A centralized Hub for competition.

So, it's pretty common fact that competitiveness is at a sort of stale low, incoming players have nowhere to learn to be competitive/no drive to do so, and old players have no desire to teach them. So, why not a League system where, as players achieve new tactics (on their own or with outside help), the receive SP bonuses, and a higher CSR: A sort-of replacement to ELO (ELO would still be present, but not necessarily Skill-defining) that would average all stats into a single numerator out of 100. 100 would be perfect stats (Everything either equals ∞, or are near-perfect enough to achieve a 100), while a 0 would be blank stats. I'm not a math genius, but an example function for this could be CSR = ELO + W/L / Rank (This probably makes no sense, but you get the idea). In this League system, Coalition Wars, Tournaments- all of that shit, would be tracked globally, and affect a players CSR as well. I've made a sort of el cheapo explanation.jpg to outline what ideas I've had about this topic, so let's finish the thread with that:

Written by Guest, 27.09.2013 at 16:19

Not to be mean but ... I think you might find this useful. You do good PS work, don't typography ruin that.

http://www.creativebloq.com/graphic-design-tips/typography-tutorials-1232719

I know how Typography works. I chose not to use it properly because I made this in under 10 minutes, and want each section to be easy-to-read and coordinated. Also, fuck PS.

Wins/time best indicator of how fast they are progressing.

Win/Loss is pretty meaningless seeing as you can just abandon games you are about to lose. Games won/games played could be a better idea. But then you get penalized when abandoning practice games... Anyways, stats can always be fudged one way or another.

The .jpg was a bit hard to read, but I did like the idea of awarding points for tourney rankings and teaching other players.

Written by Guest, 27.09.2013 at 21:20

The amount of practice games people leave are relatively small compared total amount of games played. At least hopefully people don't have over 1% of there games solo games. :/

IDK, some people practice alot. When I was in Victorious Scholars, Chess used to say: "practice, practice, practice". I did, a bit. I think good competitive players do so alot more though.
And then there's those muli-player practice games where people ally at the end. Those also count as a win...

Point is, I would prefer elo to any metric that factors in games won.

Guys...the W/L was hypothetical, as I stated. Stay on topic.

Some sort of CW/Tournament elo maybe. That part of the idea I like. But definitely stay away from Wins and Losses.

And Terminal, you're right. Solo practice is mostly for opening moves. These you need to readjust these when you buy new upgrades. If you want to master the openers for say the 7 principle EU+ countries, that's already quite a few practice games... just sayin'. Anyway, that part is off topic. I just mentioned it to point out one of multiple reasons why the win/loss/games played numbers are not good to use for this.

This Topic was Bumped By The Revolution

Stop it :|.