TWDT Season 26 Rules - Feedback Needed

[WillBy]

Ahead of the upcoming TWDT season, TW Leagues Staff is looking for your feedback on our rulebook. As a community, we can always be improving our rules. To avoid any issues requiring mid-season changes, we are asking you, the community, to help us patch any holes. We all love this game, and things can get heated when we feel the negative side effects of 20 year old programming. However, only constructive comments will be allowed in this thread. We reserve the right to delete or edit hateful comments. Please don't make me regret this thread.

[URL="https://forums.trenchwars.com/forum/sscu-trench-wars-forums/twdt/previous-draft-seasons/archives/twdt-2021-winter-aa/1348896-twdt-season-22-rules"]Existing rules can be found here. Please ignore the dates, times and star caps, as those could all be changing.[/URL]

[URL="https://forums.trenchwars.com/twdt/1359941-full-twl-25-twdt-26-announcement-stream-recording-and-voting-instructions?p=1360236#post1360236"]A nice proposal of rule changes from Turban can be found here.[/URL]

We have identified some existing rules that could use some adjustments based on feedback from recent seasons:[LIST][*]Trade transparency and rules. This includes a trade approval committee, trade deadlines, and trade caps.[*]TWDTB spawn mines. What changes should be made to minimize randomness and unfortunate spawn kills.[*]TWDTB cram mechanics. This is discussed in turbans proposal above, but I'd love to hear more. In particular, developed maps that can be tested prior to season start.[/LIST]Again, we are hoping to have a civil discussion to improve our zone. This is your chance.

[Riverside]

I would enjoy 3 ratings for TWDT basing: it could increase TWD activity within the already active TW population to learn an additional ship in the arena where 16 players participate at once.

It would be great to see increased player volunteer engagement, participation and clear criteria regarding the warbird, jav and basing ratings: from 6* to 10* (if thats the continued cap range per player).

It could be neat to have a minimum and maximum number of players per individual rating (ie 7-12 10*s and 6*s, etc).

[Turban]

My proposal for TWDT would be to completely remove player rating while replacing it with player tiers. In my opinion current player rating system is poor as players can either overperform or underperform depending on who they are playing with and it should be up to captains to decide how much someone is worth. This adds more skill to captaining as well testing their eye for talent. As a rough guideline you could use following:

10* and 9.5* would be considered [B]Elite Players[/B]. In dueling leagues you would have at most 12 players in this bracket with an 8 team league while you would limit it to about 20 players in basing.

9* and 8.5* players would be considered [B]Top Players[/B]. You would use similar limits as above for both basing and dueling.

8.0* and 7.5* players would be considered [B]Middle-Tier[/B][B] Players[/B]. This is the largest and arguably most important tier in our zone. True target audience of draft tournaments in my opinion.

Any player rated below that would be considered a [B]Beginner Player[/B].

Teams would be limited to these player slots when building a lineup:


[U][B]TWDT-D and TWDT-J[/B][/U]
x1 Elite Player
x1 Top Player
x2 Middle-Tier
x1 Beginner

[B]TWDT-B[/B]
x2 Elite
x2 Top
x3 Middle
x1 Beginner

[MousE]

[QUOTE=Turban;n1360246]My proposal for TWDT would be to completely remove player rating while replacing it with player tiers. In my opinion current player rating system is poor as players can either overperform or underperform depending on who they are playing with and it should be up to captains to decide how much someone is worth. This adds more skill to captaining as well testing their eye for talent. As a rough guideline you could use following:

10* and 9.5* would be considered [B]Elite Players[/B]. In dueling leagues you would have at most 12 players in this bracket with an 8 team league while you would limit it to about 20 players in basing.

9* and 8.5* players would be considered [B]Top Players[/B]. You would use similar limits as above for both basing and dueling.

8.0* and 7.5* players would be considered [B]Middle-Tier[/B][B] Players[/B]. This is the largest and arguably most important tier in our zone. True target audience of draft tournaments in my opinion.

Any player rated below that would be considered a [B]Beginner Player[/B].

Teams would be limited to these player slots when building a lineup:


[U][B]TWDT-D and TWDT-J[/B][/U]
x1 Elite Player
x1 Top Player
x2 Middle-Tier
x1 Beginner

[B]TWDT-B[/B]
x2 Elite
x2 Top
x3 Middle
x1 Beginner[/QUOTE]

I totally agree with this, but we would need to make sure we have enough players in each tier because our current ratings seem borked. I don't agree with beginner players being included in competitive games because literally they just get shit on by both the enemy team and their own team for being uhh bad. Showing up to a competitive league once a week is not how you l2p a game

[MousE]

My thoughts on the problems with this DT

1) Number of teams needs to match the number of signups (if people sign up late we need to re adjust and not just go into the season with half the people not playing)
2) Star cap was way too low this season especially with the lack of functional low * players this is due to our rating inflations - EVERY YEAR whoever wins gets their ratings bumped to the point now where the only low star players are just REALLY REALLY bad or literally don't give 2 fucks
3) Low star players!!!!!!!! They need their own game - I mean we say we want to be inclusive, but every game has an MMR system to prevent elites from crushing noobs which makes noobs quit we should be making low star games like Rage suggested. If there is no population for low star games and I can't repeat this enough DO NOT FORCE CAPTAINS TO HAVE TO PICK THESE PEOPLE TO MAKE LINES WORK. how can u be a cap and rely on someone who doesn't give a fuck, let alone make it fun to play with when these players don't even attempt to prac or engage in strategy. As discussed with Turb a 7* and under game would allow new players to stand out and earn spots on rosters

Personally I believe DT could be like TW light with just more teams, but VERY good games if we all caps to play all their good players. The current system makes for bad games and capping a nightmare trying to build lines to fit into a fixed mathematical number...

Oh ya and our current rating system is dookie because of obvious inflation, but is also very difficult to 100% judge skill in base. You can debate who is more helpful Sprackle pushing like a 3rd shark blocking bullets and grabbing flags being annoying or a camper who kills sharks and hangs back.

IF I was running DT I would make a 7* and under cup for each league while the other games are going on

[Rab]

turb-
I'm not seeing how that's different from the current system, other than terminology, isn't it the same people playing who would play now?

[Rab]

regarding FA.. we could cap the number of FA signups. e.g. 1 or 2 picks per team
this prevents FA from causing a "we need more teams" situation, and discourages people waiting for FA deliberately, whilst still allowing in some latecomers.

[Turban]

[QUOTE=Rab;n1360250]turb-
I'm not seeing how that's different from the current system, other than terminology, isn't it the same people playing who would play now?[/QUOTE]

Not necessarily.

Currently there are so many different variations you can field with star cap ranging from 10-10-7-7-7 to something like 9-8-8-8-8. However this is not really optimal as it means a large portion of players our target audience for this league tend to bench in matches which is also kind of a result from teams not drafting their teams in a balanced manner. The current system basically encourages you to risk picking a low-star to allow higher star players to play which leads to bad team and game balance in my opinion.

This change would mean that captains would no longer feel pressured needing to optimize their lines based on a hard star cap, but instead they would have a bit more freedom combined with an easier (more streamlined) draft as well. I feel by limiting the amount of players in each tier (relative to amount of teams and players competing) you could optimize it so that most players above 7* would get a fair chance to play assuming captains aren't too stupid.

Only players group who would get hit are 7-star players, but you could always come up with an alternative league for them which would run at the same time as TWDT where they could play against each other to for a chance to prove themselves to the main team.

[Rab]

hmm k.
remember that's bot/web work, bunch of stuff depends on stars atm.

[MousE]

[QUOTE=Rab;n1360256]hmm k.
remember that's bot/web work, bunch of stuff depends on stars atm.[/QUOTE]

I agree with the FA thing Rab so many people joining last minute was a horrible problem for this league, and also Ogron keeps telling me the system Turb is suggesting used to be used or something like it so would it be that hard to re implement?

[Turban]

It's basically similar to older system with one major change by limiting of how many players can be in each tier.

[Riverside]

Before the Draft happins:

If a player feels they have too low of a rating ([B]NOT[/B] too high): provide a public and/or private platform or person to contact where a player can request and be granted an increase(s) for the season(s).

(Ie ?message x persin, vs this link, etc x days before Draft)

The consequence wud b their Playtime, and the decision maker of the team that drafts (or later trades for) them [B]after[/B] the rating bump.

To keep community engagement via forums without a person seeking to add feedback wondering "o was that the rating given to this playir, or what they asked for?

There can be an additional 1-2 columns in the ratings Spreadsheet:[LIST=1][*]Rated as [I]x[/I][*][I]NA [/I]or asked for [U]increase[/U] to [I]y[/I][*][I]NA[/I] or granted [I]y[/I].[/LIST]

[RageRitual]

+1 for rule against mining spawn. This should have been implemented before the draft started.

Speaking of spawns, you can still be disconnected from being killed in spawn too many times before games have started. This is a simple fix that STILL has not been fixed. Please fix it.

Also, can we please get !list and !roster for everyone on team to use, not just assistants/captains? No reason not to.

Turban might be on to something there with allowing 2 entrances to flag room.

[Exalt]

[QUOTE=Riverside;n1360260]Before the Draft happins:

If a player feels they have too low of a rating ([B]NOT[/B] too high): provide a public and/or private platform or person to contact where a player can request and be granted an increase(s) for the season(s).

(Ie ?message x persin, vs this link, etc x days before Draft)

The consequence wud b their Playtime, and the decision maker of the team that drafts (or later trades for) them [B]after[/B] the rating bump.

To keep community engagement via forums without a person seeking to add feedback wondering "o was that the rating given to this playir, or what they asked for?

There can be an additional 1-2 columns in the ratings Spreadsheet:[LIST=1][*]Rated as [I]x[/I][*][I]NA [/I]or asked for [U]increase[/U] to [I]y[/I][*][I]NA[/I] or granted [I]y[/I].[/LIST][/QUOTE]

Why would anyone want to be rated higher?

[ogron]

[QUOTE=Exalt;n1360268]

Why would anyone want to be rated higher? [/QUOTE]

for the challenge.

saiyan and ease play as 10*s in everything, i doubt they would find playing as an 8* or 9* interesting or meaningful.

only 2 people have ever won warbird as a 10* since the star cap system was implemented nine seasons ago (Racka and Iron Survivor); it's one of the most difficult feats in the game.

for everyone below that, it's still a more satisfying accomplishment. your teammates get worse as your rating gets better. winning as a 9* is harder than 8* and much harder than 7*. everyone has different goals and some players fight to get lower ratings, but there's plenty of players who want to play at the highest rating they feel they can win at.