Page 3 of 4

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:18 pm
by DarKxXxLorD
Oh, damn. I have only one thing - do not get nervous. The rest - a trick of the brain and.

GL :mrgreen:

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:41 am
by TerRoR
Sup goggles :D

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 12:47 pm
by zoky
darklord,,maybe u read here..repsond on PM in CVWT site

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:58 am
by MrTPenguin
I suggest restoring the third-place playoff to first-to-three-wins (as it was pre-2010), because first-to-four makes for very long matches, and I regard the semi-finals as more important and first-to-three is adequate for them.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 2:05 pm
by Zemke
You can win a real trophy winning the game for the third place. It’s worth a lengthy battle. :)

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:57 pm
by MrTPenguin
I do agree it's a worthwhile game for a valuable reward (unlike its counterpart in the football world cup!)

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:11 am
by khamski
Okay. I posted it year ago. Mod promised to react, make a poll or whatever but didn't bother to keep a promise.
So i post it again this year.

My wishlist:
1. Get forum from nnn site back to it's separate place and dress it in site colors. I didn't donate to this year cwt so i am willing to donate for forum things if it's needed.
2. Change "players with same points" situation solvation as i proposed here viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1480#p23706.
3. Make DONATE button visible in main menu to visitors donations all year long even before tourney actually starts. Encourage visitors with good written text on the main page.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:56 pm
by Kayz
I can only answer to 2.

You say: "If two players have same points we check stats BETWEEN THEM not OVERALL STATS."
The maximum amount of points you can get with winning just one game is 5 points. The maximum amount of points you can get with winning 2 games is 7 points.
So we only have problems if two players have the same amount of games won, because you can't reach 6 points with just one won game.
So the only important cases are: Two players won one game each and two players won two games each. Losing all/Winning all doesn't matter.
A gets 5 points:
A 2-3 C, A 2-3 D, A 3-2 B but his round ratio is -1.

B gets 5 points as well:
B 3-0 C, B 2-3 D, B 2-3 A with a round ratio of +1.

(D wins C 3-0, too, otherwise this example makes no sense)

With your idea A would go through, though B has a better round ratio because he won C 3-0. I don't like it, but I can live with it. Other opinions?

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 11:10 pm
by kukumber
Considering a single game outcome over the group stage performance denies the whole point of group stage.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:29 am
by Zemke
Thank you for the feedback, khamski!

About 2:
Haven’t dived too deep into your calc, Kayz, but I think I know what you mean. And Kukumber’s sentence sounds just nice. :D
My proposal: Points > Game Ratio > Round Ratio > Head-To-Head Record

About 1:
I don’t see the necessity. I’m okay with it though as it’s generally not important to me.

About 3:
I think it could be integrated into the admin news or have an extra banner above it. It will be more present then.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:30 pm
by Kayz
^
Zemke wrote: My proposal: Points > Game Ratio > Round Ratio > Head-To-Head Record
Yes! This! Then we don't need stupid decisive bo5 match in most cases.

Except one:

What if D loses to all players 0-3,

and A 3-2 B, B 3-2 C, C 3-2 A? Typical Rock Paper Scissors situation.

Then we'd have 3 players with 7 points, 2 won games and a round ratio of 3... and the Head-To-Head Record is: A should be in front of B, B in front of C, C in front of A, which is not possible.
Then we'd need a decisive match between all 3! I see no other option for this special rare case

Analogously to this case: D wins all players 3-0, then the same situation.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2015 2:06 pm
by MrTPenguin
This may be a noobish question, but where is it written that you get 5 points for a win and 7 for two? The CWT rules page says 3 for a win (and 1 for a loss, if it was 3-2).

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:40 pm
by Kayz
You get a point for losing 2-3. So the maximum amount of points with one win is 1 win (3p) + 2-3 (1p) + 2-3 (1p). Hence the "maximum amount". Just wanted to clarify that you can't reach 6 points with just one won game.

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:11 pm
by MrTPenguin
(I geddit now.)

Re: CWT 2014 possible rules modifications

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:40 pm
by khamski
On point system

Points > Head-To-Head Record
There are no ties in cwt games so that stat line is short. )

Fair, easy and has no exceptions.
kukumber wrote:Considering a single game outcome over the group stage performance denies the whole point of group stage.
I disagree.
Without good group stage perfomance they won't be even fighting for PO place.
So group stage perfomance plays it's vital part in the standings.
But it can't break the tie between the two.
The only stat that can fairly decide who goes through is the result of their group game.

It's unfair to unlink player from the PO when he has same points with the other player AND he won other player in their head-2-head game.
It's unfair and stupid.

On CWT forum
Zemke wrote:Thank you for the feedback, khamski!
I don’t see the necessity. I’m okay with it though as it’s generally not important to me.
As i already mentioned CWT is a community project.
It's important what "you" think but other opinions must be heard too.

Forum is important.
It holds the traditions of CWT.
It holds the important discussions (including this one) along with funny and interesting ones.
Forum is a soul of CWT.

Infobox simply can't replace it.
It's another tool for another tasks.
Same as instant messangers|chats didn't replace forums in the internet.

It's totally ridiculous to have CWT forum separated from CWT site and merged into a clan site.
It's weird and wrong.