Hydra 2013 Post-Season Discussion OPEN

The Second Best Dueling Event of the Year!
Locked
User avatar
Jake
Top Thug
Top Thug
Warlord of the Boards

Posts: 2243
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:25 am
Location: Red Orc Brewery, a dueling venue, or the taverns of Badside
Contact:

Post by Jake »

Kalamere wrote:Jake, I get the point about not counting anything against people. I can't say I entirely agree, but I see where you're coming from. So, that aside, if we were to keep a differential system what about dropping the number of top duels from 4 to 3?
There are lots of tweaks that might help. A shorter season. A lower minimum # of duels (like 3).

We could also simplify the scoring. Perhaps a Win is worth a flat 5 points. (6 if it's a shut-out maybe.) And a loss is worth the # of points scored, with a cap of 4. So...there's still an incentive to win X times, but after you've got wins, you can stop. Or you can keep dueling without feeling at risk of hurting yourself. While someone who gets some early losses still has an incentive to keep dueling and get those 3 (or however many) wins.

There should be an incentive to duel, since that was one of the goals, but not a bar so high that people feel a need to keep trying to improve their wins.

So...anyway...sure...3 duels a week sounds fine to me. So does a shorter season. 4 weeks (with a break in the middle) or even just a straight 3 week season.
User avatar
Jake
Top Thug
Top Thug
Warlord of the Boards

Posts: 2243
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:25 am
Location: Red Orc Brewery, a dueling venue, or the taverns of Badside
Contact:

Post by Jake »

Queen wrote:I am very new to Hydra, having started dueling entirely one week prior to Season 2 starting so a lot of the problems have gone over my head in this topic. However, I have fought duels during this Hydra season at multiple ranks and against nearly all ranks available.

I believe the biggest problem with the Hydra tournament is that the point differential system is broken. The system favors select quality duels over the majority of duels in a weekly frame. The system works by taking the difference of the final score and adding it to a base value for your total gain of Hydra points.

Here's an example:
Let’s say you win four duels, with the final scores being:
  • 5-4
    5-3
    5-2
    5-4
It would take the differences in each (1, 2, 3 and 1, respectively) and would add them to a static base value (5). Those points would then be taken as your earned points for that week; in this example, the player would have earned 27 points.)

Let’s say you think you can do better, so you fight another four duels that went exactly the same way. However, you played an additional two matches that went 5-3 and 5-2, so these matches out-perform your previous 5-4 matches. In other words, your highest point gains would be: 5-2, 5-2, 5-3 and 5-3. So you earned a little bit extra, but at the cost of 50% more dueling. This motivates players to attempt to play as many shutout games as possible in a given week and this is, without a doubt, one of the leading causes of Hydra-burnout.

If a player is attempting to maximize their shutout games, then fighting against lower-ranking duelists would be the best strategic plan for higher-ranking duelists. Due to the Rank disparity on any given night, you may simply not have the option to fight at-rank. There are two options: you fight at-rank of a lower ranked duelist or you don’t. You may not want to take a risk by lowering your rank. The newer player may not fully grasp the whole concept and may just agree to it for a chance at a duel. Although there is no player who is ‘at fault’ in this scenario, it is still a problem.

My Proposal:
What I’m proposing is we remove the differential part entirely and stick to strictly base values dependent on Rank. The idea here is when you win a duel at your rank, you receive the base amount of points. This will greatly reduce the burden on callers during the high-traffic dueling times in Hydra and will make it easier for duelists to keep track of their own points.

I propose that the base wins by rank, if you fight at rank, should be as follows:

Image

So a Glass beating a Glass earns 5 points, an Emerald beating an Emerald earns 7 points, and so on.

Now we’re going to take a look at how this system will handle cross-rank dueling. The Point Differential system is designed where an Emerald has the best opportunity to get points off a shutout victory. This design will benefit you picking easy fights, bottom line. In my proposed system you will receive the most benefit by defeating someone at your current rank, or higher.

When a rank duels their own rank, they get no modifier. When a player duels a rank above their own (but their opponent downranked) and wins, they get a small bonus modifier. When a rank duels a rank below it (having downranked) and wins, they get a small negative modifier, as shown below:

Image

Thus, when regarding the modifiers in the chart above, it is most beneficial for more experienced duelists to duel their own rank. The resulting points from a downranked win is slightly less than winning at your own rank, but still worth the effort if it is the only option at hand. On the other hand, when a low rank player defeats a high rank player, their points will be modified to reflect the difference in ranks.

For example, a Sapphire-ranked player and a Glass-ranked player agree to duel. The Sapphire agrees to downgrade to a Glass rank. If the Sapphire-ranked player wins, he will receive a -1.5 modifier on his final Hydra points. If the Glass-ranked player wins, he will receive a +1.5 modifier on his final Hydra points.

This results in the final Hydra points:

Image

Notice how it becomes very simple: If you beat a Glass, you get 5.0 points. If you beat a Jade, you get 5.5 points. And so on.

The goal of my proposed system is to take what has been considered the core of the Hydra Season 2’s faults and revamp them. You will no longer be scored on how well you perform but instead on who you perform against. You will no longer have to win at least four times a week to hit your point cap; for example, Emeralds can cap in three wins. It gives players the choice on how to cap; you can beat two Emeralds and a Sapphire, or you can beat four Glasses. You could argue that this incentivizes players to play at the Glass level to ‘avoid’ Emerald players, but the impact on Emerald-level games will be negligible, while increasing the number of Glass games and opportunities substantially. The projected values are based on a weekly limit of 20, but can easily be tweaked and remain just as effective. You can argue that the lower ranks will have to duel more than the higher ranks, and that is true, only because they will have an advantage: ranking up will yield a bonus, depending on the determined weekly cap, ranking bonuses will be applied after.

Ideally, with a much more direct scoring for duels, it will be easier to value Challenges and Tournaments alongside them. For example, winning a challenge could secure +15 points to your team’s total at the end of the week. These will be added onto your points, above the cap, just like ranking up. Taking this one step further, if you were to give bonuses for dueling in all three sports, a player can have that bonus added on past their/their team’s cap as well.

I truly believe this will give a better experience to all sides of the Hydra Tournament. Whether you're a returning Emerald, a first time Glass, a Caller or a third-party who wants to help out.

Yours truly,

Queen
This is a little less simple than the quick thought I made, but I do like the consideration that went into it, and it's well worth a read through.
User avatar
Rakeesh
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Professional Duelist

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post by Rakeesh »

Queen:

Really good write-up. I absolutely agree with you philosophically, and your cap proposal isn't too different from what Kalamere and I were talking about a couple of pages back. Here's the effective problem that I could foresee with the sliding point scale based on relative rank differences:

The best thing for everyone to do would be to fight Emeralds only. That means that it's going to be hardest for Glasses/Commoners/etc to find duels, because other Glasses (and all other ranks period) are going to score more points if they beat top-ranked duelists. With a cap system (flat points for wins, an individual and a team cap for the week), I don't think you'd have to worry about farming so much. With your system, my fear is that lower ranks would find trouble getting in duels. That's a problem that I haven't quite reconciled in my brain yet, but it's something to consider with your proposal.

As you said, if you remove the point differential scoring system, the intensity and active demands of the season become a lot more reasonable; and that means more healthy, happy, sustained activity for everyone.
When I am silent, I have thunder hidden inside.

[OOC: Twitter is the best way to stay in touch. <3]
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Rakeesh wrote: The best thing for everyone to do would be to fight Emeralds only. That means that it's going to be hardest for Glasses/Commoners/etc to find duels, because other Glasses (and all other ranks period) are going to score more points if they beat top-ranked duelists. With a cap system (flat points for wins, an individual and a team cap for the week), I don't think you'd have to worry about farming so much. With your system, my fear is that lower ranks would find trouble getting in duels. That's a problem that I haven't quite reconciled in my brain yet, but it's something to consider with your proposal.
The best thing for anyone in this system ideally is to fight AT-RANK. It serves with the least risk/reward factor. The scale is setup for nights where there are relatively few duelists available. I highly doubt a Glass is going to challenge an Emerald if there are other Glasses around or anyone, not-emerald for that matter. Simply having a payout doesn't make it a good idea. First week it would take four wins for a Glass vs Glass to get point capped at 20. Let's say a Glass beats an Emerald for 7. The difficulty of beating one Emerald alone wouldn't change a 4 win cap. It would simply not be worth the effort for a Glass.
Image
User avatar
Rakeesh
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Professional Duelist

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post by Rakeesh »

What if your proposal only worked dueling down, but not dueling up? Only penalties, and no bonuses?
When I am silent, I have thunder hidden inside.

[OOC: Twitter is the best way to stay in touch. <3]
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Rakeesh wrote:What if your proposal only worked dueling down, but not dueling up? Only penalties, and no bonuses?
I have edited my original post to include a curve for Loss benefits. Dueling down isn't the best option and due to the intrinsic nature of Ranks and their scaling; if people didn't know already dueling in the opposite direction is most likely the same in that regard.
Image
User avatar
Rakeesh
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Professional Duelist

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post by Rakeesh »

I do think that the loss modifier helps push people intrinsically in the right direction with your proposal.

It's really interesting. A little complicated, but better than removing mods for dueling down (since this makes use of the existing ROH infrastructure).

I'm not opposed to this system versus mine, as it seems balanced now with the loss modifier, and is still a flat cap system - which I agree is much better than Point Differential.

That said, I think that the system still wants a weekly Team Cap, too. The Team cap serves to remove the need of a Credit System (and allows for a more controlled Swap Meet system) by not demanding all five of a team's duelists to reach their individual cap for that team to be competitive; this would allow non-regulation sources be the means for the top level of competition amongst the best teams.

I think that 15 points for a challenge is definitely too high of a value for challenges. I rather like the values that Kalamere/I came up with for non-regulation scoring (beyond the caps):

- 5 points for a challenge, +1 if it was a defensive win after the defender waived grace.
- 2/3/5 points for a rank gain, depending on the WoL it took to reach that rank from the previous rank.
- 5 points for the top team winning % in each sport per week (with a minimum of, say, 10 duels).
- A 20/10/5/5 tournament payout to the top four duelists, in a proposal with only two sanctioned Hydra tournaments.

Kalamere also suggested adding a small bonus for each duelist that duels in multiple venues each week to encourage cross-sport dueling, but held within the weekly regulation caps.

---

Basically, I'm not opposed to your updated suggestion in how to handle regulation scoring. It's another solid option, and you've presented it very well. There are some other elements to consider; I'd be interested in seeing you flesh out a full system, or at least inputting on Kalamere's re-proposal of mine back on page 2 of this thread.

I can't really get behind a "how to make Point Differential work" conversation, since I feel like it's trying to shove a square peg through a round hole, but I'm interested in ideas like these.

I'll be interested to see what Sylus is thinking, as well.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm also okay with shortening the season. I think that with a sustainable system, six weeks would be doable for me, but I'm certainly not everyone - and I can't see any harm in tightening up the length of the event as well. I still think that the best system would be a sustainable one, though.
When I am silent, I have thunder hidden inside.

[OOC: Twitter is the best way to stay in touch. <3]
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Rakeesh wrote: That said, I think that the system still wants a weekly Team Cap, too. The Team cap serves to remove the need of a Credit System (and allows for a more controlled Swap Meet system) by not demanding all five of a team's duelists to reach their individual cap for that team to be competitive; this would allow non-regulation sources be the means for the top level of competition amongst the best teams.

I think that 15 points for a challenge is definitely too high of a value for challenges. I rather like the values that Kalamere/I came up with for non-regulation scoring (beyond the caps):

- 5 points for a challenge, +1 if it was a defensive win after the defender waived grace.
- 2/3/5 points for a rank gain, depending on the WoL it took to reach that rank from the previous rank.
- 5 points for the top team winning % in each sport per week (with a minimum of, say, 10 duels).
- A 20/10/5/5 tournament payout to the top four duelists, in a proposal with only two sanctioned Hydra tournaments.

Kalamere also suggested adding a small bonus for each duelist that duels in multiple venues each week to encourage cross-sport dueling, but held within the weekly regulation caps.
I don't really see a need for a team-cap. The idea behind player caps is that the deciding factor will be who goes beyond the normal measures for their team. I very much like the suggested Challenge / Rank Gain guidelines. The other bonuses sound great also. I was browsing this thread mostly while at work on my tablet and when I got home I went straight to work on the basic skeleton. I'll have to re-track and get all the ideas in a nice pool. I hope Sylus gets a look at it soon as well.
Image
User avatar
Rakeesh
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Professional Duelist

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post by Rakeesh »

The idea of a team cap is so that if something comes up for someone on your team, their weight can be shared amongst the rest of the team, if the rest of the team is able to score enough points. If Aenlyn goes to the hospital in a given week, four players are still able to hit the cap for the team. It basically replaces the Credit system in a flat point system like yours/mine.
When I am silent, I have thunder hidden inside.

[OOC: Twitter is the best way to stay in touch. <3]
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Rakeesh wrote:The idea of a team cap is so that if something comes up for someone on your team, their weight can be shared amongst the rest of the team, if the rest of the team is able to score enough points. If Aenlyn goes to the hospital in a given week, four players are still able to hit the cap for the team. It basically replaces the Credit system in a flat point system like yours/mine.
Isn't that why the Swap Meet exists? What's the point of replacing the Credit system with another version of it? I like the idea of tournaments going on top of team scores or individual player caps but not how that last hydra tournament went either. I'd sooner remove them if they can't be properly seeded.

Edit: Also my philosophy on a player cap.

The player cap is existent so people have a goal to hit. Then they have a goal to even further surpass it by leaving their realm of comfort. Someone hasn't challenged in a long time? Now is their time to leave the shell. Someone hasn't dabbled in DoM? Now is their time to experiment. Team Caps offer no incentive to even have all players duel. What's the point of limiting people's performance on a scale team-wide? People shouldn't be penalized for trying but encouraged to do so.
Image
User avatar
Rakeesh
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Professional Duelist

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 8:08 pm
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post by Rakeesh »

I think that the Swap Meet works when you have advance notice of a player's absence (aka, vacation), but not for week-of emergencies. The Credit system was using your "best extra duels" to fill in holes, which works well for week-of emergencies, but that was for a point differential system. If you can suggest how you'd specifically imagine a credit system working with your proposal, I'm definitely ears. The Team Cap was my answer to that issue.

Think of it this way with your system:

You've got a built-in Team Cap already. If your goal is to require a team averaging four wins/week over five players (with a max of 20 individual points), you've effectively set the "Team Cap" to 100 points. If you allowed a max of 25 individual points instead, but set a Team Cap to 100 points, that would allow for four teammates to make up, entirely, the loss of their fifth teammate without affecting what your proposed weekly goal is.

That's currently the best thought I have on replacing the Credit System in a flat point system like this.
When I am silent, I have thunder hidden inside.

[OOC: Twitter is the best way to stay in touch. <3]
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Rakeesh wrote: The Team Cap was my answer to that issue.

Think of it this way with your system:

You've got a built-in Team Cap already. If your goal is to require a team averaging four wins/week over five players (with a max of 20 individual points), you've effectively set the "Team Cap" to 100 points. If you allowed a max of 25 individual points instead, but set a Team Cap to 100 points, that would allow for four teammates to make up, entirely, the loss of their fifth teammate without affecting what your proposed weekly goal is.

That's currently the best thought I have on replacing the Credit System in a flat point system like this.
This is precisely where we differ. I don't see an issue. Hydra is a competition and I don't see why lines are blurred in a competition. You're on an Olympic track team and you tear your acl in warm ups? Guess what you're screwed. That's life. Individuals have caps so they have a reason to push themselves past it. Teams do not have caps because people deserve rewards for going the extra mile. It all boils down to Sylus in the end, so I'm just going to peek in here every now and then for some constructive criticism.
Image
User avatar
Andrea Anderson
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
Less Than Three

Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:55 pm
Location: Her Twilight Isle home she shares with Lilith.

Post by Andrea Anderson »

Queen wrote:This is precisely where we differ. I don't see an issue. Hydra is a competition and I don't see why lines are blurred in a competition. You're on an Olympic track team and you tear your acl in warm ups? Guess what you're screwed. That's life. Individuals have caps so they have a reason to push themselves past it. Teams do not have caps because people deserve rewards for going the extra mile. It all boils down to Sylus in the end, so I'm just going to peek in here every now and then for some constructive criticism.
Simply change swap meet. 1 token per week that can be used any time in that week. Sunday -> Saturday. Once that week is over, you lose the token and it's non refundable. If, let's say, Queens player is unable to duel that week -- the token can be used to switch in another. That player who is switched out can't be switched back until the following week when another token is useable.

That way it takes away the need for any sort of credit system, but also leaves flexibility if there's a need for swap outs. This would also make swap-meets purpose clear; to swap out a person who has a serious reason to be unable to duel that week.

Keep the rules regulating swap meet there if challenge points are allowed. A player who is swapped out or in with a pending challenge can't gain points from defending / challenging another player.

Adding that with your current structure, Queen. I'd be all for joining Hydra next year; though I'm also for more effort and would join anyway even if my team could suffer a point loss due to an emergency. It'd put more pressure on teams to win tournaments / challenges.. Though it's not exactly casual friendly.

Maybe a middle ground could be thought of. That's what I think the swap token idea could be.

Either way, very good presentation :). I'll go back to being quiet now.

Edit: Edited to add "A player who is swapped out or in with a pending challenge can't gain points from defending / challenging another player."
Last edited by Andrea Anderson on Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Hope
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Beast Mode

Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:13 am
Location: New Haven
Contact:

Post by Hope »

Apple wrote: Simply change swap meet. 1 token per week that can be used any time in that week. Sunday -> Saturday. Once that week is over, you lose the token and it's non refundable. If, let's say, Queens player is unable to duel that week -- the token can be used to switch in another. That player who is switched out can't be switched back until the following week when another token is useable.

That way it takes away the need for any sort of credit system, but also leaves flexibility if there's a need for swap outs. This would also make swap-meets purpose clear; to swap out a person who has a serious reason to be unable to duel that week.

Keep the rules regulating swap meet there if challenge points are allowed. A player who is swapped out with a pending challenge can't gain points from defending / challenging another player.

Adding that with your current structure, Queen. I'd be all for joining Hydra next year; though I'm also for more effort and would join anyway even if my team could suffer a point loss due to an emergency. It'd put more pressure on teams to win tournaments / challenges.. Though it's not exactly casual friendly.

Maybe a middle ground could be thought of. That's what I think the swap token idea could be.

Either way, very good presentation :). I'll go back to being quiet now.

It sounds solid. I'm not against team swaps or the credit system since both had good usage, and imo weren't really abused. It'd be nice if it were in a different form of "team cap" though.
Image
User avatar
Andrea Anderson
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
Less Than Three

Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:55 pm
Location: Her Twilight Isle home she shares with Lilith.

Post by Andrea Anderson »

Queen wrote:It sounds solid. I'm not against team swaps or the credit system since both had good usage, and imo weren't really abused.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the idea of hard work deserving more reward over simply having things tossed at you. The credit system this past Hydra, imo, worked that way. The team had to work together to make up the points while swap meet was an easy fix. But none of those will matter with this new system.

Using an MMO terminology. Should the person farming for the time-lost protodrake for 21 days have his accomplishment and effort thrown away due to Blizzard selling the drake the next expansion for 25 bucks? It's the casual vs hardcore argument that has caused strife between two different play styles.

A player shouldn't start with a 2100 Arena Rating and have access to all the best gear simply from the start. They need to work and earn what they can gain. Neither should they be allowed BiS ( Best in slot ) gear because they signed up toward the end of an expansion.

RoH and Dueling is not an MMORPG. It's a PVP game. It's hard to connect the two, but there is a connection between them being the hardcore players vs casual players.

Hydra should not be hard. Yes. But it should not be too easy. There needs to be a middle ground that can please everyone.

Though pleasing everyone is pretty hard lol.

With the swap tokens. Teams have their shot to switch out if needed, and if not? They don't need to worry. Just duel, get points, and go about your business. The tokens will be there if an emergency comes up.
Locked

Return to “The Hydra's Den”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests