Micahlele said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    This and the CSN vs b99 situation are the 2 most recent and relevant examples I can recall of a team with a worse W/L but more MP getting into playoffs over a team with a better W/L but less MP.

    While making playoffs or not is part of the issue, this also impacts playoff seeding of teams. It’s significantly more frequent that teams with worse W/L records end up being seeded higher in playoffs than teams with better W/L records, often having lost to said teams earlier in the season.

  • @Xenagos said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    @Micahlele said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    This and the CSN vs b99 situation are the 2 most recent and relevant examples I can recall of a team with a worse W/L but more MP getting into playoffs over a team with a better W/L but less MP.

    While making playoffs or not is part of the issue, this also impacts playoff seeding of teams. It’s significantly more frequent that teams with worse W/L records end up being seeded higher in playoffs than teams with better W/L records, often having lost to said teams earlier in the season.

    ok but if ur still in playoffs you just win against the team that got higher seeded than you because you still have the option. And if you lose well then sucks to suck. If the seeding is like 7 vs 8 in a swiss bracket then who cares ur losing to the 1st and 2nd seed 90% of the time anyway and it would not make that big of a difference.

    However, the team that doesn’t make playoffs doesn’t get the chance to play more and continue their game. It ends and there is nothing they can do about it.

  • @Micahlele >unironically strawmanning me on the forums
    .>comedy chevrons

    the line of reasoning that because someone is harshly criticizing how rgl does something means that they patently hate rgl and everything about it is stupid. i think rgl has issues, yes, however on the whole it is a generally well run league. we have actual prizepools, responsive admin teams who actually give a singular shit unlike back in UGC, excellent anti-sandbagging policies, and the div admins generally do a great job officiating the league. even the anticheat team, although very slow, is very good.

    to ignore all of the context around the point and just say “well there was a .66 difference LOLE!!!” and trying to “own” people on the forums by throwing around ad homs that you didn’t come up with, doesn’t help anything.

    this is something that by all measures, literally makes no sense whatsoever. this team got shitstomped almost every week. as a matter of fact if you remove the two maps affected by forfeits, their records become 1-4, and 4-1.

    match points isn’t an unusable system, nobody is saying that, what we’re saying is that a swiss style bracket paired with match points, can give results that don’t make sense and can seem unfair.

    i don’t know of any other league that has this type of seeding that totally ignores W/L, and to someone who has played sports their whole life, it seems odd that it works this way.

  • VlNTjnP.png

  • @Alto BBL posted a thread about this today i think

  • i think swiss divs is cool cuz it sounds cooler than round robin

  • @cayorne said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    to ignore all of the context around the point and just say “well there was a .66 difference LOLE!!!” and trying to “own” people on the forums by throwing around ad homs that you didn’t come up with, doesn’t help anything.

    I bring up the .66 difference because that means having multiple FFs have a decay for points so the team with the worse W/L will have fewer points. So the problem is solved. I don’t just bring it up to say “lol it’s close who cares”.

    I see no problem with calling you completely fucking useless while also providing a solution to the problem in the same post.

    this is something that by all measures, literally makes no sense whatsoever. this team got shitstomped almost every week. as a matter of fact if you remove the two maps affected by forfeits, their records become 1-4, and 4-1.

    Woah! So basically all of their points came from forfeits and this means the way forfeits are calculated in relation to the MP system should be reworked to make it fairer for all the other teams.

    Almost like multiple FFs having a decay in the value of MP provided is a possible solution to the problem.

  • @shotaway based terryposter

  • @Mothership

    People don’t want objectivity, they want whatever favors them in the moment.
    

    I just want to comment on this because I think it is a statement I really don’t agree with, especially because I believe that the example given (antlers) is a perfect example of what I think is RGL upholding a clearly outlined rules standard and being generally applauded - negative press WAS initial circlejerk as it often is, then backpedaled into actual analysis and evaluation (which seems to lean RGL), then discussion turned to if the underlying system is fair - this is (IMO) the perfect cycle of improvement:
    *Community opinion on if admin decision aligned with public rules.
    *Community discussion on if rules are appropriate or should be revisited.

    Here’s a link to the tftv thread: https://www.teamfortress.tv/60393/thank-you-letter-to-rgl/?page=4

    I especially like this post:

    Look, I like the we-hate-RGL-threads as much as the next guy, but this one makes little sense.
    
    We are all accountable for our actions - whether IRL or online. RGL has made it explicitly clear that they will, and have, banned people for failure-to-submit demo infractions. Additionally, RGL has made it explicitly clear that they ask for demos from roughly every match that is played within RGL. If you guys want to argue about the use (or non-use) of these demos from an AC perspective, you can, but it is not a new thing that RGL has implemented. They have been requesting demos and enforcing the suspensions surrounding not being able to provide them for several months now. It is pretty likely that RGL circles back to players who failed to provide demos in the past, at least based on the frequency with which players who already have had warnings about demos get their demos requested.
    
    Antlers knew about this rule and RGLs willingness to enforce it, and had every opportunity to be accountable and ensure the same mistakes he made before do not happen again.
    
    I have sympathy for any player who gets banned from the game they love, but I still dont understand why people are upset. RGL has been requesting demos for months, and has never (at least to my knowledge) made exceptions under any circumstances. RGL is not at fault for following their own rules. Be accountable. Be responsible.
    
    

    I’m not saying it isn’t an important topic or consideration, but I do think it’s a dangerous line of thought to emphasize - as justifying not listening to community opinions will only lead to detachment and more closed door or individual decisions for a community.

  • @Micahlele

    Wah wah how could this happen! I fucking hate the rgl admins and anyone involved with rgl! grrr I’m angry!

    how about you actually think about the situation instead of banging your head on the keyboard shouting “MP SUCK LOL GIVE US W/L” like a chimp. When it comes to arguing for a change you people can be completely fucking inept.

    I see no problem with calling you completely fucking useless

    Even if @cayorne was being a prick, it’s not a good justification for escalation.

    Simply put, I think you make a great post with a good idea and direction for a discussion, but you frame it in a way that makes it really hard to root for you: Even if cayorne is one of your most vocal critics - I’d hope RGL can meet dissatisfied elements of their community with cooperation and understanding rather than what really feels like pointless bullying.

    I don’t want to take a moral high ground, but especially with your position I think you need to carefully consider the way you bear yourself, “with great power comes great responsibility” and whatnot, as a head admin you represent a lot more than yourself - and what you say and how you say it will affect other people’s willingness to work and talk with you (and by association RGL).

    Just want to emphasize that a confrontational attitude will only isolate yourself and RGL from the community, calling a critic “completely fucking useless” and doubling down on it doesn’t seem productive to quality discussion (Not saying that you don’t have to address this, just that you could have definitely framed it better).

  • @cayorne said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    @shotaway based terryposter

    shoutout to flare talking about terry davis and glow in the dark CIA [REDACTED] on stream

  • @FlipFTW said in seasonal "point system sucks" thread:

    I don’t want to take a moral high ground, but especially with your position I think you need to carefully consider the way you bear yourself, “with great power comes great responsibility” and whatnot, as a head admin you represent a lot more than yourself - and what you say and how you say it will affect other people’s willingness to work and talk with you (and by association RGL).

    I am not a head admin anymore nor do I plan on returning to any public staff position inside of rgl anytime while I am enrolled in uni.

    I am not associated with RGL and RGL is not associated with me.

  • Ok - I’ve jumped in and derailed the thread: now here is my attempt to re-right as well as contribute a bit of the discussion.

    My understanding/Summary:


    The core of the issue relates to @tua’s question:
    Q: How do we have the most competitive playoffs possible?

    An element of this is the identification of which teams are “best” suited to participate in playoffs. @Mothership states the current system is a “compromise of both” referring to wins and rounds. This system (MP) should be emphasized as a COMPROMISE - this conclusion is also the essential result of the Swiss vs RR discussion (Thread and subsequent discussion) - Swiss isn’t ideal, but chopping divisions for RR can be worse (Or just too difficult).

    @Cayorne in the OP states that he believes “W-L should be everything”.
    In a latter post (Can we please get post #'s on these forums?) cayorne states that the current system is confusing to new players and the lack of ease in understanding the system can cause players to feel “wronged” or “punished for…winning matches and not rounds”.

    We deal with two examples in this thread:

    1. A (theoretical?) example in OP between team A and B - this dilemma is well summarized by mothership:

    "Team A had 2 rolls and 5 close games. Team B had 5 close games and was completely rolled in 2. Which team is better?"

    1. A current season example in AM - where a team with two forfeit wins results in them taking a playoff spot over a team with a better record (It seems unclear yo me if both teams got forfeit wins and the match page is missing information, but the main point stands).

    I think a good quote to summarize the general issue with both:

    match points isn’t an unusable system, nobody is saying that, what we’re saying is that a swiss style bracket paired with match points can give results that don’t make sense and can seem unfair.

    Michlele identifies the issue with 2) as FFW and suggests point decay as a fix for the MP system.

    My Thoughts


    On W-L vs MP:
    I think W-L makes for a much simpler system and one that is unarguably more intuitive, but I think this paired with the swiss format doesn’t really solve an issue of “unfair” playoff placements. While Example 1 attempts to indicate an unfair placement as a result of MP, an equivalent example surely exists should W-L be the only consideration - in fact I think BBL’s thread essentially highlights a belief that SWISS is the issue, not MP vs W-L.

    What interesting to me is that I think the base PURPOSE of MP was to try to correct some of the inaccuracies of swiss. I’m not sure of the history or implementation, but I’d imagine the purpose of MP was to emphasize the value of “Stealing rounds off of top teams” - trying to work toward that better evaluation of teams to create more competitive playoffs.

    On FFW
    The essential problem with Example 2 that both mothership and Micahlele agree with is the FFW giving full match points. Micahlele offers a potential solution with multiple FFW decay, but I don’t think this addresses the root of the problem - a team that wins via FFW even once has an inherent advantage (Via full MP), in short his solution focuses on dealing with multiple FFW, but doesn’t any other aspect of the issue.

    My instinct is to resolve forfeits by putting a resulting greater weight on the provable accomplishments of the team - the equivalent thought would be say two midterms and an final for a class accounting for 50% of a grade with 15%, 15%, and 20% weighting turning into one midterm and a final weighted at 20% and 30% respectively.

    Unfortunately, I can’t instinctively see an intuitive way to fandangle this - so instead for practicality I’d suggest the approach of attempting to trying to ensure that a FFW doesn’t result in that team having a greater advantage over other “winners”. A quick and dirty way to do this might be to take the “average” points obtained by all teams that “won” their matches and give that average to the forfeit winner. It probably doesn’t really make sense that the amount of points won by a forfeit is tied to literally every other match - but I think it is the closer to a fair reward than the minimal 2 where the other team might not even exist anymore, or maximum 3 while other teams have to struggle for fractions of a point.

    Note: I think it’s hilarious that this could mean even more fractional points, but I do think that if you’re going to use MP, emphasis should be placed on balancing those arbitrary points so that they are as accurate as possible when it comes to representation of a team.

  • @FlipFTW bro shoutout to flip on god. The dude is legit the like math video from an indian guy with like 30k views that summarizes the entire chapter in 10 minutes.

  • @Micahlele
    Apologies, shows how out of date or out of touch I am with HL news.

    Regardless of my incompetence, I think that discussion here on the forums isn’t without merit.
    IMO the purpose of these forums (besides circle-jerking) is to discuss and refine proposals, with my misunderstanding out of the way, we’re on the same side of wanting improvement when it comes to RGL and the way some things are run - so lets try to cooperate to a better solution. I (perhaps naively) believe that people are more likely to listen to you if you demonstrate you’re willing to listen to them.

    @cayorne I think you have people’s agreement that the current system has problems, but if we want change we need to give specific actionable feedback and justify those changes. I have basically no stake in this, but I’m not really convinced W-L is that much better:

    A team can have a better W-L if they had an “easier schedule” from swiss format (Taking a early loss to have subsequent easier matches) - this is “unfair” to teams that may have consistently difficult matches - resulting in a much greater struggle for the same effective “win”.

    I have to admit I lean with mothership on this general topic - switching to a W-L system seems like a poor solution when you’re dealing with a short season - the best analogy I can think of is using a low quality mesh over a more refined one - it seems to me like having all-or-nothing is more INTUITIVE but actually would result in more UNBALANCED entries into playoffs. This observation is mainly instinctual, but I think my point stands that I’m not really convinced of the merits of W-L beyond this simplicity.

    I think the comparison you propose (NBA/Sports) works well of a W-L system because they have so many games in comparison (33-48 for 81 matches in NBA vs 7 matches in RGL). When you have such an incredibly small sample size (with HL not seeming to be willing to have more matches or a longer season), a system like MP on paper makes sense if only to help counter some of the insane deviation from a small sample. Not saying that’s what it does efficiently or at all, but I can understand some of the intention.

  • @FlipFTW Strong agree with Flip, excellent write-up

    The situation of a team making playoffs due to getting two FFWs has happened before (https://rgl.gg/Public/Team.aspx?t=5987&r=24). Because of the small sample size of 7 matches a season, we’re kinda screwed no matter what we do, playoffs will never be perfect every season for every div.

    I do like the idea of point decay for getting two FFWs in a season, but it should probably be noted that in bodybuilding’s case, they still would’ve gotten into playoffs with 1 less MP. It was a very close season where very few wins were 3-0 so getting one clean, free win would be a big deal, let alone two.

    I’d almost lean towards the second FFW being a 1.6-0, like how FFWs are counted until there is no “replay” guaranteed.

    Regardless, I think all we can do is band-aid this until HL players agree to play a double digit number of matches every season. Even if all we do is reduce the MP of a subsequent FFW to 2 instead of 3, it’s a step in the right direction and would prevent the Cat Lovers Situation this season.

  • oh and one more thing:

    We might want to enact some kind of policy of holding people accountable for killing teams/forfeiting matches, because it is a significant part of this issue. People can kill their teams multiple seasons in a row with no real repercussions, when it ends up being a wasted slot that could’ve been given to a team that wouldn’t have died.

    I’ll be honest, I haven’t thought much about how such a policy would look like, but surely that needs to be addressed. In the same way we in the past have only let Invite players main in Advanced/Challenger if it’s clear that they had no opportunities in Invite, why don’t we do anything of the sort for people trying to keep their teams together? A dead team fucks the ENTIRE division (unfair FFWs for some but not others), not just the players on that team.

    For example, I saw in esea’s csgo rulebook that dead teams lose their spot in their div and get moved down to open; you can’t just make a new “Main” team, any team you make will be placed in Open. Obviously we wouldn’t do anything like that, but it’s food for thought.

    Maybe a warning system like we do for demos where if you play on two dead teams in a row then you get banned for a week, then for three it’s like 4 weeks? Keeping a team alive and retaining the slot imo should be the responsibility of the entire team and not just the leader’s. Or if a team dies and another is selected to be moved up to replace them, RGL makes them promise to not die or they’ll all get banned for a short period at the start of next season. RGL needs to take some kind of stance against killing teams, right now it acts like that’s perfectly fine.

Log in to reply