Rules question

[Britania Grey]

Repeated Defenses: +2 per
For each title defense beyond the first where the challenge would count for Hydra points, the victorious defender will earn an extra +2 per defense, with an ultimate point cap of 20. eg: First defense is 15 points, 2nd is 17 points, 3rd is 19 points, 4th and beyond are 20)

I thought this meant that the total points for two defenses in a week would be 17? I see on the dashboard that Lem has 30 points. So ... huh? Is it 15 points per sport per defense then 17 total for the next etc?

[Rakeesh]

Piggy-backing on this question:

The "defense streak" bonus points are counting the number of repeated defenses specifically during Hydra, yes?

Aka, Matt's next Opal defense (if successful) wouldn't be worth 41 points, but only 15?

[Andrea Anderson]

Not to speak for Sylus but I believe the defense rule is per title.

Example being: Brit wins the Tower of Fire during Hydra. The next week she defends it after waiving grace, then waives grace once more and defends it next week. The defense point streak would start at the second defense.

At least that's how I read the rules.

[Lem DeAngelo]

I read the rules to imply that the streak was per title and only counted towards challenges and defenses that are issued during Hydra and occur during Hydra. Lem got 15 for his Old Market defense and 15 for his Tower of Air defense. Those were his 2nd defenses in each sport, but his first defenses that counted for Hydra, so he got the base 15 points for each defense. His next defense of Old Market would be 17 points, and his next next defense of the Tower of Air would be 17 points.

At least that's how I read it.

[Jake]

Not to speak for Sylus but I believe the defense rule is per title.

Example being: Brit wins the Tower of Fire during Hydra. The next week she defends it after waiving grace, then waives grace once more and defends it next week. The defense point streak would start at the second defense.

At least that's how I read the rules.

To elaborate that example...this is how I understand it.

Brit holds and defends Barony. Earns 15 points.

Brit holds and defends Tower. Earns 15 points.

Brit defends Tower again. Earns 17 points.

Brit defends Tower again. Earns 19 points.

Brit defends Barony again, Earns 17 points.

The defense bonus is earned for repeated defenses of the same title.

[Kalamere]

My understanding is the same as what Jake posted and how I scored Lem's two defenses (each as 15 points). Easily changed if Sylus says otherwise, but I figured since this rule came about after the waiving of grace period discussions that it made more sense this way. Defending the Tower of Air has no impact on the grace period associated with the Old Market barony.

[Kalamere]

Piggy-backing on this question:

The "defense streak" bonus points are counting the number of repeated defenses specifically during Hydra, yes?

Aka, Matt's next Opal defense (if successful) wouldn't be worth 41 points, but only 15?

I believe that only Hydra defenses count, but again that's up to Sylus.

I did want to point out that there is a 20 point cap on the total value of the defense. So, even if those old defenses counted, Matt would still only gain 20 points there.

[Britania Grey]

Sorry if this is me being dense, but is it 15 + 17 + 19 + 20 + 20 + 20? (Per title) or after two defenses 17 total, 3 19 total, 4+ 20 total?

me

[Jake]

15 + 17 + 19 + 20 + 20 + 20

This.

Let's say Jake wins vs. Joku for Barony of New Haven.

That's 15 points. 15 points for winning a challenge.

Then Jake wins FireStar from Rak. Different title, another 15 points. 30 total now.

Jake defends New Haven. Wins another 15 points. 45 total now.

Jake defends New Haven again. Wins 17 points. (15 points for challenge + 2 for repeated defense.) 62 points total now.

Jake loses FireStar. No points.

Jake defends New Haven again. Wins 19 points. (15 + 2 + 2) for a total of 81 points.

Jake defends New Haven again. Wins 20 points. (Which is cap. All further defenses earn 20.) For a total of 101 points.

----------------------------

It it worked the other way...

First defense worth 15. Second defense only worth a +2 (while the challenger could win 15). Then the title-holder would have no incentive to waive grace. His/her benefit for waiving grace for a mere 2 points (vs. the 15 as the challenger's potential) would be bad strategy.

---------------------------

So...a challenge is worth 15 points to either challenger, or defender.

The defender, if successful in repeated defenses, can earn a *small* bonus, as an incentive to allow more challenges, vice just using grace period to run out the clock.

[Hydra Corporation]

The defense bonus is earned for repeated defenses of the same title.

This is correct. The +2 applies to defenses of the same title, not every individual title defense.

[With Wicked Intent]

Okay, so here's a question along the same vein.

Jacen has a title defense later this week which will count for Hydra, but doesn't earn him any points should he win, since I have a character on the same team as the challenger.

Does that mean if Jacen should successfully defend his title, and then defends his title again against someone else which does earn him points, that he gets the +2 points for two consecutive challenges during Hydra?

[Kalamere]

(( This response is OOC .. the thread is not marked as such, but we're now talking alts.. so probably it should be. ))

This is the problem I have with the alt rule.

Players are limited to 2 characters entered in the tournament and cannot have both characters on the same team. Duels against teammates will not count for Hydra. This extends to include alternate characters. Excluding alternate characters is not to intentionally limit dueling options, but to avoid any potential risk of impropriety among players.

The problem for me is that I really have no way to enforce the alt's part of this within the backend code because I generally have no idea who plays who, nor do i really even want to know. I doubt this is only me. I mean, does your challenger know? I would have suspected this challenge is mostly in hopes of getting hydra points. Since those aren't allowed for this match, then they may want to rescind and find a different target.

Overall, Sylus, I'd suggested nix'ing that part of the rules. If you find that people are colluding then take specific action, but even back in TDL we allowed duelists who were on both teams to fight (though, obviously not against themselves) and people generally gave it their best shot regardless because its as much about making all your characters look good as it is about moving 1 team forward. And, of course, this is near impossible to enforce until we start making everyone share their alts.

~Kal

[With Wicked Intent]

Actually, the challenger does know about this. The character of mine that's on her team is fairly well-known to be another character of mine. I had Jacen waive his grace period in order to gain Hydra points, and that would be why the other player challenged, but she also wants to get a title for her character, which is why when I informed her that there would be no Hydra points for the challenge, she didn't rescind to go after someone else.

Honestly, I don't get this part of the rules either, and I'm not a fan of it. In my experience, the duelists here are some pretty honorable sorts, and speaking for myself, my alt is doing much better in the Hydra standings than Jacen is, which is completely unintentional. I understand about not dueling against teammates or dueling against your own alt on another team - not getting points for dueling members of the other team simply because you have an alt on it is kinda bothersome, because not only are they in it for points, but they want the potential wins for the normal dueling standings as well.

This is just my opinion, of course, and I understand Sylus' reasoning for the rule, even if I don't agree with it. I have more faith in the other players, I guess.

[G]

The reason why, is because while you and others believe each other to be doing it honorably, you can damn sure bet that there are those out there who are likely saying behind the scenes that something might be shady.

The reason to not award points for it would be to remove all arguing against the potential of foul play. If there's nothing to be gained from it, the naysayers can't point fingers and say "That duel is Suspicious!"

Better to err on the side of caution.

[Rakeesh]

(())

To be honest, I like the no alt rule. TDL/IFL were designed with specific matchups by the two captains facing each other in a given week; because of that, collusion would be very difficult.

In this format, collusion is very easy, and really pretty next-to-impossible to prove. I would hope that nobody here would ever do something like that (because what's the point?), of course, but taking alts out of the picture not only helps make it a little bit safer - it also should help to keep down the OOC paranoia/finger-pointing that inevitably comes with situations that can very easily look suspicious.

When we're clocking in hundreds and hundreds of duels a week, safeguards are going to be a good thing - and there are plenty of other people to duel.