|
I am ranked 6th in my Gold division. Of they "Top 8" in my division I am the only one that has played 1v1 in the last week. Some haven't played in 2 or even 6 weeks, and one hasn't played in 21 weeks.
The player ranked 1st in my division hasn't played in 10 weeks, yet he has over a thousand more points than me.
Now, hopefully I get promoted before I earn another thousand points, but the new "awards" and season change has got me thinking: Should players lose points for inactivity?
If this were the case, I believe that I would be 2nd in my division. To me that seems right, given that I am an active player. Should someone who hasn't played in 21 weeks get a "Top 8" award? Should someone that hasn't played in 10 weeks still be first?
It seems to me that division rank should take into account player activity? What do you think?
(remember, something similar will be happening in the Grandmasters league as players who get too much bonus pool will be kicked out)
Poll: Should players lose points for inactivity? No (392) 75% Yes (130) 25% 522 total votes Your vote: Should players lose points for inactivity? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
|
I stopped playing months ago and I'm probably taking up some poor guys spot.
|
Yes, absolutely, I don't think someone should keep their ELO in a Master's Division if they havn't played for weeks. You should also gradually get dropped in League if you are inactive long enough (Months).
|
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool.
|
My thought is it doesnt matter anyway because division rank means absolutely nothing. But i dont really think a player should lose points for inactivity, thats the point of the bonus pool. Once you hit your "skill cap" you wont get promoted as often and you will burn your bonus pool in a league at which point inactives wont be higher than you :D
|
On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool.
This pretty much.
|
Spot doesnt matter anyway. Why You have to suffer because u dont want to play? You earn the points, they're youres. And thats it. In gettting to higher leagues poins do not matter at all.
|
They do, it's called bonus pool. If you don't play your not collecting it and hence will be lower than other people who do. Instead of removing points, they give you points for playing to make you feel special.  Which I wish they wouldn't. I have 2.3k bonus pool. What the hell am I going to do with that? anyone buying?
|
division rank means absolutely nothing. say we're in the same league with the same points. in my division you would be ranked 10th but in your division you're ranked 5th. who's the better player? Grandmasters will be the league that drops players for inactivity. there's really no point to do so in other leagues.
|
Fuck no they shouldnt take away points from inactive players. I go months without playing because of school, and i wouldnt want to be punished for it. Use your bonus points and get ahead, thats all.
*edit* have 2.5k bonus points in 1s, and moved up 400 points in around 12 games in diamond. Since its spring break i finally have some time to play
**edit 2** also stomping high diamonds (3k+) because i am way under ranked from not constantly laddering.
|
They are ranked higher for a reason. If they were able to get that high ranked in that much time, imagine if they played while you did too. If you deserve to be there, you will be.
|
Another way will be bonus pool accumulates at a slower speed if you have not laddered for a week or more. Bonus pool should also replenish faster if you have 200 or lesser in your pool.
At the current rate, its 1 point per 112min as of when the season officially starts.
For example, if a player is inactive, they can maybe gain 1point per 180minutes. And if a player is very active and have a pool of 200 points or lesser, they gain 1 point per 56mintues.
|
inactive = not using bonus pool = losing points relative to active players...
|
Hell no, I've been sitting on my 1337 point diamond league rating since like a month before they implemented the master's league, do you know how many games i had to throw to get it to line up that precisely before I retired? =(
|
Inactive players are already losing practice time. When they do play they will probably lose more than they would initially compared to active players.
That's punishment enough.
|
On March 24 2011 15:43 Sensator wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool. This pretty much.
yep
i do think it should demote you from your league eventually though. i hate kids who place into dia/master then never play again because they're RT scrubs who are too scared to etc etc
but that's just me
|
On March 24 2011 16:30 Vei wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 15:43 Sensator wrote:On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool. This pretty much. yep i do think it should demote you from your league eventually though. i hate kids who place into dia/master then never play again because they're RT scrubs who are too scared to etc etc but that's just me
I'm pretty much exactly the type of player you hate, but to be honest, for some of us, there's just no point in playing if you can't be the best. If I can't be competitive within the top 200 in NA, or at the top of the arena ladder in WoW, I just won't bother to play, and I'm too old to put in the time practicing SC2 and building my mechanics up to get to that level. Rather than wallow in mediocrity in the 3k master's range, I'd rather just stick to WoW, where years of experience and very low mechanical requirements mean that I can play once a week and still easily compete with top-tier players.
|
i dont think its fair to people that are actually busy.
|
war3 had decay
sc2 has bonus pool ("reverse decay")
|
On March 24 2011 16:22 TzTz wrote:
inactive = not using bonus pool = losing points relative to active players...
Exactly.
If the inactive guy still has 1000 points more than you even though he is not using his bonus pool, he is better than you.
|
On March 24 2011 16:30 hidiliho wrote:
Inactive players are already losing practice time. When they do play they will probably lose more than they would initially compared to active players.
That's punishment enough.
After 2 months and a bit break this happened to me. I was rank ~15 Diamond with 2k rating (pre masters) and i came back, was rank 48 and lost a lot of games because of lack of practice. I got dropped to platinum and had to work my way up again, it was so painful 
I think it punishes you enough for inactivity the way it is now.
|
My opinion is not lose points but I do think that 270 bonus pool demotion thing should be expanded to all leagues. Something like 270 demoted out of GM, 450 out of masters, 750 out of diamond. I also think people should be able to be promoted/demoted without playing if their MMR changes or point demotion kicks into effect.
I just think its really silly to see 50% of divisions as blatantly inactive...why am I competing with these 100 "similarly skilled" players if 50% of them havnt played in 3 months.
|
No thats not how the ELO system works. It also shouldnt have a bonus pool -.-
|
On March 24 2011 16:37 Grebliv wrote:
war3 had decay
sc2 has bonus pool ("reverse decay")
On March 24 2011 16:22 TzTz wrote:
inactive = not using bonus pool = losing points relative to active players...
This. Even though i would trade bonus points for a good decay system to get rid of point inflation, there is no need to have both systems at the same time.
If he has 1000 points more than you, even though he stopped playing a while ago, he
a.) was much more active than you while he played
b.) he is simple much better than you
|
I wanna see people's MMR and get rid of the whole silly point system! You should too!
|
YES players should loose points for inactivity.
The system blizzard currently uses with the bonus pool is terrible.
The way the system should work is that you loose x points or x% of points every x period of time, and any points lost go to a bonus pool.
As an example, let's say 0.1% of points lost every 6 hours.
As far as I understand, that will solve the stupid inflation issue, while not punishing low-level inactivity much, but still giving a small advantage (or better representation) of players who are playing regularly
|
I don't think it should. There could be all sorts of things that might happen outside the player's control that could force them to not play, like moving to a new house/country or running out of time cuz of work or school. The player shouldn't be penalized for that.
|
no, because I would have even less motivation to play again the longer I don't play.
|
what does it matter? they arent gaining points if they are inactive (unless you count bonus pool, but everyone gets the same)
|
I would cut the players who didn't play more then 5 weeks and make them to play another placement match. Styles and players are changing. If you were 2 months ago you have can be really easy platinum now if you didn't play. Something like that would be nice: inactive 1 week => -100 pts, 2 weeks -200 pts and so on.. after 5 weeks take that player out from ladder. when he is playing again put him back. easy...
|
On March 24 2011 17:03 Xapti wrote:
YES players should loose points for inactivity.
The system blizzard currently uses with the bonus pool is terrible.
The way the system should work is that you loose x points or x% of points every x period of time, and any points lost go to a bonus pool.
As an example, let's say 0.1% of points lost every 6 hours.
As far as I understand, that will solve the stupid inflation issue, while not punishing low-level inactivity much, but still giving a small advantage (or better representation) of players who are playing regularly
Sorry, but that makes no sense at all. Your system doesnt punish inactivity, its just a random removal of points. Its not even equal for all players. You need to be more active as a player with many points than someone with less points to get the same amount of points per unit of time. Thats basically the opposite of what we want.
Again: The current system is indeed stupid, but it DOES punish inactivity. If you dont play, you dont use your bonus points, so you fall behind.
WC3: Inactive players get punished
SC2: Active players get rewarded
From a pure psychological standpoint the current system is much better. Of course it results in a stupid point inflation, so most people (me included) dont like it. But you definitely can see why blizzard is using this system and not the one from wc3.
Also, its lose, not loose. What language do people speak in canada?
|
On March 24 2011 16:37 Grebliv wrote:
war3 had decay
sc2 has bonus pool ("reverse decay")
that is... very... very well said sir. I think i would like to see Master league players lose their spots if they don't play. Given that its only top 2% (on the most populated server lol) but still. I have a lot of friends who just get to masters and then go off and play 4's. And I can beat a lot of them on 70% handicap.
|
it would be only option for master (GM already has devotion rule).
Below master it wouldnt make any sense.
|
On March 24 2011 15:44 Gingerninja wrote:They do, it's called bonus pool. If you don't play your not collecting it and hence will be lower than other people who do. Instead of removing points, they give you points for playing to make you feel special. Which I wish they wouldn't. I have 2.3k bonus pool. What the hell am I going to do with that? anyone buying?
You've misunderstood what the bonus poolis.
If you don't play your bonus pool will be higher, those guys who haven't played for 21 weeks will have a massive bonus pool, everyone gets roughly 12 points per day added to their bonus pool, meaning you essentially only need to win twice per day to use your new bonus pool.
They give you the points so that inactivity doesn't leave you behind, you can always catch up. Players who play alot will have no bonus pool. Those who have new accounts or don't play much will have a large bonus pool. Large bonus pool + high points should indicate the player is doing fairly well.
|
i dont think you should punish blizzard if they have other things to do.
|
Inactive players don't need more reasons to be deterred from laddering. I already have nearly 2k bonus pool and despite being matched against 3k diamond league players as even match I only have 1.2k points.
|
On March 24 2011 17:30 emythrel wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 15:44 Gingerninja wrote:They do, it's called bonus pool. If you don't play your not collecting it and hence will be lower than other people who do. Instead of removing points, they give you points for playing to make you feel special. Which I wish they wouldn't. I have 2.3k bonus pool. What the hell am I going to do with that? anyone buying? You've misunderstood what the bonus poolis. If you don't play your bonus pool will be higher, those guys who haven't played for 21 weeks will have a massive bonus pool, everyone gets roughly 12 points per day added to their bonus pool, meaning you essentially only need to win twice per day to use your new bonus pool. They give you the points so that inactivity doesn't leave you behind, you can always catch up. Players who play alot will have no bonus pool. Those who have new accounts or don't play much will have a large bonus pool. Large bonus pool + high points should indicate the player is doing fairly well.
Sorry, you didnt understand the bonus pool. Everyone (!) gets 12 points/day. Its doesnt matter if you are active or not. If you are inactive for some time, you have a lot of unused bonus points, thats true. But every active player already used these points. They got them too.. Sure, for some extend you do "catch up". But without bonus points you wouldnt even have to catch up in the first place.
Bonus points dont give you the ability do catch up. Because of them you have to catch up! Many people dont understand this. They think bonus points help them if they are inactive. And thats exactly why blizzard uses this system. I
If you are inactive (forever), you dont catch up. So you fall behind because of the bonus points. The system punishes you for not playing, even tough many players dont even recognize this.
|
Bonus pool does effectively the same thing; it gives you a bonus for playing, instead of not punishing you for inactivity. Same outcome, only one feels nicer than the other. I'm pretty inactive (I struggle to find time to play), and so I have a massive ~2300 bonus pool.... I think I'd actually feel a bit of despair if every time I came back to play a game all my points kept being taken away. I'd feel like I wasn't getting anywhere, whereas right now I feel like I AM getting somewhere because my points are steadily increasing, but just not as fast as the people who have time to play more.
My opinion is not lose points but I do think that 270 bonus pool demotion thing should be expanded to all leagues. Something like 270 demoted out of GM, 450 out of masters, 750 out of diamond. I also think people should be able to be promoted/demoted without playing if their MMR changes or point demotion kicks into effect. Why? I may be "inactive" with my ~80 wins, but when I DO play I rock the socks off Diamond players. It doesn't make sense (to me at least) to move people like me down. We're still *insert league here* standard players, we just don't play as much as others, and the current system can demonstrate that quite clearly already.
|
Losing points for inactivity would essentially be punishing people for having a life outside of starcraft. Contrary to popular belief starcraft is not the centre of the universe, and most people have commitments outside of it that will inevitably take them away from it. For example, I had a period of a two or three weeks where i couldn't play at all, because i was too damn busy with work, family and a million other things. At the end of the day points don't actually mean anything in relation to advancement up the ladder, the only thing it gives you is bragging rights.
|
Nah, penalizing people for not grinding 24/7 is a pretty bad thing. I think Blizzard learned that with WOW.
|
I think players should not lose points for inactivity, but players also shouldn't gain bonus points. Should be a more ELO style system where you only rise in rating by actually improving, rather than by grinding
|
I voted no, but after thinking a little more about it, i think,
that after some time of inactivity you should slowly lose points as long as the mmr stays the same(!).
Edit: the reason for this is that you shouldn´t be forced to be uberactive to play at your given skilllevel
Edit2: And you could regain your points very fast since your opponends would be favored for a long time (mmr >> points)
|
On March 24 2011 16:37 Grebliv wrote:
war3 had decay
sc2 has bonus pool ("reverse decay")
I wouldnt mind if they took out bonus pool and added decay to be honest. I think that the bonus pool is more rewarding for being inactive then decay was obviously.
|
On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool.
Exactly. I ended the season with over 2k bonus pool and was rank 29 in my division. Realistically I could've been first or second if I'd been more active (actually I probably would've been promoted to master league, but that's beside the point).
Also I don't think the system should punish you for having a life. If you get stuck at work or a new game comes out that takes away your attention for a few weeks you shouldn't come back with 0 points or be in bronze league.
|
no, you really suck if you cant surpass someone who hasnt played and you should be reminded of that at every opportunity, not given an unearned bump in ranking
|
Bonus pool kind of does this well enough already imho.
|
I actually do think there is a problem with how inactivity works. I don't really care much about ranks but more so the hidden mmr can be brutal. I didn't have much trouble getting back into the swing of things when I took a couple month break, mainly because I have played sc off and on since 1998. But when I think about it others might be affected more with how the system is and
the results are most likly you won't get back into the game.
Back when 1000 pts in diamond was around the top I stopped playing and when I came back later
what I found was that my hidden mmr was no longer 1000 it was going up with everyone else who was still playing. So now that I was say rank 30 with 1000 pts I was pairing up with people that
were 2300 in pts and in alot of case's I was = or favored. Even for me this has made it much harder
for me to continue to play the game because I don't play much when I know im going to play people from 3k masters to 3400 masters.
Sorry if i am not very clear, I just know many people who say are in gold- low level masters would
be intimidated to play if they even took say two weeks off because they will keep moving up with the people they are currently being paired with. And with some of blizzards new changes to bnet
it seems like they don't want people to be afraid to play ( taking loses away) and this is something
that has made me not play quite as much 1v1 ladder because I am rusty and have to play at the same level i used to play at.
|
I think they should lose points for inactivity instead of this bonus pool bullshit. I can never figure out if I am getting better or worse lol.
|
A definite YES is the answer, BUT ONLY TEMPORARILY. Right now people who are inactive get bonus points so they can catch up with people who ladder constanly. In addition to this you always get more points for a win than you lose for a loss. This is wrong, because it brings people to the top of the ladder through sheer massive number of games. Those arent the best players however. It is the people with above average win rates who are really really good.
So we need a "reverse bonus point" ... penalty points for inactivity, which can be negated by bonus points you only get for this specific goal and once you have filled up this loss through bonus points there arent any new ones.
|
See how I have a 2500 ~ bonuspool, i vote no
I think the ladder should be about skill, and not about whos more active. So leave it like it is
|
I think they should not lose points but they should absolutely lose MMR.
If the player has not been playing , it is good to assume that his skill is decaying. It is not fair that someone who mastered 1 build during the opening weeks get very high mmr and then he stopped playing and thus he has not mastered anything else but yet still keep his MMR
|
On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool.
This exactly.
losing points would also be a negative reinforcement for returning after a break.
|
Absolutely not. I hated level decay in WC3. It basically forces you to play which is not good at all.
|
As long as they reset the leagues and have seasons, that's okay with me.
|
Bonus pool is good because it allows inactive players to catch-up if they return to playing after missing in action for a period of time. If you already spent your bonus pool and still cannot surpass someone who is inactive, it just means he's better than you. If you are as good as him, you should overtake him easily by spending your bonus pool.
|
I dont like the ranking system. after the release of starcraft 2 I was more of an active player and was pretty fast ranked into diamond and yeah while I was active I thought the system is ok
..then I went more inactive and followed starcraft 2 more from the fan and spectator point of view. for me it just feels weird when I enter the game after I didnt play a long period of time and I am still diamond and at first get matched vs people I could compete during the time I was active.
it also bothers me that I keep remaining diamond (because of the bonus pool I guess) and then lose vs platin players while I try to get back into the game and they probably think "yeah I own a diamond player"
for me it would be even better to start from the beginning or have some reset options availabe after some time of inactivity. I feel that would also give you more freedom to consider race switches when you get bored.
|
I thought this was the point of Bonus pool? Instead of adding a decay they just make your point value less meaningful as the season goes on
|
|
|
I don't think you should straight up lose points but I definitely think your rank and division/league standings should drop. Just look at low master league players who only played a handful of matches, months ago.
|
There should be NO loss of points for inactivity.
For this reason: If Idra stopped playing for 3 months, and got bumped down to say Silver (spectulation) then how would that be fair for the silver players who had to get stomped by idra making his way back to the top. How would it be fair for any of the active players to basically be given losses because they get paired with a Grand Master level player who has been gone.
That is one of the biggest reasons they shouldn't do the decay.
|
On March 24 2011 15:42 Nimic wrote:
The rank does take into account inactivity. Indirectly, with bonus points. If they're a thousand points ahead of you, they've either played a lot more games than you or they're a lot better than you. If you were as good as them and had played as many games as them, you would almost certainly be ahead, since they would miss out on a lot of new bonus pool.
I agree with this. Inactive players do lose points, through unspent bonus pool.
Whether that's a better solution than losing points for inactivity, I don't know. But both would be too much I think.
|
On March 25 2011 00:54 DeamonMachine wrote:
There should be NO loss of points for inactivity.
For this reason: If Idra stopped playing for 3 months, and got bumped down to say Silver (spectulation) then how would that be fair for the silver players who had to get stomped by idra making his way back to the top. How would it be fair for any of the active players to basically be given losses because they get paired with a Grand Master level player who has been gone.
That is one of the biggest reasons they shouldn't do the decay.
no one is saying if you quit you should be brought back to the bottom. But you should also not be
rewarded because of your earlier play. I would be happy if the rating/hidden mmr stayed exactly where it was point wise, so at least you would have to play to continue to move up. Instead of your rank points staying the same and your hidden mmr raising with everyone else you used to play vs.
|
Pretty on-sided poll results. Looks like most everyone is not interested in having any point "decay" and a good number are happy just with bonus pool.
I do like the bonus pool system. And though I didn't play wc3 it seems like most people prefer bonus pool to the decay system.
However, I still seem to think there should be some way for it to account for activity, but I am not sure what. And I am definitely not talking about a few days or a week or two, but 10 weeks? 21 weeks? Still seems like it should account for that.
|
Well you do get dropped out of the Grand Master League if your bonus pool gets bigger than ~1-2 weeks of not playing.
|
On March 24 2011 15:38 Toxin451 wrote:
It seems to me that division rank should take into account player activity?
It does. It's called bonus pool.
|
no because if u dont have internet for some inevitable reason then its not really ur fault even if u still want to play (in my case i havent played for 1.5 months cuz my parents blocked the internet on my laptop T_T. bringing my laptop to school for the next week or so to play in class so i dont die of sc deprivation :D)
|
In Master and Grandmaster League, maybe but others no..
|
There should be no decay, and there should be no bonus pool.
|
On March 24 2011 16:39 Drazzzt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 16:22 TzTz wrote:
inactive = not using bonus pool = losing points relative to active players... Exactly. If the inactive guy still has 1000 points more than you even though he is not using his bonus pool, he is better than you.
thats actually a good point
|
I could understand having your points decay overtime if you take a bunch of time away from the game. You earn bonus pool overtime which would just simply counter it, instead of almost being rewarded for not playing as much.
|
I'd rather see blizzard reset league every few months than giving negative points for inactivity
|
If what I've read is true and the season will only be 3 months, I personally wish they'd just remove bonus pool all together. I mean what's going to happen, someone is going to get to +1k pts in a month and be considered inactive since he didn't play the following 2 months?
Personally I just feel those 3 months is short enough that it really doesn't matter, since getting to the top will take long enough that you can't really be considered inactive just from 1 season.
|
I dont care about points, but I dont want to get demoted for inactivity. As each league is supposed to hold +/- 20% of the population, I like the idea that, once I reach diamond (or master, for the next season), I can stop playing ladder and prevent someone else from getting in.
|
since there is point inflation its unimportant, even with a 50% winrate you will leave inactiv people behind you. And like every elo you shouldn't lose points just because you don't play games that would affect your elo. You will rapidly lose elo if you start playing again if you have been inactiv, or since you trained super hard you will gain it super fast.
|
On March 24 2011 15:38 Toxin451 wrote:
It seems to me that division rank should take into account player activity? What do you think?
The Bonus Pool system already does this.
|
Bonus encourages you to play. Blizzard smartly realizes you can't play all the time (or perhaps shouldn't). They don't want to punish or discourage you from having to play all the time. If you take a week off or more from playing for whatever reason you're at a disadvantage for the rest of a season and have less incentive to continue laddering. They want you to play of course, but real life and other games happen.
I wouldn't mind however if MMR decayed, so when you do come back you don't get trounced for 10 games then get demoted because you're rusty. That would of course require unification of ladders to make them continuous.
|
I think that if you are inactive for a long stretch of time (Maybe a couple moths), you should be removed from the league, keeping your MMR. Then when you decide to come back, you play one "Placement Match" and get slotted back in.
|
no cuz i'd be in bronze o.o i could see an argument for masters... but otherwise no :D
|
I think that once you get your bonus pool below a certain point there should be a cap on it. I know that would encourage me not to let my bonus pool build so high. it might be tricky to impliment to not hurt new players come in with smaller pools though. I'm thinking a cap of between 200 and 500 bonus pool once you have gotten your pool below that number would be effective.
|
On March 24 2011 16:29 PanzerKing wrote:
Hell no, I've been sitting on my 1337 point diamond league rating since like a month before they implemented the master's league, do you know how many games i had to throw to get it to line up that precisely before I retired? =(
hahaha I'm seriously considering doing this now and then never playing another ladder game.
|
The closer the visible point system is to approximating skill level, the better it is. The more it is influenced by tangential things such as activity, the more it fails to give people a sense of how good they and their opponents are.
|
On March 28 2011 22:08 PinkSoviet wrote:
I dont care about points, but I dont want to get demoted for inactivity. As each league is supposed to hold +/- 20% of the population, I like the idea that, once I reach diamond (or master, for the next season), I can stop playing ladder and prevent someone else from getting in.
It doesnt work that way for masters league. The top 2% of active players make up masters league, so if you went inactive, someone would bump you out and take your spot.
|
Oh wtf...I meant to click no and my mouse Ouiji'd up to the yes button -_-. I don't think people should LOSE points for inactivity, because all that time they're inactive, it's not like they're blocking you from catching up to them. I mean.. maybe if bonus pool was automatically added to their actual points gradually over time then I'd see a problem...but it's not like someone's record in the Hall of Fame gradually becomes lower and lower because they have been retired for x amount of years.
|
this idea defeats the entire purpose of bonus pool.
|
Yes and no. I think that in divisions below diamond people shouldn't lose points for inactivity. Presumably people in lower leagues are more casual gamers. These people will not play nearly as much. Why ruin what they've achieved? Also the people who play a ton will improve and eventually get more points than the casual players, thus allowing those who try hard but can't go up in divisions to maintain a high rank. (Don't know if this makes sense, just what I think.) Diamond and up is more competitive imo. Here it makes sense in my mind to have people lose points for inactivity. It'd have to be a very slow rate of removal though. Real life problems can easily drag people away from their hobbies etc,
|
If you can't beat somebody's rating who has 2700 bonus pool you deserve to be below them.
|
On March 24 2011 16:39 Drazzzt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 16:22 TzTz wrote:
inactive = not using bonus pool = losing points relative to active players... Exactly. If the inactive guy still has 1000 points more than you even though he is not using his bonus pool, he is better than you.
lol yeah im in this boat unfortunately :/ have like 700 bonus points which if i could spend would easily propel me to top 8, but unfortunately sittin around 50th :/ hopefully i can find time to spam games tonight and get top 25
|
Players do lose points for inactivity. It's called "bonus pool."
|
thats what the bonus pool does. Instead of losing points due to inactivity, everyone else that stays active gets MORE points from the bonus pool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
