How should the Point system work.

[Aeternis]

Points that should be taken into account in order to have an accurate, balanced and fair point system.

Points should only be counted for official maps AND official games. Official games will/can be user created, but will have the following rules (similar to the DotaLeague ruleset):

They are 5v5 matches of official and specific maps (if not only the DotA map).
They will contain pretty much balanced teams that cannot be controlled by the host (ie they will be always shuffle team games) so the host wont keep the best players for his team and the worst for the other.
If a player leaves and does not reconnect, then his team, if they loose they wont get a loose point, if they win, they get a win point. If the other team wins they either way get a win point.
Backdoor shouldn't be alowed.

[BodyHammer]

Generally agree, however you should still get a loss for having a player leave. Games can and do get won in 4 on 5 and 3 on 5 situations due to the free items gained.

It would also open up easy abuse with stacked teams "Ok, hey greg, you leave this game this time so we don't get a loss, I'll do it next time".

Not to mention simply having someone leaving means you have free reign to do whatever the hell you want without fear of getting a loss.

As for backdooring... with current setup there would be no way to run on check on whether or not that was done to account for it.

[Elerion]

RE: Leavers:
Simply don't allow players with disconnect percentage above ~5% to play ranked games. Players with a higher ratio will have to play and finish non-ranked games to be able to compete again. In the process, make it so non-ranked games have to last for x minutes and contain y players to count towards your disc ratio so it will be harder to farm games.

RE: Backdoor
This will be extremely hard, if not impossible, to monitor. Either find a way to limit it through game mechanics, or keep it allowed. In high level games it is rather inconsequential anyhow.

RE: Shuffle
I fully agree that Shuffle should be mandatory in ranked games. However, the shuffle should be based on the points of the participating players rather than fully random. The sum of the rating points of both teams should be as equal as possible after the shuffle.

Finally, consider using (optional) points brackets, so it is possible to create ranked games exclusively for people over/under certain ratings. All the above would still apply.

[Dick_Assman]

How on earth can you justify shuffleing teams? So, if I want to compete with a friend of mine, theres a chance we'd have to play against eachother (while possibly on VT/TSay which could ruin any competitive game)?
Id like to see anyone justify the fact that playing with friends in a team-oriented game shouldnt be possible while playing ranked/competitive games. Thats just stupid.
Besides, no one is forcing you to stay if you notice that the teams are weighted to one side, or just join a shuffled game for that matter.

Just no. The shuffle-teams option is optional for a reason.

[Elerion]

If you don't shuffle teams, then it will be impossible to rate players individually. 5 decent players with experience as a full team will consistently beat 5 higher skilled, but unaffiliated, players. Not to mention as a host you have the power to keep kicking any great players or opposing teams that join the game until you are left with only weaker opponents. Shuffle (according to rating) is a necessity if you want a reliable individual rating system.

I am all for implementing team ratings separately, where full teams can join and get rated as a team, playing against other full teams.

Note that if you want to play with one or more friends versus randoms, this is absolutely possible - you just won't get any rating for it.


You can see the mechanics of the above demonstrated in Warcraft 3's ladder systems. You can join as a full team and get matched versus other full teams - OR - you can join solo and get matched with/versus random opponents. You can not join as a team and get matched versus random opponents for the reasons stated above.

[Aeternis]

Simply don't allow players with disconnect percentage above ~5% to play ranked games. Players with a higher ratio will have to play and finish non-ranked games to be able to compete again. In the process, make it so non-ranked games have to last for x minutes and contain y players to count towards your disc ratio so it will be harder to farm games.
Yes, totally agree, that's definitely a better solution.


RE: Backdoor
This will be extremely hard, if not impossible, to monitor. Either find a way to limit it through game mechanics, or keep it allowed. In high level games it is rather inconsequential anyhow.
True, that would be idea.


Finally, consider using (optional) points brackets, so it is possible to create ranked games exclusively for people over/under certain ratings. All the above would still apply.
Also a great suggestion that could work just swell


If you don't shuffle teams, then it will be impossible to rate players individually. 5 decent players with experience as a full team will consistently beat 5 higher skilled, but unaffiliated, players. Not to mention as a host you have the power to keep kicking any great players or opposing teams that join the game until you are left with only weaker opponents. Shuffle (according to rating) is a necessity if you want a reliable individual rating system.

I am all for implementing team ratings separately, where full teams can join and get rated as a team, playing against other full teams.

Note that if you want to play with one or more friends versus randoms, this is absolutely possible - you just won't get any rating for it.


You can see the mechanics of the above demonstrated in Warcraft 3's ladder systems. You can join as a full team and get matched versus other full teams - OR - you can join solo and get matched with/versus random opponents. You can not join as a team and get matched versus random opponents for the reasons stated above.
You feel me 100%, that's exactly what i have in mind in more words. Thank you.