The Rally Point (discussion and questions)

[stockwellpete]

Final statistics - there have now been 30 draws from 578 results, which is 5.19% (or roughly 1 in 20). Three have been agreed 0-0 draws; one has been an agreed draw where both players did not do enough damage to score any points; and one Themed Event match was also adjudicated as a 0-0 draw. Apart from these five matches (0.86% or roughly 1 in 100), all players involved in drawn matches have received one point each. There has also been one tied match.

I think these figures are pretty good and the number of drawn matches has roughly halved this season compared to last. There were only 4 agreed draws where both players scored no points and these tended to cluster towards the end of the tournament where matches may not have had too much importance in terms of the final promotion and relegation issues.

Next season the scoring system will see a more radical change with the introduction of a marginal victory category of results, the abolition of the tied match category, and a modest increase of the "score draw" threshold from 20% to 25%.

[SimonLancaster]

I think that this kind of realignment is a good idea. Rewarding players for their brave efforts. I have some ideas and a few examples to throw forth. Here are two examples:

1. Game ends as a draw (Player A) 56-36 (Player B).

2. Games ends with a win (Player A) 60-56 (Player B).

I have some ideas about bonus points but I would be interested in hearing under the new proposed system what points both players would get in both situations.

[stockwellpete]

I think that this kind of realignment is a good idea. Rewarding players for their brave efforts. I have some ideas and a few examples to throw forth. Here are two examples:

1. Game ends as a draw (Player A) 56-36 (Player B).

2. Games ends with a win (Player A) 60-56 (Player B).

I have some ideas about bonus points but I would be interested in hearing under the new proposed system what points both players would get in both situations.

The decision has actually been made now following the two polls we held about a month ago.

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 01&t=88607
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 01&t=88648

The scoring system for Season 4 (under Rule 5) will be as follows . . .

4 points - for a win where the losing player has not scored 50% or more
3 points - for a marginal win where the losing player has scored 50% or more
2 points - for a tie where both players score 60% or more, or for a draw where a player has scored at least 25%
1 point - for a marginal defeat where the losing player has scored 50% or more
0 points - for a loss, or for a draw where a player has not scored 25% or more

In a match where the score ends at 56-36 (a draw) both players will score 2 points each. In a match where one player wins narrowly 60-56 the winning player will get 3 points and the losing player 1 point.

[SimonLancaster]

Don’t you think there is a case to reward the player who finishes 20 points ahead of his opponent? I was thinking a bonus point so 3 points/2 points or 2 points/1 point. Something of that nature.

I am in broad agreement with the second example for the close win.

These are issues I have been playing around with in my head I am not telling you how to do it! All good stuff.

[stockwellpete]

Don’t you think there is a case to reward the player who finishes 20 points ahead of his opponent? I was thinking a bonus point so 3 points/2 points or 2 points/1 point. Something of that nature.

Not a decisive case, I would say. If you give a bonus point to the player 20 points ahead in a drawn match and they then score 3pts, you are giving them the same number of points as a player winning a marginal victory. I do think you have to keep a clear points gap between the two types of win now possible (4pts or 3pts) and a "scoring" draw (2pts). Draws cannot be reduced to just 1 point each because that would leave no room for the marginal defeat (1pt) category.

[tomlowshang]

Are DLCs required for participation?

[stockwellpete]

Are DLCs required for participation?

Yes, they are.

[tomlowshang]

Thanks.

[Zardoz02]

For those of us who are data-addicted... er... data-driven... I've put the above 3 seasons win/draw/loss numbers into a spreadsheet which you can search and sort at your leisure.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

[Herode_2]

I can't find the deadline for applying (except Feb 1st when the Tournament begins). Is there one officially stated before 01/31 ?

Point is : I have some preferences, sure, but they are still weak, as well as I'm a weak player ^^ and I plan to wait as long as possible and to apply to a division lacking players.
BTW, Pete can also use me as a reserve player (*), I'm pretty sure that he will need some of those, eventually.

(*) >>> for any division at Pete's will, except the Themed Event

[stockwellpete]

I can't find the deadline for applying (except Feb 1st when the Tournament begins). Is there one officially stated before 01/31 ?

Point is : I have some preferences, sure, but they are still weak, as well as I'm a weak player ^^ and I plan to wait as long as possible and to apply to a division lacking players.
BTW, Pete can also use me as a reserve player (*), I'm pretty sure that he will need some of those, eventually.

(*) >>> for any division at Pete's will, except the Themed Event

There is no formal deadline at the moment. I will see how the recruitment proceeds. At the moment I have set 40 places aside for each of the main sections and either 16 or 24 for the Themed Event. At the moment it looks like Classical Antiquity and Late Antiquity are going to be very well supported with Early Middle Ages and the Themed Event not doing so well. But it is very early days and i will have a much better idea towards the end of the week. I think recruitment can stay open until about Sunday 27th January and that will give me four days to set everything up (tables and charts) before play starts on Friday February 1st.

Yes, I will be needing reserves again, at least six for each section if possible - three for the A/B divisions and three for the C/D divisions.

[SpeedyCM]

Hey Pete

I noticed in the Biblical section you placed one of the Lydian hoplite army lists in the non-hoplite army section, I was wondering if this was in error and it should be with the other Lydian army list in the hoplite section as the two lists are almost identical?

[stockwellpete]

Hey Pete

I noticed in the Biblical section you placed one of the Lydian hoplite army lists in the non-hoplite army section, I was wondering if this was in error and it should be with the other Lydian army list in the hoplite section as the two lists are almost identical?
I see the same has been done with the two Cypriot army lists though the second one of them does have 3 more raw hoplites than the first one.

It was Richard who pointed out to me that if I included all the hoplite armies in the main Biblical army list without any restrictions whatsoever, then it was possible that many players would choose them in preference to anything else. So I came up with the idea of separating out the hoplite armies and restricting players to just one hoplite selection. Here is the PM I sent to Richard explaining what I was going to do . . .

"I have gone through the armies and identified 14 that are clearly hoplite armies and then there are another 6 that are borderline hoplite armies."

Hoplite armies
Aetolian 550-461 BC
Akarnanian 550-461 BC
Athenian 550-461 BC
Boiotian League 550-461 BC
Carthaginian 550-411 BC
Corinthian 550-461 BC
Greek 680-551 BC
Greek Asiatic 550-461 BC
Greek Western 550-461 BC
Kyrenean Greek 630-461 BC
Phokian 550-461 BC
Spartan 680-551 BC
Spartan 550-461 BC
Syracusan 550-461 BC

Borderline hoplite armies
Cypriot 680-550 BC .........33% of infantry
Cypriot 549-490 BC .........50% ditto
Egyptian 664-571 BC ........25% ditto
Egyptian 570-525 BC ........30% ditto
Lydian 687-551 BC ...........40% ditto
Lydian 550-546 BC ...........50% ditto

Bearing in mind we only have 40 armies to choose from in total and I am bit concerned about restricting player choices too severely, I think regarding the borderline armies that maybe the early Cypriot, both Egyptian armies and the early Lydian armies should get a "pass" and just the later Cypriot and Lydian armies should be added to the top list. So players would still have 24 other armies to choose from outside the hoplite contingent."

So, basically, a hoplite army is defined as any army that has 50%+ of its main infantry consisting of hoplites. It is not a perfect solution but I think it will do until we get a second Biblical DLC. At least we can get the Biblical section started now. I did feel that the From Maurya to Alaric format had reached its sell-by date. It did OK for three seasons but it was only intended as a temporary replacement until we could open up another core section.

[Geffalrus]

Hi!

New to this whole thing, so just wanted to ask a semi-dumb question. I saw somewhere that messing with one's base game screws with multiplayer (for obvious reasons), but that "mod foldered" changes do not cause that problem. So if I downloaded the Silk Road custom battle mod, and a player-created campaign, all via the in-game hub, that will not affect anything? Just want to make sure before the new season starts.

[stockwellpete]

Hi!

New to this whole thing, so just wanted to ask a semi-dumb question. I saw somewhere that messing with one's base game screws with multiplayer (for obvious reasons), but that "mod foldered" changes do not cause that problem. So if I downloaded the Silk Road custom battle mod, and a player-created campaign, all via the in-game hub, that will not affect anything? Just want to make sure before the new season starts.

Downloading scenarios and official mods from the Community area is perfectly safe. I think the problem is when you are modding things yourself, like movement or combat ability, and you do not make a copy of the game's original folders and modify them leaving your originals as they were.

[Geffalrus]

Many thanks for the confirmation!

[Barrold713]

A terrific response to Season 4
Looking forward to starting the competition.
BDH

[stockwellpete]

A terrific response to Season 4
Looking forward to starting the competition.
BDH

Yes, we have done very well for this season. We are up to 68 players now and there are still a few places left. We have halted the steady downward trend which saw us decline from 82 players in Season 1 to 58 players in Season; 3 and we will have 14 divisions across the tournament, plus the Themed Event, compared to 12 divisions last time. The really promising development is the number of new players we have recruited this time - 16 so far. That is certainly a record number. Thanks to everyone who has helped to build this tournament and please keep asking players, particularly your last round opponents in the automated Xmas tournament, so that we can fill up the last few places.

[ggarynorman]

Hi pete

Any idea why very few A rated players are returning?

[stockwellpete]

Hi pete

Any idea why very few A rated players are returning?

I am not really sure. I have spoken to some of these players and they have said things like "I have a new job", "I am too busy", and "I am taking a break for a season", but I do wonder if there is something a bit more "structural" going on. It may be that some players feel that although they are good enough to play in the "A" division, they are not good enough to put in a really good challenge for the top places, and that has led to a sense that they have gone as far as they can in the competition. I might be completely wrong about this, of course. I also know a few of the players in this group, myself included, who are feeling "burned out" after being with the game from the first beta test. Steam tells me I have played over 1,100 hours now, although some of that time was taken up with scenario design, and that seems an incredible amount of time to spend on just one game.

One of the things I really noticed when I was running the FOG1DL, which lasted for just 4 seasons, was that there was quite a big gap in ability between the top 6 or 7 players and the second tier group of around 15-20 players. It seems we might be heading in the same direction again with the FOG2DL. Before the FOG1DL there was the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (LOEG), organised by pantherboy, which ran for around 6 seasons, I think, and perhaps the gap I am talking about might have developed at that time as well. I only played the last few seasons of LOEG so I am not completely sure about this. Maybe some of the other veterans might comment?

Whatever the reasons are, it has definitely been very noticeable this season that the A-rated group is diminishing quite rapidly.