Season Two 2v2: Thread Closed

[Pwnbroker]

I had suggested, in the 2v2 thread, that establishing some "expected game times" would be a good way to draw folks in to some established windows for ladder games. If players had an idea of when activity was most likely they would have the option of prioritize their game time.

I rarely have 4 hours to wait and then play so I end up hopping on another game but I do have the luxury of working at home, and for myself, so I could adjust my schedule accordingly to increase my chances of getting a ladder match together.

[Forrest Krunk]

Team D? seems teams got excessive players at the end of season one, perhaps another team would keep it more balanced, many players seem to join after the action has begun, so broaden the spectrum of available options with more teams! Only a suggestion...discuss...

[Gulidar]

Errr, i'm +3 GMT. You would be surprised, but Moscow time.

[Mr Krinkle]

GMT for me, available to play most weeknights from 6-12 and weekends (hangover permitting)

[Mrmot]

I had suggested, in the 2v2 thread, that establishing some "expected game times" would be a good way to draw folks in to some established windows for ladder games. If players had an idea of when activity was most likely they would have the option of prioritize their game time.

I rarely have 4 hours to wait and then play so I end up hopping on another game but I do have the luxury of working at home, and for myself, so I could adjust my schedule accordingly to increase my chances of getting a ladder match together.

This is good idea.
Maybe we should check times of *.dcrec files (server creates them just when all players quit, correct?) at server so we can have some idea what could be "expected game times".

Maybe this stuff can be usefull to arrange a convenient time for ladder games.

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html

I'm available from 19:00 - 00:00 UTC (GMT)

[iRadiated]

No its not a joke and I personally wouldn't be offended.
However
Team B is light on good players especially when the other teams won't play when Mor is around.

[Gulidar]

However
Team B is light on good players especially when the other teams won't play when Mor is around.

I cant say we are too light but i'm sick of those double-faced A people who play mostly in mike + ace pair and wont play when mor - our best player - around. Also, i dont know really well but i think Mojo, our 2nd place best player, stopped playing because of this. And Hyperion never ever showed up to play. Quite hard to win ladder in such terms, thanks to double-faced people.

[Ace Rimmer]

Not to re-start anything here but I believe the difference isn't how good (MOR) is, rather how long (MOR) usually makes a game. The game gets even longer when (MOR) and Mojo are playing together. At least that is the perception of the rest of the field.

Either way, there's nothing that can be done now as the season is almost over. These and other issues will be addressed before next season starts.

[Mrmot]

Not to re-start anything here but I believe the difference isn't how good (MOR) is, rather how long (MOR) usually makes a game. The game gets even longer when (MOR) and Mojo are playing together. At least that is the perception of the rest of the field.

Either way, there's nothing that can be done now as the season is almost over. These and other issues will be addressed before next season starts.

But there is something can be done.
No more captain bonus, captain points....
Just points for victory/draw/loose.

[I am Legion]

Not to re-start anything here but I believe the difference isn't how good (MOR) is, rather how long (MOR) usually makes a game. The game gets even longer when (MOR) and Mojo are playing together. At least that is the perception of the rest of the field.

Either way, there's nothing that can be done now as the season is almost over. These and other issues will be addressed before next season starts.

But there is something can be done.
No more captain bonus, captain points....
Just points for victory/draw/loose.

Dont forget a time limit on ladder games unless otherwise agreed to by all the players involved in a given game. If we can do this there wont be any excuses for players not playing other players

[Ace Rimmer]

There is no possible way to handle time limits on games without causing more problems.

[Gulidar]

Indeed. We must try to find a way to soften bor problems. And also we must find a way to avoid situations when only a few(2, for example) best players from team(ace + mike, for example) constantly play while all other people are obviously worse players. Maybe "no more then n games per week per one man" rule, or we should somehow try to make games happen only with players of more or less equal skills...
You know, maybe introducing something like personal score and allowing to play people with same scores +-n will do the trick. Its quite usual in games, you know - Battle Value in battletech, points in many board games(warhammer, for example... well, points and BV are about units value, not skill, but still this is an example), points(if i remember correctly, all players start from 1000 and there is some formula to calculate points changes, in short - the better opponent you beat, more points you gain, but all opponents must be in +-(idontrememberhowmuch) range) in gamespy. Maybe it is time to create something like this here, in ladder.

[Why?]

Everyone has varying schedules, that change from day to day. We're not gonna be able log everyone's availability. Besides, scheduling the games hasn't worked out very well. We've gotten a lot more pick-up games going than anything.

Assuming we're all mostly normal members of society... most everyone sleeps from 1am-ish to 9am-ish... And most people work 9-5. So, people from the same continents are the ones you're gonna find have the most compatible schedules.

In my experience, I've played/seen people from my own continent the most; with Aus/NZ/China behind that.(b/c they're almost 12 hours difference.) Most of the Euros are in bed when the North Americans are playing at night. Don't see you guys around nearly as much... During the day, and early afternoon, is the only time I see a lot of euros on.

So I think the ladder would benefit by splitting these 3 groups up pretty much evenly. (While also taking into account how active the players are.)

Edward (-9 GMT)
I am Legion (-8 GMT)
Pwnbroker (-8 GMT)
BATTLETRON (-7 GMT)
Forrest Krunk (-7 GMT)
sfericz (-5 or -6 GMT)
Ace Rimmer (-5 GMT)
V1C1OUS (-5 GMT)
Why? (-5 GMT)


Mr Krinkle (GMT)
tllotpkamvpe (GMT)
iRadiated (GMT)
Mogwai (GMT)
Mojo (+1 GMT)
Mrmot (+1 GMT)
"47" (+1 GMT)
(MOR) (+1 GMT)
Eral (+1 GMT)
Forever Young (+1 GMT)
Zorotama (+1 GMT)
Senator (+1 GMT)
Blackbeard
rus|Mike (+3 GMT)
Gulidar (+3 GMT)

wu.j China (+5 GMT)
Shai Hulud (+10 GMT)
!STONER! (+10 GMT)
NZ Army (+11 GMT)
renholder
Stock Jockey

[Ace Rimmer]

Edit: responding to Gulidar:

But the point isn't to limit the players, which the above does. The point is to get games played.

Besides, if you only ever play games with players in your range, you will never ever get any better. One other point that will trash that logic; playing in the same "range" will create a loop effect seen in regular 1v1 ladders. That is, the same people will always be playing the same people. That does not add value to the game.

[Gulidar]

But the point isn't to limit the players, which the above does. The point is to get games played.

The point is to make games more challenging.

Besides, if you only ever play games with players in your range, you will never ever get any better.

Not really. Player win => player gets more points => player plays with better players => player gets better.

And of course this scoring mode will be used only in 2vs2 ladder, so

playing in the same "range" will create a loop effect seen in regular 1v1 ladders. That is, the same people will always be playing the same people

is wrong.