Battle for the Belt Rules (READ FIRST)

[AAFitz]

If I go online and search FREE Online Games, I get some. I wonder why? Because they get money with ads, and donations, etc. But most people do not have the patience to wait for a 5 second or 15 second ad to finish. Wikipedia works entirely on donations. People donate so that Wikipedia goes on. But they could just go like: What does Wikipedia have to do with me? and not donate. But they do. Because they want Wikipedia to go on.

I suggest you make it your life's calling to offer free games on the internet for all, so you can show all the others how wrong they really are...or go find some cans on the side of the road, turn them in, and buy the premium...or both

Can I still be in on this tourney

 

[steelrain]

I suggest you make it your life's calling to offer free games on the internet for all, so you can show all the others how wrong they really are...or go find some cans on the side of the road, turn them in, and buy the premium...or both

My sixteen-year-old cousin said he wanted to upgrade his membership, but he did not have access to a credit card. I wonder how many underage player on Majcom have this same problem. Sure, WoW and many online games require credit cards, but they have alternative payment options (you can pickup an WoW giftcard at Walmart,) which negates the need for a credit card.

IMHO, the CLAN feature is an untapped goldmine. I think players would gladly upgrade in order to play in a clan with their friends. They might also might recruit new players for their clan.

 

[masterjskye]

I also would love to see more being done with Clans. Adds a whole new dimension to the proceedings, with the option of clan challenges and tourneys etc.

 

[Eunoia]

I also would love to see more being done with Clans. Adds a whole new dimension to the proceedings, with the option of clan challenges and tourneys etc.

Do they plan on making it so that members can willingly create their own clans with their friends? As of now... I don't believe new clans can be created. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

 

[namelochil]

I guess I need some clarification on a few things. When I make the set of 3 games, am I creating them on the same map or on 3 different maps? If it is the latter, then does that mean that for the next set of games I cannot choose those 3 maps? I just want to make sure that I am doing this right before I proceed.

I have the same questions. Does anyone have the answers?

 

[KungFuDuet]

OK - official announcement (music please)

They can be any three maps you want, with three different settings if you want (you can do it on all the same settings as well)

the next set of three maps must have at least two maps that are different to two of the first set.

Settings does not matter.

Hope it clarifies it.

 

[ajdedo]

OK - official announcement (music please)

They can be any three maps you want, with three different settings if you want (you can do it on all the same settings as well)

the next set of three maps must have at least two maps that are different to two of the first set.

Settings does not matter.

Hope it clarifies it.

Actually, not clear

"the next set of three maps must have at least two maps that are different to two of the first set."

Is that the same way of saying only 1 map can be the same?

For example:

Supposed I won the first round using these maps ->
Classic Massive
British Isles
Mars

Can I then start the second round with -?
Mars
Africa
Africa

And if so, then can the third round be -?
Africa
Classic Massive
Classic Massive

 

[KungFuDuet]

thanks for finding some simpler terms

yes, you are correct. Only one map MAX can be the same.

 

[ajdedo]

But you can still have 2 (or 3) of the same map in the same round - as long as it wasn't played before - right?

just like my example above - two africas in round 2 and two classic massive in round 3 is okay right?

 

[KungFuDuet]

But you can still have 2 (or 3) of the same map in the same round - as long as it wasn't played before - right?

just like my example above - two africas in round 2 and two classic massive in round 3 is okay right?

Yup, totally fine.

 

[Blondo]

Quick questions:

- title matches are still set up like this: 3 maps/settings chosen by current Champ and 2 by contender?
- every time you defend your title, you get 50 points (e.g. you first get to the title and 150 "prize money"; then someone ties your "record" and challenges you to a title match ... you win this and get 50)? In the case you lose and someone else becomes champ, do you get 50 when you reclaim the title?

Suggestion for new prize money structure:

In the current system you need to defeat at least 5 opponents (or more if you need to tie the record) to claim the title instead of 3 in the previous season. Also there are more players this season. That's why I feel there will be a lot less ties, title matches and champs this season. A structure where you receive a purse of 150 the first time you claim the title and 50 every time you defend or reclaim the title would still imply that the prize money awarded this season will be a lot less. When you're high on the leaderboard you'll need to counter the swings of 1v1 somehow (the prize money is possibly not enough to cover the extra losses during the games in a whole season). I like initiatives like these but when I have to win a disproportionate amount of games to break even (incur too much damage) it will scare me away. Consider that luck is very important in 1v1 (or 2v2 doubles). The only way to safeguard your place on the leaderboard is playing games where skill is a more determining factor or where there is an extra incentive to enter into luck heavy games.

You could mirror reality more: fighters purses are negotiated before the bout. We could also opt for this kind of system: 75% to the winner of a title match. Which means the contender receives 150 when he wins and 50 when he loses (vice versa for the current champ).

Normally the champ even receives a bigger piece of the pie and also his ability to draw crowds is calculated in. So you could even elaborate the previous structure:

- Contender wins = same as above (150 Contender & 50 Champ)
- Champ wins = depending on the relative positions on the leaderboard of both players, the champ is awarded a bonus. Let's say Champ at least gets 160 (even if his leaderboard position is lower than the contender). When the Champ is placed higher on the leaderboard he gets more bonus. In heavy weight increments can be bigger because players are grouped closer together. An example: no 3 on the leaderboard defeats no 6 which means that with 5 points increments his purse would be 175 (=160 + (6-3)x5).

Of course this is only a suggestion and you could tinker a bit to get a structure that's more exciting.

 

[KungFuDuet]

the rules shall be revised for Season 3. thanks for all the suggestions.

 

[ajdedo]

I've got a suggestion too....

I think players should be grouped by their highest achievement in rank.

For example - I achieved Major status (3000+) - but I dropped down to Captain (2000+) recently.

I think next season I should be automatically grouped in the HEAVY WEIGHT status regardless of what my current points might be.

 

[Blondo]

Atm the weigh-in takes place when you sign up/join: a lot can happen between the moment you join, the moment the trny kicks off & the end of the season:

When signing up I was excited about the challenge that the Heavy Weight Belt presented and I tried to convince more players to join. After having lived through season 2 and being able to show a fine result (7 bouts won, winning all 3 games in a few bouts & only losing 2 bouts), I'm doubting that the Belt is something I like to pursue. An example makes it easier to explain why I'm hesitant:

In the previous bout (vs Steel @ about 3700 points) I needed to win 2 of the 3 games just to break even. This means that when you have about 3700 points or less when we play our Belt games I'll start losing points even when winning 2 of the 3 games.

Of course everyone knows that the higher you're on the leaderboard, the harder it gets. Believe me, after having played a decent amount of games at 5k+ I'm fully aware of what it takes. In the end we all lose games ... and when you lose against someone who has a lot less points it only means that instead of the usual heartfelt wp/well done wishes you'll have to hide that you're going apeshit crazy.

Consider that you're playing coinflip 1v1 games against the best (allround) players on this site. To make it easy everyone has a 50/50 chance in their beltgames (the higher you're in the ranking, the more afraid you are of these luckheavy games). In the example Steelrain was the leader: he invited me to the games of his choice & was first to act in 2 of these 3 games. The dice gods favored me & I won 2. Yet winning 67% only meant I didn't lose points ... in other bouts I lost points with a winrate of 67%.

The bigger the scoregap, the higher your winrate needs to be or vice versa. According to the current Belt rules it makes a lot of sense to join when you have one of the lower scores: very little risk & big rewards ... for players who have high scores the challenge of a 50/50 trny is too big for the rewards it offers (cfr. nobody likes to risk 100 for a 50/50 chance at being rewarded 1). Just to break even you'll need to be apeshit crazy already (no reward while risking a buttload of points):

- to win 2 out of every 3 games on average during a very long season (defying 50% odds game after game)
- 150 points for holding the Belt
- a big prize in the end

So you need a very big prize in the end or you need to defy the odds by a ridiculously high margin to actually have gained points after winning the season ... it's more likely you'll lose points while winning the season. The Belt is the only trny in which that's a possibility. Comparing the Belt with the League will even make you feel sick.

How would you feel after winning a long trny with many, many, many games, defying the odds by a large margin in every single game and at the end of this long trny when you've received all bonus prizes, you expect to have gained points for all your effort ... yet you have lost them instead?

Going further into the risk part (the odds biting back, underperforming or the nightmare of worst case scenarios) will just give you a headache so I'l end with this: the classes of the Belt are based on your score. Yet you can weigh too heavy to pursue a heavyweight championship belt. There are solutions that attenuate the risk/reward disparacy and provide incentives to all players regardless of their score to join the Belt (e.g. a points system/prize structure that mimics real life more ... weigh-in normally happens before a bout, yet in our solution we could choose the moment of weighing in freely).

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Ajdedo and Blondo make good points, but the placings can't follow both of their ideas. IMO, the placings should be made at the time the tourney starts, NOT when you sign up. (A good case could also be made for AJDedo's suggestion also.) Blondo's points about losing points while winning work the other way also, I'm in the heavyweight division of the dubs. I've had a pretty significant streak of bad luck/(bad play?)/losses, and am currently nowhere near the rank of most of the other players. So, when my partner and myself win a game, I/we are getting quite a few points, and in fact, even if we won 1 of 3 games would probably break even.

 

[OwlCraft]

How about a different point reward for each weight category (one that more accurately reflects the "cost" of winning at each level)?

X points for Light Weight
Y points for Middle Weight
High Z for Heavy Weight (and/or a Champ-Contender split, as suggested by Blondo)

 

[KungFuDuet]

I see all your concerns guys. I have currently going through all the options and see what we can do for the next season. But before anything, this season has to be fought out...

P.S. I have one idea which might solve some problems which you guys see... Just wait and see

 

[Blondo]

After banging my head against the wall a few times ... an idea popped out ... a "Risk Boxing League" like the BFTB could:

• be exciting, fair & fun for everyone
• be easy to manage
• take care of the weigh-in problem
• prevent very big score gaps with few players to fill in those gaps
• respect objections against over-injection of points
• attract & connect players from all over the community

How could season 3 of BFTB look?

All contenders get a dummy account when a season starts = a robot to fight your bouts with.
Basically you’re shadowboxing outside the ring, while your bot takes risks that can never be too heavily biased.
At the end of the season you hand in your bot & get points deducted/added accordingly.

Rules of BFTB

The first rule: only bots are allowed to enter the ring & the ring is the only place to fight with your bot.
Rules during the season can stay the same (bout = best out of 3 games; first to X bouts = (Grand) Champion; etc.)
When a season ends your bot has either gained or lost points which will be added/deducted from your account.

Strengths & opportunities

You'll have more weigh-in possibilities: without causing a big bias, you can consider other grounds than your current score e.g. highest rank achieved, performance in previous season, etc.
You can create equal groups (same amount of players, easy to switch groups, etc.)
You can safeguard a fair risk/reward structure during the (un)lucky swings of the many coinflip games in a season
You'll have the possibility to be in bouts with players you seldom meet or with the ones you like playing the most
You can use buy-ins to award prizes while in the end all the bots can be levelled out (what's added = what's deducted; no need to inject extra points)
It's easier to manage than most solutions, e.g. leader/contender splits, bank balances, negotiating purses before a bout, etc.
... and it's much more.

It's an all-in solution promising fun for everyone.

You’ll know what I’m aiming at when you’ve ever heard of Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots.

 

[Badorties]

Blondo... what are bots? separate accounts? How is this better than just playing yourself?

 

[Blondo]

After banging my head against the wall a few times ... an idea popped out ... a "Risk Boxing League" like the BFTB could:

• be exciting, fair & fun for everyone
• be easy to manage
• take care of the weigh-in problem
• prevent very big score gaps with few players to fill in those gaps
• respect objections against over-injection of points
• attract & connect players from all over the community

How could season 3 of BFTB look?

All contenders get a dummy account when a season starts = a robot to fight your bouts with.
Basically you’re shadowboxing outside the ring, while your bot takes risks that can never be too heavily biased.
At the end of the season you hand in your bot & get points deducted/added accordingly.

Rules of BFTB

The first rule: only bots are allowed to enter the ring & the ring is the only place to fight with your bot.
Rules during the season can stay the same (bout = best out of 3 games; first to X bouts = (Grand) Champion; etc.)
When a season ends your bot has either gained or lost points which will be added/deducted from your account.

Strengths & opportunities

You'll have more weigh-in possibilities: without causing a big bias, you can consider other grounds than your current score e.g. highest rank achieved, performance in previous season, etc.
You can create equal groups (same amount of players, easy to switch groups, etc.)
You can safeguard a fair risk/reward structure during the (un)lucky swings of the many coinflip games in a season
You'll have the possibility to be in bouts with players you seldom meet or with the ones you like playing the most
You can use buy-ins to award prizes while in the end all the bots can be levelled out (what's added = what's deducted; no need to inject extra points)
It's easier to manage than most solutions, e.g. leader/contender splits, bank balances, negotiating purses before a bout, etc.
... and it's much more.

It's an all-in solution promising fun for everyone.

You’ll know what I’m aiming at when you’ve ever heard of Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots.

Blondo... what are bots? separate accounts? How is this better than just playing yourself?

All bots (e.g. fresh accounts/levelled out accounts) could belong to KFD (trny organizer) ... there could also be alternatives (e.g. banking system while playing bouts in RT) ... goal of the previous post is to get feedback/co-creation started.

In its current form the BFTB is an attractive concept yet it has a few flaws. I feel that when we put a little bit of effort & thought into the BFTB ... it will be one of the mainstays of MajCom.

The League also had a few flaws & looks very different in the second season. When later seasons would have dragged on as long as the first season ... thanks to the changes, the Leagues longevity has better odds ... many players return, few drop out and a lot more will join. Jskye puts in a lot of effort ... that might be the biggest worry for the League ... that's also why you need something that's easy to manage.

I feel that in the long run, the most promising solution is Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots.