Feedback for S23

[FML|red7z7]

Hi all, with each season we try to learn how we can better organize the league to serve the players. Now with season 23 behind us, we would like to open a discussion to hear your thoughts, ideas, and suggestions regarding the season format (duration, match-making, news postings, etc.) and all related things. We've already heard good feedback on the map selection, so thanks for that. The admin team has been having conversations about things we would like to change for next season, so now we would like to hear from all of you as well.

[FML|WorpeX]

More Crypt Lord

[ZsSuperCumulo]

good topic, I will post my thoughts and suggestions this sunday :)

[b100death]

Hi. Why who win more score in game get 11 pts ?
Mb to do : 4 place - 5 pts; 2,3 - 10 pts; who win more score in game 15 pts, who win game 15 pts too, and who won game and more scored - 20 pts
I think its more motivation play for win.

[SteppinRazor]

Hi. Why who win more score in game get 11 pts ?
Mb to do : 4 place - 5 pts; 2,3 - 10 pts; who win more score in game 15 pts, who win game 15 pts too, and who won game and more scored - 20 pts
I think its more motivation play for win.

This is actually an interesting idea, though I dont know if it would work but it would lead to more players just going rambo and not hoarding and crying for 3 hours

[ObserveAndLearn]

Hi. Why who win more score in game get 11 pts ?
Mb to do : 4 place - 5 pts; 2,3 - 10 pts; who win more score in game 15 pts, who win game 15 pts too, and who won game and more scored - 20 pts
I think its more motivation play for win.

it's a really good idea.

i would tinker a little bit with the numbers though
4th place - 5pts
2nd and 3rd place - 10 points
winner of game gets + 15 (25 total)
winner by score gets + 10 (20 total)
if you win by game and score you get +20 (30 total)
would motivate more dynamic play.

i would consider vetoing maps would be an interesting idea too.
for instance you give the players 5 maps to choose from and veto (1 each) so they can play the final remaining map. this of course has it's downsides (like players playing a map more than once throughout rounds) but it will add some extra spice and clashes of game plans even before the match.

third thing i would suggest to make things even more interesting : bonuses for certain achievements.

for instance the player who makes the most hero kills throughout the round can swap two players from other matches next round (self not included). would make for hilarious scenarios and "deathmatches" with a lot of good players in one place.

Man of the round (the person who performed best but couldnt win, we can make a poll after each round) gets to choose the map next round, denying his future opponents the map veto.

etc. you get the idea.

[Pinballmap]

We are already planning to change the usual pointsystem (25-10-10-5)

[b100death]

it's a really good idea.

i would tinker a little bit with the numbers though
4th place - 5pts
2nd and 3rd place - 10 points
winner of game gets + 15 (25 total)
winner by score gets + 10 (20 total)
if you win by game and score you get +20 (30 total)
would motivate more dynamic play.

Why u think winner by score should get smaller then winner by game ? Winner by game can be not figts but win. Winner by score must fights more. I think winner by score must get equal pts, not smaller.

[b100death]

We are already planning to change the usual pointsystem (25-10-10-5)

25 is ?

[j33.]

it's a really good idea.

i would tinker a little bit with the numbers though
4th place - 5pts
2nd and 3rd place - 10 points
winner of game gets + 15 (25 total)
winner by score gets + 10 (20 total)
if you win by game and score you get +20 (30 total)
would motivate more dynamic play.

Why u think winner by score should get smaller then winner by game ? Winner by game can be not figts but win. Winner by score must fights more. I think winner by score must get equal pts, not smaller.

.

If winning the scores is valued as high as (or close to) winning the actual game, then there will be many games where shortly after the 3-way begins the dominating player suicides one of the remaining players and leaves. This secures him almost full score with no risk at all. The alternative is that he tries to win the 2v1 and risks that some1 surpasses him in the score.

Winning the 2v1 and keeping the top score would reward only 5 pts more compared to the risk free suicide strategy. The suicide strategy also lets the dominating player decide which player gets the "winner of the game" -points. He checks (or has checked) the scoreboard and suicides accordingly.

The current point system leaves only little room for this kind of dirty play since in 90% of games it encourages all player to play for win.

[b100death]

Winning the 2v1 and keeping the top score would reward only 5 pts more compared to the risk free suicide strategy. The suicide strategy also lets the dominating player decide which player gets the "winner of the game" -points. He checks (or has checked) the scoreboard and suicides accordingly.

Hi J33, i do not think so bad about the players FML. This rly dirty style and i think fml players not played like this
About current score system. I think encourages all player : not die first - important target, not play for win!
Obtained if you played good and agressive you not are rewarded if not win game.

[Peregrine]

I agree with J33, to reward more than 1 point for top score is to reward a player for winning at some abritrary blizzard-created point value system. I can fight all 3 players, get triple 10 heroes, and lose the game horribly but still win in points - that is not ffa

FFA is about being the last man standing. Just because you rambo and have good micro doesnt mean you're good at FFA. Which is proven in the recent finals where J33, who most predicted had the worst micro of all the players, came out on top because of excellent game sense, timing, and scouting.

[letshavesomefun]

why am i not suprised seeing eshan and jee voting for a point system were hoarding manipping and crying gets rewarded and agressivness and micro punished :D (your final was nicely played tough jee! <3)

[zTsoso]

The way the point system is set up right now encourages players to play passive. It rewards players that manipulate, hide buildings, trees etc. and camp in their main in the long run. It makes for 3-4 hour games where nothing happens in 80-90% of the game and where things get exciting in the last 10 minutes in a base race we have seen a zillion times.

FML games have good skill quality, but ultimately the format stagnate and the games become boring, long and predictable.

Why does a FFA game have to last 4 hours when all players are good? Should it not be rewarded if you fought and played the best throughout the game? I think there is room for improvement in the current system. Obviously J33 and Eshan have interests not to change this. They have great succes with the current format and are just better shaped at winning the mind games than getting the top score imo.

I think if we make it like 15 points for top score (like 25-15-10-5), it might create more incentive to play aggressive instead of sitting. it would be both more entertaining and fun for the viewers (skillwise, microwise, strategy wise) - plus the winner would still get the most points of all. I think it is at least worth experimenting with ideas to force players to stop sitting. The timer did not have the outcome we wanted, but maybe this could help stop a trend of boring and predictable games.

The "downside" to this is that the strong fighters will be represented in the top. This is, however, already the case with the current format so there is no news to this. With a new format we may see more entertaining games, more fights and a higher display of skill in more aspects of FFA.

[ZsSuperCumulo]

intersting debate, I think I would be on Eshan´s and J33´s side on this particular topic (the top score point), but I´ll explain my reasons later. Keep the ideas coming guys, it certainly helps to change from time time and it wouldnt hurt to try new things out :)