If you are going to post, please don’t post stuff that you don’t actually mean or is not relevant towards these kinds of threads. I don’t appreciate it nor does anyone else.

This goes to everyone. Thanks.

@dlphn @Constantly

I don’t have an argument against either of the things you have brought up. Thus, I am enabling the downvote system for everyone as of now. there are some requirements and limits to the downvotes to help prevent abuse, which overall I think will solve any other issues I may have.

@starcatfish kk. cus truth be told, you guys are not suppose to have access to that yet. whoops

I am just going to state my opinion, although I do understand wanting to experience maps you haven’t played before.

bad maps are no longer played for good reasons. I would rather us not waste time and resources re-learning lessons we have already learned years ago.

new cascade should be tested because its new and has an active developer willing to work with us. we can find new issues and fix them, and add it into the rotation this season.

None of the other maps will be added back in. because you guys will play them, re-experience the same things as its the same map, and we will repeat this process again in a year.

No, 5cp and HL isnt fun and will never be fun due to the gamemode’s innate issues with the format. 6’s works with 5cp because 6’s was designed around that gamemode. Vanguard was made with HL in mind iirc and we played it a total of 3 times in UGC(?)

ramjam is too big of a map for koth and while yes, we haven’t played it since UGC, the issues that were presented to the map developer were ignored and was not fixed. Also don’t use UGC as an example for anything good.

borneo is a very long map. When your best pick as spy defending last is to sap the teleporter, its a bad map. when your engineer on offence runs full time EE for ez teles, its a bad map. Its the anthesis of vigil with cap times of 10 minutes not being bad.

Millstone.

Anyone remember badwater_pro? I think we are on version 20 of that map.

anyone remember barnblitz_pro???

Again, I understand you guys wanting to experience those maps that you haven’t before, but do them in your in-house pug groups instead.

One of the goals of Engineer.tf is to be able to provide adequate resources for aspiring engineer mains to improve. To assist in that function we have created a page on the website that allows you to view, search for, and download STV demos from official Invite RGL Highlander matches. This is a valuable resource that allows mentees to watch and learn how the best play at the highest level of Highlander. Because these are STV demos, anyone can benefit from this resource, even if you don’t play engineer.

you can view our STV Archive on our website at https://engineer.tf/demos.php

I Don’t see anything wrong with the forums? everything appears to be working correctly.

Reminder that there is a difference from Free Speech and Consequence Free Speech.

Free speech means the government cant do anything about your saying slurs.

That does not mean that there are not political, social, or cultural repercussions to your actions.

We have pushed an update to the Engineer.tf STV archive. You are now able to sort/organize the demos via the types using the arrows at the top of the categories. Additionally, we have started including the link to the Logs.tf page for that match. We have also added pages to the demos archive, so you no longer have infinite scroll. Lastly, we are now also including the 6’s demos into our archive. Since we are geared towards engineers, we have split the archive into two pages. One has only Highlander STVs, while the other will contain both 6s and HL STVs.

@Alto Ask and you shall recieve. via windows paint.

and yes, the TL;DR: Swiss is bad.

the two teams who had the hardest schedule were both in the bottom 3.

@dlphn said in Matchpoints on king of the hill HL ruleset:

seems like nothing would change but it seems weird to me that the third round is worth less points than the first two, i feel like they should have equal point values. maybe .4 per round? idk

The third round is not worth less than the first two, all the rounds won have diminishing returns. You get .6 for the first round, .4 for the second, and then .29 for the third.

This is because we are taking the loser rounds won and dividing by the total rounds played. For koth, the winner will always have 4 rounds won, so you are basically doing a fun line graph of y=3x/(4+x). As you win more rounds, the number you are dividing by also increases.

@calo said in Matchpoints on king of the hill HL ruleset:

@Mothership ill give you a hat if you run stats on this data for playoffs seeding in invite seasons 1-9

Doing that would not necessarily help since the way the league ranks teams might of changed multiple times since season 1.

Current system:

This is the official math on how points are given out. to break this into a formula, we would say this:

(Loser Points)    L=x/(y-1)
(Winner Points)   W=3-L
                  3=L+W

So if we were to plug in the Koth info, we would get this: (Only showing the loser points math as I hope we can all do W=3-L on our own.)

Score |  MP          | Math
 4-0    3-0             0=0/(4-1)         
 4-1    2.66-.33      1/3=1/(4-1)
 4-2    2.33-.66      2/3=2/(4-1)
 4-3    2-1             1=3/(4-1)

As you can see, the winning team’s rounds for koth is always four, so the math for the original formula is simplified to [Loser score]/3 or, Rounds won times 0.33

Lets also test this with Payload.

Score |  MP | Math
 2-0    3-0   0=0/(2-1)         
 2-1    2-1   1=1/(2-1)

So we can simply the Payload formula to (Loser score/1) or even more simply Loser MP = Loser Score.

Using a Different Formula:

Now to to make the koth 4-2 be the same match points as payload 2-1 would require us changing the formula completely. This is ignoring if the community agrees that 4-2 on koth is the same as 2-1 on payload.

IDK what math you are using to dist. in your doodle. But the only way to get a flat distribution like what you are wanting is by dist the final points based off if the losing team got 1/3 of the total rounds in the game. Leading to this formula:

Loser MP = 3(Loser rounds won)/(Total rounds played)

Basically, you want to gain one (1) MP off winning one third (1/3) of the total rounds played.

Score |  MP     | Math
 4-0     3-0        0=3(0/4)
 4-1   2.4-.6     3/5=3(1/5)
 4-2     2-1        1=3(2/6)
 4-3  1.71-1.29   9/7=3(3/7)

 2-0     3-0         0=3(0/2)
 2-1     2-1         1=3(1/3)

This has the fun side-effect of having proportionally decreasing MP gained as you win more rounds as the losing team.

R:    MP:    Change:    Diff:
0     0      +0         +0
1     0.6    +0.6       +0.6
2     1      +0.4       -0.2
3     1.29   +0.29      -0.11

Applying the New Formula to Season 10:

Current league standings are as such:

Rank    Team            Pts
1       Hood           11.34
2       WJQ308          9.33
3       FroggieLand	9
4	3600	        9
5	Yeye	        5.33
6	somebody help   3
7	Amigos    	1
8	Train Station	0

This would change to:

Rank    Team            Pts
1       Hood           11
2       WJQ308          9.4
3       FroggieLand	9
4	3600	        9
5	Yeye	        5.31
6	somebody help   3
7	Amigos    	1.29
8	Train Station	0

Basically nothing for this current season would change.

Applying the New Formula to Season 9:

Lets try this again with last season however just for shits and giggles.

Rank    Team                Pts
1       Don't Press Tab     20.34
2       Man Crush Monday    13.67
3       Froggie Land	    12.68
4	RunItBack            9.34
5	Yatch Club           9.34
6	somebody help        8.66
7	Yeye                 6.32
8	Goose Lagoon	     3.65

The new formula would change to This:

Rank    Team                Pts
1       Don't Press Tab     20
2       Man Crush Monday    13.4
3       Froggie Land	    12
4	RunItBack            9 
5	Yatch Club           9  
6	somebody help        9
7	Yeye                 7
8	Goose Lagoon	     4.6

The change in this case is that RunItBack, Yacht Club, and Somebody Help would all now have the same MP, but all with different records.

In the case of last season, this would not result in any change in the regular season rankings, and thus would not affect playoffs. THIS TIME!

What about a different formula?

The issue resolves around the fact that the current system rewards 1 match point to the winner of the match and then divides the rest of the points based off rounds.

If you make koth 4-2 = 2-1 in MP, then 4-3 would have to give more than 1 MP to the losing team. This means you cannot award extra points to the winning team because there would not be enough points to give away to make 4-2 = 2-1 in MP.

This means that my formula is the best (that I could think of at 2am) alternative that we could use. HOWEVER:

Final Conclusion

One thing everyone should keep in mind is that HL does rankings on MP and not win/loss. This means that it is completely possible for a team to rank higher than another team while having a worse Win/Loss record. And this formula, would increase the amount of points a losing team gains via rounds taken, and thus exponentially increases the chance of this happening.

It honestly comes down to if we think that one payload round is equal to two koth rounds (currently its equal to three). Which I personally do not as it is much easier to take 2 koth rounds than it is to take a full payload/stopwatch round.

Data:

• Link to S9 Rankings & Teams
• Excel Data to get the reworked MP

Guys, please don’t make me have to moderate a covid thread.

@Constantly I don’t know if there is room for something like that. I think just copy pasting the 6’s payment structure is what is best if we want to take HL seriously.

I am just interested in hearing why Challenger was removed.

@WiLLmaTiC said in Highlander Season 9 Survey Results:

70% of players from IM to Invite are interested in having their division become a paid division and playing for a prize pool. Be on the lookout in 2022 for more info regarding this!

This is something I am genuinely excited for.

It is nice to know that my favorite map poll I did Here aligns really well with the league poll results. It also matches the changes from when I ran it last time as well.

You are not trying to discuss the mission statement of RGL, you are trying to convince yourself and others that because Antlers was a Caster/Producer, he should not be held to the same standard as everyone else in this community.

If you want to have a discussion on it’s mission, then perhaps you should actually post what you think is wrong with the mission, or what needs to change instead of:

@Deltamarket said in Thank You Letter to the RGL Admin Team:

The clear intent was satire aimed at the entire point of RGL.**

If you want to have a discussion on something, make actual points with backing evidence instead of baseless comments.

We are dropping support for the Invite 6’s STVs. The secondary page (https://engineer.tf/rgl_demos.php) which contains the 6’s demos will be officially retired two weeks from today (10-16-2021).

@Deltamarket said in Thank You Letter to the RGL Admin Team:

Again is RGL going to be a group that legislates useless rules until the bitter sweet end, or will it reorient itself to benefiting the community? I can’t make that choice, but you can.

Your ignorance to why these rules exist do not excuse your actions. Perhaps you should educate yourself a bit a spend some time thinking about the reasoning behind why these rules exist.

RGL Anti-Cheat Updates from 3/20/2020

Tl;DR: Random POV checks are a Anti-cheat issue and thus this rule directly correlates to helping stop cheating.

@Deltamarket said in Thank You Letter to the RGL Admin Team:

I suppose you again misunderstood the point of the thread. I’m not arguing the rules nor am I arguing he should be unbanned under how things are currently done.

The clear intent was satire aimed at the entire point of RGL. To anyone who read that and thought “I’ll write about why you should be able to record a demo” you just misread the entire thing please try again :).

Its fairly obvious this is just a rgl-hate circlejerk thread. However this is not the TFTV forums, and we actually require discussion on these forums.

@Deltamarket

The rules are very specific and clear. [1008.5] - POV and STV Demos

This includes the penalties for doing so:

You are asking for discretion where there is none to give. Perhaps if you provide an actual valid reason why your buddy should have the ability to not have to follow the rules like everyone else, that would help your cause.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I really don’t see any excuse for not submitting demos on three separate occasions. If P-rec is not working, the built in demo recording works just fine.