Rules and Scoring System Updates

[Dovekie]

Last place was always punished way too harshly. 

[ZsSuperCumulo]

Last place was always punished way too harshly.

and now it gets rewarded greatly :D

[FML|Mog]

I don't mind the point system change. I don't think it will change anything tbh, but I'm not opposed to trying something new. The only thing I really don't understand is why 1st isn't 21 points? It seems very wrong to me that two 4th place finishes = same points as 1st place. Also, if someone doesn't show to a match but informs admins they can't make it, such as in previous seasons, do they get 10 points now?

[FML|WorpeX]

I don't mind the point system change. I don't think it will change anything tbh, but I'm not opposed to trying something new. The only thing I really don't understand is why 1st isn't 21 points? It seems very wrong to me that two 4th place finishes = same points as 1st place. Also, if someone doesn't show to a match but informs admins they can't make it, such as in previous seasons, do they get 10 points now?

So, answer to the last question is yes, they will get 10.

To answer the first one is more complicated: While it might sound weird to say, the actual point amount changes don't matter much in the long run. A player who got last twice and second twice will still be ranked below someone who got second three times and last once. In your example, two last places will equal a first but only if that first is a non-top score first. We want to reward players for activity and showing up for games thus a higher point value for last place is needed. Winning once and no-showing the next game should not be rewarded.

What matters is the difference between each point amount and the amount of bonus the players get for highest score. For this season, we wanted one high score second place to cancel out a last place finish. It you're impressive enough, four of them will essentially turn a second place finish into a (non-top score) first.

You also have to remember that 85% of all wins will actually be 22 points and not 20, since the winner usually always gets top score.

[SteppinRazor]

THe one thing I do like is that there will be less separation between players in the standings so a win = a potentially huge jump aka players will HOPEFULLY value wins ever more.  For example, in previous years a player with 15 points (2nd/4th finish) would not have a chance to catch a player with 35 points (1st/2nd finish), but now these players would be separated by a much smaller gap.  In THAT aspect, the season will be more interesting because no one will "be out of it" unless they cannot win at all. 

[FML|Mog]

I don't mind the point system change. I don't think it will change anything tbh, but I'm not opposed to trying something new. The only thing I really don't understand is why 1st isn't 21 points? It seems very wrong to me that two 4th place finishes = same points as 1st place. Also, if someone doesn't show to a match but informs admins they can't make it, such as in previous seasons, do they get 10 points now?

So, answer to the last question is yes, they will get 10.

To answer the first one is more complicated: While it might sound weird to say, the actual point amount changes don't matter much in the long run. A player who got last twice and second twice will still be ranked below someone who got second three times and last once. In your example, two last places will equal a first but only if that first is a non-top score first. We want to reward players for activity and showing up for games thus a higher point value for last place is needed. Winning once and no-showing the next game should not be rewarded.

What matters is the difference between each point amount and the amount of bonus the players get for highest score. For this season, we wanted one high score second place to cancel out a last place finish. It you're impressive enough, four of them will essentially turn a second place finish into a (non-top score) first.

You also have to remember that 85% of all wins will actually be 22 points and not 20, since the winner usually always gets top score.

Thanks Worpex! I misunderstood, I didn't realize the +2 points for top score also applied to the winner (unlike the +1 for top score from the past system).

In that case, I agree it really won't matter in the long run. Finalists will still have to win 3 matches, and semi finalists will still have to win 1-2. scores will look closer on paper, but in reality you still need basically the same results to advance to the "postseason".

[FML|WorpeX]

]In that case, I agree it really won't matter in the long run. Finalists will still have to win 3 matches, and semi finalists will still have to win 1-2. scores will look closer on paper, but in reality you still need basically the same results to advance to the "postseason".

Exactly! The goals of the system are this:

1. Reward players for showing up for all of their matches and heavier penalties for missing a match.

2. Extra incentive to stay active in the game and less incentive on passive game-play.

3. Allow players to catch up from unlucky losses easier, and provide a clear mechanism for doing so (in this case, an expansion on the bonus point rule).

4. Getting the best players at the top of the standings!

---

In my personal opinion, I think this new system is going to make the standings and play-off race a lot more fun to watch and compete in. I also think (and hope) that it will increase the spectator value of the games. However, I don't necessarily think that this system is going to be perfect or that it is better than what we used for 20+ seasons. I do think it'll be different, fun and has a possibility of really shaking the scene up!

[Peregrine]

I agree with Cumulo here

This new system rewards mediocrity. FFA is about winning against 4+ opponents, and this new system rewards you even if you don't win, in two ways

First it gives more points to people who get 4th, 3rd, and 2nd place than before AND on top of that it gives less points to the winner. So overall it is decreasing the value placed on WINNING.

Secondly, it now gives you extra points for having top score - which again, promotes something OTHER than winning (its based on an arbitrary point scoring system Blizzard put into the game as a gimmicky statistic - it serves no purpose and has no real bearing on the events of an FFA). So ultra aggressive play will be rewarded, regardless if you win or lose.

So its devaluing what makes FFA such a complex difficult and exciting gametype: winning at all costs

And its promoting very shallow things - gameplay style and increasing spectators. You are rewarding mediocre play and giving a handicap to players who lose often, to allow them to compete. That is pretty lame, i think. You let almost anyone play in this league, but only the winners should rise to the top. I think this scoring change will water down the games and make them a little bit more basic, more predictable, less complex and yes, probably shorter and more "action packed" - but will the best players be rewarded? Will it be real strategic action or just micro wars? If losing bravely is almost as valuable as winning, players have more incentive to suicide, to take 4th, to play more recklessly

[Tleilaxu]

Shut the fuck up LOL

[FML|WorpeX]

And its promoting very shallow things - gameplay style and increasing spectators. You are rewarding mediocre play and giving a handicap to players who lose often, to allow them to compete. That is pretty lame, i think. You let almost anyone play in this league, but only the winners should rise to the top. I think this scoring change will water down the games and make them a little bit more basic, more predictable, less complex and yes, probably shorter and more "action packed" - but will the best players be rewarded? Will it be real strategic action or just micro wars? If losing bravely is almost as valuable as winning, players have more incentive to suicide, to take 4th, to play more recklessly

Trust me, I fully understand your concern and we take all feedback into account. From a players-perspective, I can totally see where you're coming from.

We just ask you to keep an open mind and give it a chance before writing it off completely. None of the admins are trying to ruin FFA or make winning less valuable. Just remember that this is a one season trial - it may or may not be the scoring system past this season.

Yes, we are trying to make the game a little bit more accessible to spectators - we have been very vocal and clear about that. Broadcasting and shoutcasting have been a big push for us and it has become extremely popular with FML fans. The changes were done to continue to make them possible and to draw in more casual fans. It may seem shallow, but we believe it to be important for the league and FFA's future.

Again, just keep an open mind and give it a chance for a season! I don't think we've done anything (lately) to not have some faith in the direction and future that we're trying to take!

[Peregrine]

Definitely have an open mind - and maybe like Mog said it won't affect standings too much

it would be cool to have more spectators and exciting games, i was just concerned at the potential cost to the integrity of FFA as a whole

but it was just a potential prediction, lets see what happens, excited for the season!