Highlander Match Point System

Topic created · 98 Posts · 718 Views
  • Can we implement a match point system that accurately reflects the percentage of rounds won? This is already done for stopwatch maps, if the final scores are 1-2, then one team gets 1/3 match points, the other team gets 2/3. If the scores are 3-0, then one team gets full points. Why can’t we do this for KOTH maps also?

    When I was an admin, I was told that polls from a while back determined that we don’t want to give any bonus for simply winning a match, so each round won should count equally. Secondly, there is absolutely no reason why KOTH should be treated differently from payload. If final scores from a KOTH match are 4-3, then the winning team should get 4/7 and the loser 3/7. On a 4-1 score, winner gets 4/5, loser gets 1/5. It’s really quite simple, and its also only correct way of assigning points, given that we already decided to count each round equally.

    Also for the admins, when you make this change, you’ll have to deal with the decimal approximation issue again here (I know you fixed it for this season). Either use fractions (best option), or if you need whole numbers again, you’ll have to assign maximum points to be 210. (The smallest number that is divisible by 5, 6, and 7)

    If you have a problem with using fractions or making the match point system assign very high numbers, then too bad because this is literally the only way to assign points fairly. If you think we should be giving the winning team a bonus, then we need to run the poll for it again because that’s not what we’re trying to do right now.

  • When a match goes to the final round the stake should be higher than 1/7th match points. I think the current system appropriately makes winning that final round a true win.

  • You may think this, but we polled for it and you are in the minority. It is impossible to differentiate between the value of rounds unless you give added benefits to the winning team, which we agreed not to do. Again, we can poll this again if we see the need to do so, but regardless, there is inconsistency between KOTH and stopwatch, and it should not be this way.

  • shut up inquisition

  • Instead of being rude (minty), we could discuss why the thing that won a majority of player votes isn’t being implemented correctly.

  • my team lost lakeside 2-4 and the match points are 2-7
    i do not care about how many points i got, i could not care less genuinely even if i tried. id rather focus on my teams improvement instead of “boo hoo i didnt get enough match points for losing”
    maybe instead of sitting here and complaining about nothing maybe try and focus on getting ur team back to invite again, sound good?

  • This is actually true, I’ve been in a lot of close koth matches where both teams deserve to benefit from match points, and I also don’t understand why match points are divided differently between hl and koth. At least make it the same, otherwise it might seem like match points in a loss are only worth it on pl

  • Actually I think having 210 points to divide up per match would be cool, would lead to a more telling total match score for each team (fe top team has like 800 points, playoff makers have 600ish, low div is like 300, etc). Not really any meaningful reason, I think it would just be cool to see

  • Inquisition try to not rework a system that has been working for years challenge (impossible)

    I remember when you tried to rework the fucking swiss system. Yknow, the swiss system that the entire fucking world uses.

  • I think the match point system is the best it’s ever been and doesn’t need changes anymore. :relaxed:

  • Im just curious on the poll that keeps being mentioned.

  • Just because you don’t care about your match points minty doesn’t mean that other people don’t… and if you want to stop wasting your time here then stop replying. I’m just trying to preserve league integrity, pointing out obvious flaws that have easy fixes.

    As for the poll I referenced, I was directly told that there was such a poll when I was still an admin. Once again, the surest way to know what people want is to poll it again. That we know for sure what people want. I’m not claiming to know the result of such a poll, just that regardless of what those results will be, the current system does not fit any reasonable metric and not consistent within itself.

    Lastly, @Micahlele, what you misremember about my argument (from years ago) is that it had literally nothing to do with the swiss system. To this day, it still baffles me that anyone in that group could ever think that there is a difference in seeding between two arbitrary teams with identical match points (there isn’t).

  • @Inquisition said in Highlander Match Point System:

    To this day, it still baffles me that anyone in that group could ever think that there is a difference in seeding between two arbitrary teams with identical match points (there isn’t).

    Sorry, I’m just trying to make sure I understand what you’re saying here. Are you saying there’s no way to determine which team should be seeded higher between two teams if they both have the same match points?

  • i think once u get enough downvotes on these forums your account should lock and you shouldnt be able to create posts anymore

  • Unless you can provide the poll results itself instead of saying that another admin told you, it is nothing but hearsay.

    On that note, I was not able to find any of the poll results for what you are refrencing (500 error on the article list page) but I am able to refrence the previous forum threads about MP. Most of the people in those threads prefer Win/Loss over Rounds. That in itself makes me question even more where you got your information from or even how old that survey is.



  • @Xenagos That line was in reference to an old argument I had with admins. It was week 2 of the season and something like 5 or 10 teams in main were tied with max match points. My claim (really, my observation) was that the league table was ordering these teams arbitrarily, and that it didn’t actually matter which of the teams with identical records and matchpoints was in which of the top seeds.

    Also @Mothership, the point I am making is that the system is inconsistent with itself. If you want to see which way it goes, then we should run the poll. I have never advocated for any rule change that doesn’t involve a poll, and I never will, because that’s the only good way to make decisions. It’s also worth noting that the people who post on forums don’t makeup the majority of rgl players, so its almost irrelevant what their opinions are when it comes to actual polls. Even if my suggestion loses the poll, its much more important that we actually use a poll to decide.

  • @Inquisition

    the point I am making is that the system is inconsistent with itself.

    If that’s the goal, then this can be done without claiming that an “admin” apparently told you about a poll that never occurred to my knowledge. The only polls in the past have been regarding match points vs. win-loss.

  • @Inquisition I agree that the forums do not represent a majority of players, however these forums whole purpose is to facilitate discussion and debate in a way that a simple poll can not always find a proper solution for. There has also been many polls that have happened because of forum posts. The most recent example is the July 4th break that happened recently.

    Also the system is not inconsistent with itself. Here is a screenshot I had saved from when this came up previously:

    alt text

    The winning team always gets 2 MP, the losing team then gets MP based off the rounds taken, up to 1MP. Payload is easy to do because you can only win one round, while koth has more rounds to be able to take/lose more points off of.

    EDIT: You can also view the new breakdown via https://rgl.gg/?a=1617

  • @Mothership Yep, and now it’s the winner being guaranteed 6 MP and the loser getting up to 3 depending on how many rounds they picked up.

    @Inquisition the point of this is to be a direct compromise between pure MP, in which winning games isn’t rewarded at all, and a team which picks rounds up often but reliably fails to win the final round that matters may still be high up in the rankings, and pure W/L, in which winning rounds isn’t rewarded at all except for tiebreakers.

    In pure MP you guaranteed, with how few matches HL has in its regular season and how small some divs are, exacerbate current issues with strength of schedule differences and fail to accurately measure team strength for playoffs.

  • @exa Thanks, great, that’s the poll I’m referring to. We voted not to prioritize wins so there’s no reason we should be prioritizing wins in the match point system. Sorry for causing any confusion. This poll showed that we didn’t want to have wins be the determining factor, so I’m pointing out that we’re still doing that with the match point system.

    At the very least, we can still run a poll that provides more specific details about how rounds should be distributed. There is no downside to this.

Log in to reply