SCORING

[Weasel]

I keep thinking about this system, and the more I think of it the better I like it. However, I am not willing to allow 200 pts to be given to an OW assault win, so base 100 is out. This was a problem with one of the other ladders, huge point awards for a minor win resulting in everyone on the ladder being a general. Thus I like Vesku's version, as 25/25 draw is what I had in mind too.

[Vesku]

There is only one leap of ten pts, from draw to minor win. If 5 pts is shaved off each victory then it would make 50 pts from battle no matter the result. But in the other hand, the extra five pts might be a good reward for winning.

[Imp]

Is this not all academic anyway as far as I can tell the one thing the points should try & do is give a rough representation of the players skill level to aid in choosing opponents so unless it impacts on this in someway to improve it there is no merit in changing it. You know how well or badly you played the points awarded make no diffrence be they 1 or 10,000. Why fix it if it aint broke how many people has it bothered & if you change it someones bound to say why I liked the old system, they didn't like most of us they never gave it a second thought till someone brought it up.

[Walrus]

The more I think on it, the less I think we need a change.
Perhaps it's Old School of me, but I don't think a loss should generate any more points than what it already does.
To me Minor Loss, Major Loss = a loss...to get points and move up the ladder, you need to win.
Nothing wrong with that.

I would vote for a lot more debate before any changes.

[Vesku]

From my point of view it requires a better play to achieve a minor loss than OW.

[Weasel]

Ahhh, you guys drive me to drink! :)

Hey, here is an idea, lets change the scoring system. Hey that sounds great! Ok, lets look into it then. Nah, the old system is fine...


AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH...no wonder I am losing my hair!

[Walrus]

Any excuse for a whisky...I'll join you!


As someone said earlier...I had not even thought about it until Cazerpak mentioned the idea.
It obviously wasn't bugging me at all...and get plenty of losses.

I agree with Vasku...you have to work harder for a Minor Loss than a heavy one...but still, I do that for pride, not points...so I never thought about it before now.

If it were a vote...I would say, keep it the same.

We would need a few more member speaking up about a change before we would need to make a poll or do a vote eh.

Still, any debate on future changes or improvements is always worth while and should be encouraged.


hurrah!

[Vesku]

I'm starting to wonder why are you against the change? You obviously don't care what the scoring is or is there any at all. If the change is for the better then why not allow it to be done? I believe that in the end we all want to make this a better place for gaming and if the scoring can make a difference between two players who never win a single battle then maybe it is better for someone who is interested in scoring points even though can't win battles ... yet.

[Ratel]

Reading through all the posts, I pick up two things and I believe it mirrors my feelings about it.
1)We shouldn't change the system if the effect will be that we all end up being generals in no time. The current system should be handling this fine, as it has come a long way and seems to be working. Therefore we should leave it as is.
2)I believe we shouldn't change the current scoring from a draw up to the highest level of victory, but I still believe that we should differentiate between levels of loss. Maybe leave a minor and medium loss at 5 but make anything worse than that zero? The reason why I say this is that, once a player realises he is going to loose, he should do something to minimize the level of victory that the winner is going to get. Throwing all your troops at him as cannon fodder will just improve his chances of a major victory. Therefore, at some point, one should decide to retreat his forces off-screen to prevent them from being killed. This is what would have happened in real life as well.

For example, if I am left only with my arty and some infantry units that have taken a pounding already, my tanks are mostly killed or don't stand up well against the enemy armor, etc, etc, what is the point in keeping on attacking with them if you know they don't stand a chance against the enemy, either because of quality or quantity. The more you throw them at the enemy, the more they will be killed, resulting in more points for the winner. This is especially true if the enemy already holds all the VH's and you have to take it from him. If you hold some VH's, then yes, stick around and try to keep it, therefore dig in and wait for the attack.

Maybe I am wrong, but that's what my logic says.

Finally, irrespective of whether anything changes or not, I am still gaming on. Changing the scoring system is not a major thing for me. As long as it works well.

[Walrus]

I'm starting to wonder why are you against the change? You obviously don't care what the scoring is or is there any at all. If the change is for the better then why not allow it to be done? I believe that in the end we all want to make this a better place for gaming and if the scoring can make a difference between two players who never win a single battle then maybe it is better for someone who is interested in scoring points even though can't win battles ... yet.

Vesku
You assume that the change is automatically for the better...yet your only solid argument for that seems to be this...

if the scoring can make a difference between two players who never win a single battle then maybe it is better

I have not got a problem with encouraging players who often lose by changing the way losses are scored.
I just don't think your proposed system is necessarily 'better'. You need to show me why it is.

I am a rational guy, I speak here as a SP player, not moderator.
I am not afraid of change...I just don't like knee-jerk reactions when there are no time restraints. If we talk about this for a month, and get an agreement that change to System X is better, then great. We'll change.
This is just the start of the debate...no harm in that eh.

You obviously don't care what the scoring is or is there any at all.
Obviously? Really? You speak for me on that do you?
Come on bro...that is just plain guesswork on your behalf.
You don't 'obviously' know what I think about the scoring or the points or the ladder at all...why say that?

My main points is this:

The system has worked fine for the years I have been here.
It was not, as far as I was aware as a player and moderator, in dire need of attention or immediate change.
Maciej's comment was the first I had heard on the matter since I cannot remember...so, hardly a pressing issue on the SP forum of late eh.

The fact you seem to be very keen on a change does not automatically means it is a change for the good, or necessary at all IMHO.
If you can garner enough support for us (the whole ladder community) to seriously look at it, and you settle on a system that all are happy with...then that's another story completely.

You know how we roll here.
If the ladder wants change, and all are happy with the change...then we'll change.
Bloody easy...just like that.

However, even in the last three post on this thread, we have three different ideas.
That's hardly conformity yet eh.

I actually quite like Ratel's idea, but would not wish to award zero points for a large loss.

I think that there should always be points for playing....and that is what the points for all losses have been up until now.
Not reward for a loss, but reward for participation.
That's why I had never really thought about it until now.
Just IMO, I don't care about a loss, points-wise...it is a loss, and the only interest I have in making it a Minor rather than letting it be a Major, is to make your victory a little less satisfying and a lot harder than if I threw in the towel.
Call it perverse, but that's they way I have played here since I joined.

I remember my first win here. It took 11 battles and it bloody meant something to me.
It was, finally a WIN.

I see your proposed change as a softening of the results.
I like it that on our ladder,a loss is a loss.

However...if I am the only one on the SP ladder with this opinion, and the general opinion is for a change to a scoring system that reflects different levels of loss...then I am all for the change.

Cheers
Walrus