there are less than 10 2k1 in cba hero ladder (even less at cba) and some ppl want to decay those who are at the top , that would only decrease game quality so i dont get it (? we want more 2k+ , not less
Only because there are more players with a 2k+ rating doesnt mean the quality of the games is better or the players play better because their rating is higher.
That doesnt mean Im pro decay though. After seeing it for a few years I think it sucks regardless with which settings.
How about you require a specific number of games to avoid decay after lets say 2k+. This requirement can be implemented and adjusted to any idea such as Javi's.
How about you require a specific number of games to avoid decay after lets say 2k+. This requirement can be implemented and adjusted to any idea such as Javi's.
Isn't logic Andres, if you see the top 20 right now just like 2-3 have even more than 1k games 11, and in case of some player is near of take 2k games and do not want join in decay, he can easily make new account and keep playing until have 1999 games.
I mean, i did this post for all those ladders that the top is at the level of the minimum decay. Could be good too make that as scale, always limit decay could be -50 points than top 40 player or some like that.
And about Hero i think really don't need changes, it's ok how that is.
Always complaining about everything and now about the decaysystem. they only get decayed to 1900, so wouldnt make a diffrense for ur rank. Just ask urself if this is the stuff we have to pay attention to to make cs lobby better? nope it doesnt change **** like those other milion threads before...
what about putting a rewards instead of punishment for those who play more and try to hit the top..? the punish way(decay/rating system) didn't work anytime as expected.
This won't stop people who are actively point whoring to the top so doesn't really matter. Making ratings matter less is always a good thing. At the moment plenty of players are making high rate look increasingly useless as a metric for skill, so all good as far as I'm concerned.
what about putting a rewards instead of punishment for those who play more and try to hit the top..? the punish way(decay/rating system) didn't work anytime as expected.
This won't stop people who are actively point whoring to the top so doesn't really matter. Making ratings matter less is always a good thing. At the moment plenty of players are making high rate look increasingly useless as a metric for skill, so all good as far as I'm concerned.
Well, We all saw how the last monetized tournament was a total triumph, it would be amazing if (AS A POSSIBILITY) a time goal (every X Month/week idk) are placed on ladders as Overall or the most active (CBA, Hero, RCB) and XXX$ were given $ to the top 1 (obviously extreme measures of noob bash / acc share / point trade would be applied and different players would be forced to face each other)
It would be a good idea in my opinion to also make leagues for money, whether ladders or maps.
Well, We all saw how the last monetized tournament was a total triumph, it would be amazing if (AS A POSSIBILITY) a time goal (every X Month/week idk) are placed on ladders as Overall or the most active (CBA, Hero, RCB) and XXX$ were given $ to the top 1 (obviously extreme measures of noob bash / acc share / point trade would be applied and different players would be forced to face each other)
It would be a good idea in my opinion to also make leagues for money, whether ladders or maps.
Monetized ladders would be absolute hell for any staff involved. All the ****ty tactics and ****-talking that goes on when it's just for points... how much worse it will be for everyone involved with a cash prize. Cash prize tournaments are a different beast that are much easier to regulate and that success won't translate to the ladders in my opinion. If the previous monetized tournament was a success I'd carry that on to more tournaments rather than the ladders.
edit: Plus I expect if you made a cash prize (& presumably cash-entry, since where else is the money coming from) ladder with prizes like that you would not get many applicants. Tournaments are popular because theres a set number of games, only takes an afternoon and you only have to beat a small number of people/teams. Ladders require dedication, absolute skill and a lot of games played. Realistically very very few people have a chance of winning that ladder (without cheating, noob bashing, etc, which will bring their own issues) and as such very few would be interested in joining it.
That doesnt mean Im pro decay though. After seeing it for a few years I think it sucks regardless with which settings.
After this period the settings would be changed to the following:
Decay 25 points every 14 days down to 1900
Isn't logic Andres, if you see the top 20 right now just like 2-3 have even more than 1k games 11, and in case of some player is near of take 2k games and do not want join in decay, he can easily make new account and keep playing until have 1999 games.
I mean, i did this post for all those ladders that the top is at the level of the minimum decay. Could be good too make that as scale, always limit decay could be -50 points than top 40 player or some like that.
And about Hero i think really don't need changes, it's ok how that is.
I don't think it will change anything tbh.
Well, We all saw how the last monetized tournament was a total triumph, it would be amazing if (AS A POSSIBILITY) a time goal (every X Month/week idk) are placed on ladders as Overall or the most active (CBA, Hero, RCB) and XXX$ were given $ to the top 1 (obviously extreme measures of noob bash / acc share / point trade would be applied and different players would be forced to face each other)
It would be a good idea in my opinion to also make leagues for money, whether ladders or maps.
It would be a good idea in my opinion to also make leagues for money, whether ladders or maps.
Monetized ladders would be absolute hell for any staff involved. All the ****ty tactics and ****-talking that goes on when it's just for points... how much worse it will be for everyone involved with a cash prize. Cash prize tournaments are a different beast that are much easier to regulate and that success won't translate to the ladders in my opinion. If the previous monetized tournament was a success I'd carry that on to more tournaments rather than the ladders.
edit: Plus I expect if you made a cash prize (& presumably cash-entry, since where else is the money coming from) ladder with prizes like that you would not get many applicants. Tournaments are popular because theres a set number of games, only takes an afternoon and you only have to beat a small number of people/teams. Ladders require dedication, absolute skill and a lot of games played. Realistically very very few people have a chance of winning that ladder (without cheating, noob bashing, etc, which will bring their own issues) and as such very few would be interested in joining it.