Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 65

Thread: Which ranking system for Hex ?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Angmar View Post
    I don't understand what that means.

    There is a reason most games use an ELO system - it forces you to have a minimum amount played in order to get points, but at the high end it differentiates individual skill level. You're point system is just a grindfest that the person who has the most time to play wins.
    Tecnically, the ELO system has the same flaw unless a time limit is set (such as on online chess servers). Otherwise, it's very possible to earn a low rating and be stuck there for ages. It's what pretty much coined the phrase: "ELO Hell"

  2. #12
    Elo system is good in a simple ladder with a matchmaking system. But in a system based on stat tournament it could be very unfair. And it could split the player base i think.
    And i don't think the spirit of my idea would turn the game into a grinding system. But i came up with arbitrary figures, i did not do the math. Juste a exemple to explain the spirit of the thing i want to see. It can be more complexe
    Last edited by Gregangel; 03-07-2016 at 09:37 AM.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Kami View Post
    Tecnically, the ELO system has the same flaw unless a time limit is set (such as on online chess servers). Otherwise, it's very possible to earn a low rating and be stuck there for ages. It's what pretty much coined the phrase: "ELO Hell"
    I think, ELO hell just exists in team games and in the perception of players being much better than their ranking. Its not that you automatically stuck on low ELO. If you win, you gain points. Just as simple as that.

    Creator of / Forum thread IGN: dBug Twitch: dBug404

  4. #14
    Hello all,

    I've already talked a decent bit about the PVP ladder and explained why it should be implemented soon here : The link

    While the threads did not get the amount of inputs I was expecting (mostly because it has been moved to a more obscure zone where fewer players go), I do want to point out again how crucial it is to have a ranking system as well as explain how (IMO) it should be done.

    First of all, no matter what people think about the other games, when creating something new we have to think about what has already been done, and how good/effective was what has already been put into practice elsewhere.
    In order to make it clear, I'm gonna talk mostly about MTGO, since a HS-like ladder is both awful and not suitable at all to a game like Hex.

    At some point, there was a thing called "player of the year" race. Basically people were awarded points for doing great in tournaments and those points were accumulated all year long, and easily check-able because there was a leaderboard on the main website... This way everyone was able to see who was the player who earned the most points (ie: the one who've won the most tournaments pretty much)... And at the end of the year there was an invite only tournament (online) with large prizes for the topX of each constructed and limited players.

    To make it simple, that's what we need here because :
    - It gives an actual incentive for people to play tournaments because of the points earned (and more so, scheduled tournaments, more on that later)
    - It rewards people for playing more and more of Hex (paid tournaments to be more specific)
    - It creates an actual competitive scene (which is not the case at the moment, see link) which will drain players from other games.
    - It rewards grinders who plays a lot of tournaments.

    Obviously as I mentioned on the link, a year long race would not suit a game like Hex (for now at least) so something reset every 3-4 months would do great.... And obviously a tournament (online, that's cheaper for Hex) at the end of each season for let's say the top20 players in limited and the top 20 players in constructed would be the close the season and create a sense of fame for several (as well as high prizes of course).

    I really insist on the fact that the prizes at the end have to be quite high... They don't have to be 100k$, especially if it's run 4 times per year, but they have to be decently high : AAs & Sleeves of course because they are free for Hex, and cash because cash is shiny... If there are some legal issues with cash - which is very possible - then an invitation to the next big tournament (like the invitational) could keep the "shininess" of the tournament.
    But the appeal of that system would not (only) be prizes, fame would be another very nice thing that people would be willing to play more events in order to get it (in order to be ranked higher in the leaderboard).

    Anyway, on to the system.

    I'm looking for something like :

    - Competitive drafts and Casual drafts : 1 point for winner
    - Scheduled Sealed : 3 points for 4-0 and 1 point for 3-1
    - Sealed Gauntlets : 1 (or 2) point(s) for 5 wins

    - Scheduled Constructed : 3 points for 4-0 and 1 point for 3-1
    - Constructed Gauntlets : 1 (or 2) point(s) for 5 wins

    - Same amount of points than their respective regular counterparts

    5 SHARDS
    - It's hard to give points to a 7 or 8 rounds of single elimination event... Would have been more fair if it was swiss.
    - But if we assume the (awful) single elimination is kept, then 3 points for winner of the weekly, 2 for second, and 1 point for the 3rd and 4th.
    - As for monthly tournaments, I would say the same should be kept (3/2/1-1).
    - There might be an argument that those tournaments should be kept on the casual side and awarded no points at all. I would not mind at all, it would also make sense that the points can only be earned in paid tournaments (especially since the entry fee is really low here).

    - No points awarded. Mostly because it would be too annoying for Hex to manually gives points to those that would earn them in off client tournaments.

    => Regarding the leaderboard, it HAS to be put on the official website for everybody to watch, that's the main point of a leaderboard, making people talk about it and dream about it.
    => I think that 3 leaderboard should be created. One for constructed, one for limited, and one with both of them mixed... It would therefore gives a chance to qualify for every people. Some prefer limited, some prefer constructed, but this way they would be able to see how they compare versus other players in their favourite format.

    As a side note : later on, when guild will be implemented, I'm sure everybody will love to see the name of the guilds next to the players names on the leader board.

    Just to make it clear, I would not mind an ELO system to be put in place, but this should not be the base system to gives entry for tournaments, or prizes etc... This should remain something cool that players can compare (and brag about) but it should not have any value. I've seen way too many times players refusing to enter tournaments because they were afraid of loosing points while they have a high ELO rating... And I did it myself several times back in the day (when ELO ratings used to qualify for large MTG tournaments).
    This ELO system is cool, but it should not be given any "monetary" value, because if it is the case, instead of dragging more people to tournaments, it will be an actual scarecrow.
    And I'm certainly not kidding.
    => What the game need is NOT one guy who played a draft, won it and then stopped playing for 3 months to keep that 100% win rate. It is NOT the top10 players to stop playing to keep their ELO rate high enough. What the game need is more people that play Hex, more people that play tournaments, and if possible, paid tournaments.

    To conclude, I'm a bit concerned by the very vague words Cory has given during the Invitational regarding all of this... Mostly because I have felt that there is still a long wait before any implementation on that regard... But I'm confident in the fact that it will, just not sure when.
    Still I was expecting an announcement regarding the competitive PVP future and we've had nothing of the like... but anyway, here is my contribution and feel free to comment or send me a message so that we discuss it.
    Last edited by Wuggalix; 03-07-2016 at 10:31 AM.

  5. #15
    I like this proposal too
    I just don't know if i am fine with not loosing point
    Last edited by Gregangel; 03-07-2016 at 10:04 AM.

  6. #16
    My 2c is I think there is need for BOTH a CASUAL (non-paid match-making games encouraging players to get value out of existing investment in Hex and a reason to keep spending) and a COMPETITIVE (whether paid tournaments and/or non-paid ladder matches) ranking system.

    Those who are competitive need a place to play seriously AND a place where they can just have fun or test new ideas without penality.

    There are also a ton of "fun" cards in Hex that will never see competitive play, but many of us would like to try building decks around these and have Casual ranking system where you can be paired against others with a similar combined levels of decks/ability (Hearthstone style, e.g., non-paid constructed ladder games but with better ranking algorithm less susceptible to being gamed).

    The whole point of most organized play is to match people of a similar level so that on average your win:loss is 50:50 - every other socially competitive sport/hobby I've played has been like this. If you are winning much more that 50% you are playing beneath your level and need to move up a grade (and the converse if loosing too often).

    If Hex wants to attract new players it needs a place where they can be paired against people of their level, without feeling they are being exploited being paired against better players in paid tournaments where they just land up feeling like they are subsidising someone else, rather than getting personal value on what they spend on the game.

    It will be interesting to see what types of ranking/match-making system(s) Hex come up, because it will say a lot about the type of community they want to build and what they see as the role for the new players they want to attract.

  7. #17

    You raised many valid points. And you are right that a system encouraging queues to fire would be helping Hex. And you are also right, that the fear of ruining your ELO can get a problem for some people.

    I think, there are also different perceptions of a ranked system. One is a system that you described and earn you points (or some form of ranking) by playing in the existing (or similar) queues.
    Another one is a real ladder, where players just hit play and get matched against an opponent with a similar ranking. The later would be much more fitting for an ELO like system.

    Except for increasing queue times, i can't see why both system can not coexist.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuggalix View Post
    What the game need is NOT one guy who played a draft, won it and then stopped playing for 3 months to keep that 100% win rate. It is NOT the top10 players to stop playing to keep their ELO rate high enough. What the game need is more people that play Hex, more people that play tournaments, and if possible, paid tournaments.
    That is not how an ELO system works. If you just play one match your ranking would be pretty low. You have to play a decent amount until your rating adjust to your deserved ranking. But that all depends on the individual system and parameters.

    Creator of / Forum thread IGN: dBug Twitch: dBug404

  8. #18
    @Dbug : regarding the part you quote from my previous post :
    - the first sentence is talking about a "by win rate" rating system
    - the second one is talking about an ELO rating system.

    As for the HS-like ladder, while I do think that this would fit an ELO system, I am unsure about the effect it would have on other possibilities for the players to play. And I am actually concerned that it would lower the other tournaments entry number... For no actual upside for Hex.

    Just as a quick note : Cory talked during the invitational about how Hex is a real F2P game compared to competitor games... And I would like to say that this should be emphasis more and more often, as it really is the case. MTG is obviously way more expensive, but HS which is supposed to be F2P is actually way more expensive than Hex is you want to start getting everything (or shall I say, the necessary grind to get it all is way slower).

    @Strawwmann :
    Casual PVP has some options currently... But by nature, a ranking system does not fit casual play. It's not really possible to rate a casual deck, or have a "casual ELO rating". On the other hand, if we do happen to have a "ELO system in the background" jut for information purposes, we can make it so the casual games does not count (games made in the former proving grounds, challenges etc) in order for players that want to keep their rating beautiful/not poised but still have fun from time to time.

    @Gregangel :
    Players should not loose any points, nobody likes to loose points while playing... So basically if it is possible to loose points, people will have an incentive not to play casual decks, not to try new cool drafts strategies, and to sum it up : not have fun... While it is still acceptable to loose points if it's in a "ELO system in the background that nobody really care about and that it doesn't change anything", it should not be the case for the "player of the 4 months" race (because of the ending tournaments and the high prizes).

  9. #19
    So basically you want the same Point System that MTGO uses for Player of the Year races w/ community events done in client included. Nothing wrong with that. However that system is pretty much a 'volume' system. Yes, top players do well, but it's most weighted on the grind.

    As far as a system that doesn't punish the 'casual' player - I'll define it as 4-7 events per week - too harshly, I don't have one. As a business, you want people to play which is why the POY system is good. However, it doesn't necessarily find 'the best' players for a number of reasons. All systems have flaws. The design should be based around the intent of the Rankings.

    If I was looking for the best limited player, I would set a reasonable minimum value of tournaments entered (let's say 30 per month) or maybe only consider the last X tournaments for current 'form'. Then I would give points according to placement averaged out for higher volume play (1st - 4 or 5, 2nd - 2 or 3, 2nd Round 1 ). Again, it's still very flawed as is every system.

  10. #20
    @BKCshah : I am well aware that the system I think is the best to implement is not the most effective at determining "the best player". But as you mentioned, it all depends on the goal of the system, and what I think is the most important for the game, is to gives some incentives for players to play more, and more competitively... And that system I'm talking about would provide just that.

    As far as determining the best player, there is literally no system that can do that for a game like Hex, it's often a consensus between "the best players" to determine which one is the best... But there is no real point in finding who actually is the best, at least for the game.

    Indeed, that system I'm offering is more of a volume than a quality system, and some people might not find it optimal... But it's a fair one, and one that is great for the game (which is crucial). Also, as I have to say it somewhere, even if the top5 guys in constructed or limited might not be the actual 5 bests players, they have to be quite decent. When you've won 100 drafts in a given format, even if you're not the best, you start to have a certain grasp of the format.

    Edit : I would personally not include the community tournaments (even in-client ones) in the "tournaments that gives points for the race" for several reasons (not created by Hex in the first place, free, and single elimination)... But I'm trying to be as much objective as I can and I think most people would like them to be in, so I've included them.
    Last edited by Wuggalix; 03-07-2016 at 12:25 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts