Today I've been thinking about these few things:
Here's a simple flowchart:
Link to full image and Link to editor (Edit it as you like for improvement)
The ideas are:
Thoughts?
- The credibility of ladder elo
- since 1v1 ladder elo are often used for tournament seedings, does it represent/reflect one player's real skill well enough?
- if tournaments use a much more detailed system than the ranked ladder, why can't the ladder adopt it as well?
- Recent discussions about civ/map picking, alt-f4 problems
Here's a simple flowchart:
Link to full image and Link to editor (Edit it as you like for improvement)
The ideas are:
- Split maps into categories rather than fixed maps chosen by votes
- Could still do map rotation votes under each category, but the whole map pool will remain structured, rather than drastic changes every two weeks
- Civ bans (The numbers are debatable, could be adjusted, maybe to just one) forces people out of their comfort zone, brings more variety and makes the elo more credible
- Also if in the end both players go random, it helps reducing the possiblity of huge civ wins
- Alt-F4 MUST gets freeze time punishments (1st time 10mins; 2nd time 30mins, etc) as the system provides more room to work with/more variety and options, it shouldn't be justifiable
- Make it 5 seconds between each map/civ vetos, so that the total amount of time spent on the whole drafting would be less than 1 minute, time shouldn't be a problem
Thoughts?