New thread started for rules/format thoughts?
dMw Ladder
4V4 Ladder
Captains submit his team to ladder admin (pen,squonk?)
Team names should not be offensive
A team can only challenge another team that is maximum 2 positions above you. The team at position one do not need to challenge anyone.
Winning over a team at a higher position than you means that the teams change position on the ladder. Winning over a team with a lower position means that the teams remain at their current position. A draw means that the team with lower position will go up one position and the team with higher position will lose one position.
A minimum of one match/challenge per fortnight need to be played by the team. If not the team will lose two positions on the ladder.
MR9 with 3 minute rounds, 35 C4
4 players per team NO substitutes allowed.. You are only allowed to be part of one team
Challenging team picks map
.
Maps available for matches are CS:S standard maps and maps from dMw's current map packs ( or map of the week ) (map of the week chosen by admins)
Matches are played on Thursdays and/or Sundays.( I will be around on those days to admin matches if needed)
It is the challenging team’s responsibility to contact an admin to see if he is available.(List admins)
The question is how the software calculates the winning/loosing in comparison to our specifications above. What I mean is is it possible to challenge a team 10 positions above you and what will happen if you win?
Quote from: Dr Sadako;206809The question is how the software calculates the winning/loosing in comparison to our specifications above. What I mean is is it possible to challenge a team 10 positions above you and what will happen if you win?
The first time you challenge (new to the ladder) you can challenge any team outside the top 20% of positions [this can be changed in config]
After that you can only challenge people within 2 positions above you [this can be changed to any number in the config]
I'm not sure what the software does about a draw but I could check the code tonight.
I won't participate in the ladder so will be totally impartial.
I think we agreed that people can post their own teams - subject to being changed by admins if that team is deemed too strong.
I like the other rules
what does this mean?
It is the challenging team’s responsibility to contact an admin to see if he is available.(List admins)
Are we going to have to spec each game as it happens ?? why not ask people to record them in case of an issue? (Not quite sure how records work and whether this is feasible). I'm hoping that people will be fairly mature and that adminning isn't necessary. Perhaps I'm being naive?
If it's a case of adminning, then that's fine - Thursday's are fine for me.... less so Sundays.
PEN
You would need an admin to do restarts (after knife round and at the change) and possibly to change maps etc.
Ok NP.
I now MR9 is a match setting but what does it mean? 9 rounds?
I think we'll need a rule about holidays etc? what happens if someone goes on holiday for a couple of weeks - that team is screwed if they're challenged.
PEN
Edit: Also, on the ladder if a team plays a match - surely they should be able to refute further challenges within the fortnight timescale? Otherwise they could feasibly be challenged again by the same team as soon as the match is over? Is that possible in the coding?
Quote from: Penfold;206889Ok NP.
I now MR9 is a match setting but what does it mean? 9 rounds?
I think we'll need a rule about holidays etc? what happens if someone goes on holiday for a couple of weeks - that team is screwed if they're challenged.
PEN
Edit: Also, on the ladder if a team plays a match - surely they should be able to refute further challenges within the fortnight timescale? Otherwise they could feasibly be challenged again by the same team as soon as the match is over? Is that possible in the coding?
Yes, 9 rounds and the challenge can be cancelled without penalty unless it is outside the 14 days since the team last played (from what I can make out anyway).
Just for planning, i think we might want to consider something alike the wow arena system, in theory its a 2v2/3v3/5v5 system, but teams hold a few more so you can cope with vacations, work etc. I am currently in a 3v3 team and know it can allready be tricky to get those all together (only have 3 in the team). Each person higher makes it more difficult.
Quote from: Bastet;206903wow arena system
and what's that?
I'm not sure if this is what he's saying but if it's something like this ....
Teams do not have to field or challenge four players.
i.e. The challenging team can challenge you with, say, 2 or 3 or 4 players and the challenged team respond with the same.
Also, the challenged team can say we're unable to field four players but will accept a 3 / 2 person challenge which the challengers match.
That way it caters for unavailable / vacation players and has more chance that ppl can find time to play and therefore keep the ladder more active.
WDYT?
PEN
edit: I think Bastet is saying that although you field a team of four - the pool of players for each team is increased (perhaps 6) so there's always four available. My only caveat on that is that we probably do'nt have enough members to make it feasible.
Aye, Pens right, we should aim to make teams a bit larger then whats needed to play, if we get 4 in a team, we should make matches 3 on 3.
Alternately if you want to play 4 on 4, make the team max size 5 or 6
That's not quite what I'm saying. I'm suggesting that we give the people the *option* to challenge 3 on 3 if they're short of a player or the challengees can force a 3 on 3 if they're short of a player.
PEN
The idea is the same, ppl can play matches with out fielding the full team, in case of holiday or work or illness or so.
Quote from: Whitey;206826I'm not sure what the software does about a draw but I could check the code tonight.
I presume that if it's a draw the team positions remain unchanged?
PEN
OK,
In an effort to drive this forward, I'm going to draft up the rules of the comp and then post them here for final consideration. (basically Squ0nks with a couple of additions).
Any final comments beforehand?
You all happy to be available to oversee matches?
PEN
Quote from: Penfold;207181You all happy to be available to oversee matches?
PEN
Yup
Quotepresume that if it's a draw the team positions remain unchanged?
I think as its coded at the moment a draw is classed as a chanallgers win..
but aim not 100% i just seem to remember seeing it somwhere
Quote from: squonk;207182Yup
I think as its coded at the moment a draw is classed as a chanallgers win..
but aim not 100% i just seem to remember seeing it somwhere
If it's a draw the positions in the ladder will be swapped :narnar:
okey dokey.
FTW then :norty:
PEN
As we have more teams in the ladder than we originally thought, how about making it so that you can challenge up to three places above you?
I'm just a bit concerned that we may have teams who want to play more than once per fortnight and are restricted in who they can challenge, to the point that they can't arrange another match.
Another item we need to discuss is weapon restrictions. Do we have a standard of 1 AWP/Auto per team, no AWPs/Autos at all or just let the challenging team specify any restrictions?
I do like the option of being able to specify 1 AWP per team as it would give us some practice against them. It was our main weakness during our last period in ED.
1 AWP per team gets my vote.
Quote from: Whitey;208693As we have more teams in the ladder than we originally thought, how about making it so that you can challenge up to three places above you?
I'm just a bit concerned that we may have teams who want to play more than once per fortnight and are restricted in who they can challenge, to the point that they can't arrange another match.
Another item we need to discuss is weapon restrictions. Do we have a standard of 1 AWP/Auto per team, no AWPs/Autos at all or just let the challenging team specify any restrictions?
I do like the option of being able to specify 1 AWP per team as it would give us some practice against them. It was our main weakness during our last period in ED.
I think challenging at most 3 places above you is not a problem. This doesn't mean that you aren't allowed to challenge teams below you! The only risk is that you might lose. You will not gain any positions if you win.
Regarding AWPs/Autos, 1 per team sounds reasonable.
However, we could slightly change it so that the team with lower position are the only ones allowed to use it. Or that the ladder leader isn't allowed to use it. What do you think?
Quote from: Dr Sadako;208700However, we could slightly change it so that the team with lower position are the only ones allowed to use it. Or that the ladder leader isn't allowed to use it. What do you think?
I think it will be harder to enforce and we'll end up with those "I forgot I wasn't allowed it moments". I like the idea but just hard to enforce. 1 per team is easily sorted through SourceMod
1 per team sounds good to me