With the upcoming playoff decider, I thought that it may be good to talk and examine the RGL points system. Seeing as Kings Crew have a fair chance at making lan while having a poorer W/L ratio than the potential 5th place team, it is clear this system has a greater impact than some people may have initially thought. There also seems to be some disagreement about this points system so I thought it would be a good idea to discuss whether the community wants to see this points system going forward, a modified version of it, or scrap and go for the classic W/L instead.
RGL Points System
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
With the upcoming playoff decider, I thought that it may be good to talk and examine the RGL points system. Seeing as Kings Crew have a fair chance at making lan while having a poorer W/L ratio than the potential 5th place team, it is clear this system has a greater impact than some people may have initially thought. There also seems to be some disagreement about this points system so I thought it would be a good idea to discuss whether the community wants to see this points system going forward, a modified version of it, or scrap and go for the classic W/L instead.
Some thoughts posted earlier this Week
https://twitter.com/lucrative_tf2/status/1230907146746945537?s=21
Some thoughts posted earlier this Week
https://twitter.com/lucrative_tf2/status/1230907146746945537?s=21
https://twitter.com/lucrative_tf2/status/1230907146746945537?s=21
Did people not talk about this during the survey at the end of last season? Feel like if enough comments are made it will at least make them consider having points be taken into account AFTER overall W-L record and if applicable, head-to-head. I already talked about it in the Invite playoffs article, but how an 11-5 team can get seeded above a 12-4 team because "they earned more points" is laughable at best and pathetic at worst.
That combined with the absurd number of teams they let into playoffs were my two biggest issues with last season. It appears that with half of all divs going to playoffs again, and King's Crew potentially making LAN over someone with a winning record thanks to points, this remains true for this season as well. Hopefully they'll change things for S3?
Did people not talk about this during the survey at the end of last season? Feel like if enough comments are made it will at least make them consider having points be taken into account AFTER overall W-L record and if applicable, head-to-head. I already talked about it in the Invite playoffs article, but how an 11-5 team can get seeded above a 12-4 team because "they earned more points" is laughable at best and pathetic at worst.
That combined with the absurd number of teams they let into playoffs were my two biggest issues with last season. It appears that with half of all divs going to playoffs again, and King's Crew potentially making LAN over someone with a winning record thanks to points, this remains true for this season as well. Hopefully they'll change things for S3?
That combined with the absurd number of teams they let into playoffs were my two biggest issues with last season. It appears that with half of all divs going to playoffs again, and King's Crew potentially making LAN over someone with a winning record thanks to points, this remains true for this season as well. Hopefully they'll change things for S3?
They make the argument that it promotes teams to try their hardest every match, and maybe it does, but all it really does is make the objective of playing getting points instead of winning. Sure, there might be a bit of excitement around this last playoff spot, but it's completely manufactured by the points system. If a team knows they're making playoffs, they've earned the luxury of not trying their hardest in their subsequent matches. You see it all the time in the NBA, where top players rest instead of playing irrelevant matches. Maybe the players in H5 Demoman and Rat Jail want to take a breather from TF2 to rejuvenate before LAN, but now they can't completely arbitrarily.
They make the argument that it promotes teams to try their hardest every match, and maybe it does, but all it really does is make the objective of playing getting points instead of winning. Sure, there might be a bit of excitement around this last playoff spot, but it's completely manufactured by the points system. If a team knows they're making playoffs, they've earned the luxury of not trying their hardest in their subsequent matches. You see it all the time in the NBA, where top players rest instead of playing irrelevant matches. Maybe the players in H5 Demoman and Rat Jail want to take a breather from TF2 to rejuvenate before LAN, but now they can't completely arbitrarily.
yeah bro i need to load manage in a videogame for a LAN thats a month away
yeah bro i need to load manage in a videogame for a LAN thats a month away
you missed the point: they earned the ability to do so, but now they can't. It has nothing to do with what they would choose to do
you missed the point: they earned the ability to do so, but now they can't. It has nothing to do with what they would choose to do
Imagine, you beat a team twice, have more wins than them but still might not make LAN due to less than a point difference.
How that's fair in any shape or form for either us or h5 team idk, but I guess we just have to take it since no appeal works even tho literally everyone agrees it should be W/L > Points (points then used as tiebreaker). ESEA took W/L over points and it was the most fair system imo.
And remember there is still ample time to solve this in time for LAN as the final seedings haven't been decided but it probably won't happen. Epic.
Imagine, you beat a team twice, have more wins than them but still might not make LAN due to less than a point difference.
How that's fair in any shape or form for either us or h5 team idk, but I guess we just have to take it since no appeal works even tho literally everyone agrees it should be W/L > Points (points then used as tiebreaker). ESEA took W/L over points and it was the most fair system imo.
And remember there is still ample time to solve this in time for LAN as the final seedings haven't been decided but it probably won't happen. Epic.
How that's fair in any shape or form for either us or h5 team idk, but I guess we just have to take it since no appeal works even tho literally everyone agrees it should be W/L > Points (points then used as tiebreaker). ESEA took W/L over points and it was the most fair system imo.
And remember there is still ample time to solve this in time for LAN as the final seedings haven't been decided but it probably won't happen. Epic.
They should use the points system as a tie-breaker, not to determine placement. W-L should be the main focus.
They should use the points system as a tie-breaker, not to determine placement. W-L should be the main focus.
can't believe RGL is denying us a Kev777 lan, very disappointed.
can't believe RGL is denying us a Kev777 lan, very disappointed.
Consider this hypothetical scenario: team A goes 12-4 during regular season, while team B goes 8-8.
Team A wins every match by one round, earning two points per win. They lose every match without getting rounds, earning zero points per loss. They would finish with 24 total points.
Team B wins every match 5-0, earning three points per win. They lose every match by one round, earning one point per loss. They would finish with 32 total points. Therefore come playoffs they would be ranked higher than team A.
To top it all off, that point difference means that even if seven of team A's twelve wins were by a score of 5-0, they would still have less overall points than team B.
Is this unlikely? Very much so. But the fact that it could happen and end with such a result is ludicrous. Not to mention that one of team A's close wins could've been against team B. Imagine having four more wins than a team you beat only to have them above you in the standings because they "performed better while losing."
Consider this hypothetical scenario: team A goes 12-4 during regular season, while team B goes 8-8.
Team A wins every match by one round, earning two points per win. They lose every match without getting rounds, earning zero points per loss. They would finish with 24 total points.
Team B wins every match 5-0, earning three points per win. They lose every match by one round, earning one point per loss. They would finish with 32 total points. Therefore come playoffs they would be ranked higher than team A.
To top it all off, that point difference means that even if seven of team A's twelve wins were by a score of 5-0, they would [i]still[/i] have less overall points than team B.
Is this unlikely? Very much so. But the fact that it [i]could[/i] happen and end with such a result is ludicrous. Not to mention that one of team A's close wins could've been against team B. Imagine having [u]four[/u] more wins than a team you beat only to have them above you in the standings because they "performed better while losing."
Team A wins every match by one round, earning two points per win. They lose every match without getting rounds, earning zero points per loss. They would finish with 24 total points.
Team B wins every match 5-0, earning three points per win. They lose every match by one round, earning one point per loss. They would finish with 32 total points. Therefore come playoffs they would be ranked higher than team A.
To top it all off, that point difference means that even if seven of team A's twelve wins were by a score of 5-0, they would [i]still[/i] have less overall points than team B.
Is this unlikely? Very much so. But the fact that it [i]could[/i] happen and end with such a result is ludicrous. Not to mention that one of team A's close wins could've been against team B. Imagine having [u]four[/u] more wins than a team you beat only to have them above you in the standings because they "performed better while losing."
zandaw/l > head to head > points
I think it should be W/L > Points > H2H
Reason being is that the point system is still really good for determining tie breakers with teams of exact records, I think it’s a stronger tie breaker for that scenario than head to head given the fact head to head can sometimes be really indecisive in having the better team come out on top. If you have the same record as a team, but far more points overall from having closer matches but you happen to lose one of your games to that same team then it makes all the extra rounds you won kind of obsolete and I don’t think is very indicative of determining the better team overall.
[quote=zanda]w/l > head to head > points[/quote]
I think it should be W/L > Points > H2H
Reason being is that the point system is still really good for determining tie breakers with teams of exact records, I think it’s a stronger tie breaker for that scenario than head to head given the fact head to head can sometimes be really indecisive in having the better team come out on top. If you have the same record as a team, but far more points overall from having closer matches but you happen to lose one of your games to that same team then it makes all the extra rounds you won kind of obsolete and I don’t think is very indicative of determining the better team overall.
I think it should be W/L > Points > H2H
Reason being is that the point system is still really good for determining tie breakers with teams of exact records, I think it’s a stronger tie breaker for that scenario than head to head given the fact head to head can sometimes be really indecisive in having the better team come out on top. If you have the same record as a team, but far more points overall from having closer matches but you happen to lose one of your games to that same team then it makes all the extra rounds you won kind of obsolete and I don’t think is very indicative of determining the better team overall.
Pretty lame that a team can have a better W/L than a team and a better H2H against a team but still be ranked lower than them. Like others have said, W/L should be used over points to determine seeding, and points should be used when tiebreakers are necessary. I might be wrong, but I don't think that RGL has had a close season for playoff qualifications yet, so now that such a close playoff race is happening, issues are arising with the current system.
Pretty lame that a team can have a better W/L than a team and a better H2H against a team but still be ranked lower than them. Like others have said, W/L should be used over points to determine seeding, and points should be used when tiebreakers are necessary. I might be wrong, but I don't think that RGL has had a close season for playoff qualifications yet, so now that such a close playoff race is happening, issues are arising with the current system.
To add to that, there could very well be an RPS situation among three teams, and if there is a playoff spot battle between two of those teams, the losing one should not be punished for being on the losing end of that specific matchup. This is one example of many cases, but I think that's where even having a points system shows its value, rather than replacing W/L.
To add to that, there could very well be an RPS situation among three teams, and if there is a playoff spot battle between two of those teams, the losing one should not be punished for being on the losing end of that specific matchup. This is one example of many cases, but I think that's where even having a points system shows its value, rather than replacing W/L.
Every other Round Robin-esque ranking system/bracket in games has always used W/L over both H2H and Points/Game % in almost every example you could possibly bring up, I don't know why points being the main decider was ever considered a good idea to begin with.
Every other Round Robin-esque ranking system/bracket in games has always used W/L over both H2H and Points/Game % in almost every example you could possibly bring up, I don't know why points being the main decider was ever considered a good idea to begin with.
The point system does have some advantages. You have some incentive to try your hardest against the best team in the division, get rounds in what would be garbage time, and try to get rounds over stalemating for a 2-1 scoreline. It's just the RGL formula which needs to be fixed so situations like #11 never happen. Ideally there shouldn't be more than 1 win difference between contested spots.
The point system does have some advantages. You have some incentive to try your hardest against the best team in the division, get rounds in what would be garbage time, and try to get rounds over stalemating for a 2-1 scoreline. It's just the RGL formula which needs to be fixed so situations like #11 never happen. Ideally there shouldn't be more than 1 win difference between contested spots.
W/L should be the #1 factor because wins are wins, and losses are losses, regardless of score. Close wins shouldn't get discredited because "but they gave up rounds", if anything having it in you to win close games instead of choking them should be a good thing instead of parking the bus and not taking any chances to get your 3-0 in the score system. This feels like talking about college football, where everyone says shit like "Well so and so team should've won 35-3 but actually won 27-17 so they're trash and got exposed"
W/L should be the #1 factor because wins are wins, and losses are losses, regardless of score. Close wins shouldn't get discredited because "but they gave up rounds", if anything having it in you to win close games instead of choking them should be a good thing instead of parking the bus and not taking any chances to get your 3-0 in the score system. This feels like talking about college football, where everyone says shit like "Well so and so team should've won 35-3 but actually won 27-17 so they're trash and got exposed"
frootloopsEvery other Round Robin-esque ranking system/bracket in games has always used W/L over both H2H and Points/Game % in almost every example you could possibly bring up, I don't know why points being the main decider was ever considered a good idea to begin with.
im pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve
[quote=frootloops]Every other Round Robin-esque ranking system/bracket in games has always used W/L over both H2H and Points/Game % in almost every example you could possibly bring up, I don't know why points being the main decider was ever considered a good idea to begin with.[/quote]
im pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve
im pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve
segamwim pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve
it's in place to encourage teams to try harder and get as many points as they can, but we realize the problems with the system, it will not be around anymore by the time next season is here
[quote=segamw]
im pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve[/quote]
it's in place to encourage teams to try harder and get as many points as they can, but we realize the problems with the system, it will not be around anymore by the time next season is here
im pretty sure they made the point system with the thought of stopping stalemates in matches but without realizing that theyre creating a bigger problem than the one they are trying to solve[/quote]
it's in place to encourage teams to try harder and get as many points as they can, but we realize the problems with the system, it will not be around anymore by the time next season is here
boxcarit's in place to encourage teams to try harder and get as many points as they can, but we realize the problems with the system, it will not be around anymore by the time next season is here
The point system isn't the problem, the problem (as others have mentioned) is that it shouldn't take precedent over winning. Please keep points as a way to determine tie-breakers. People in NA have had to deal with ESEA's shitty method of determining tie-breakers for years, which was literally just 'rounds for,' and could actually fuck teams over hard. Not keeping it around for next season would be a mistake.
[quote=boxcar]it's in place to encourage teams to try harder and get as many points as they can, but we realize the problems with the system, it will not be around anymore by the time next season is here[/quote]
The point system isn't the problem, the problem (as others have mentioned) is that it shouldn't take precedent over winning. Please keep points as a way to determine tie-breakers. People in NA have had to deal with ESEA's shitty method of determining tie-breakers for years, which was literally just 'rounds for,' and could actually fuck teams over hard. Not keeping it around for next season would be a mistake.
The point system isn't the problem, the problem (as others have mentioned) is that it shouldn't take precedent over winning. Please keep points as a way to determine tie-breakers. People in NA have had to deal with ESEA's shitty method of determining tie-breakers for years, which was literally just 'rounds for,' and could actually fuck teams over hard. Not keeping it around for next season would be a mistake.
man i sure needed the points system to be incentivized to try hard in a competitive league i signed up and payed for
man i sure needed the points system to be incentivized to try hard in a competitive league i signed up and payed for
Brimstoneman i sure needed the points system to be incentivized to try hard in a competitive league i signed up and payed for
god i hate your posts so much
[quote=Brimstone]man i sure needed the points system to be incentivized to try hard in a competitive league i signed up and payed for[/quote]
god i hate your posts so much
god i hate your posts so much
hushThe point system does have some advantages. You have some incentive to try your hardest against the best team in the division, get rounds in what would be garbage time, and try to get rounds over stalemating for a 2-1 scoreline. It's just the RGL formula which needs to be fixed so situations like #11 never happen. Ideally there shouldn't be more than 1 win difference between contested spots.
As I said on twitter I totally agree that the W/L should take precedent for sure. Of course I would love to go to LAN but it really just doesn't make any sense and is super backwards to not count head to head at least. I agree with lucrative and hayes in keeping the points system in some form because it does give an interesting new spin to things, dead time suddenly does matter because if you slack off and drop two rounds that could hurt your playoffs chances given a tied record for example.
Hard to say points should be more important than head to head though, rat jail beat us twice (partially due to unfortunate timing playing them the very first roster and with a different roster from the end of the season, but that's our own fault obviously). Given this, it would be especially unfair if we made LAN over them, compared to h5 who we most recently beat 5-2 and narrowly lost to 4-3 at the start of the season (compared to 5-1 and 4-3 wins for rat jail).
[quote=hush]The point system does have some advantages. You have some incentive to try your hardest against the best team in the division, get rounds in what would be garbage time, and try to get rounds over stalemating for a 2-1 scoreline. It's just the RGL formula which needs to be fixed so situations like #11 never happen. Ideally there shouldn't be more than 1 win difference between contested spots.[/quote]
As I said on twitter I totally agree that the W/L should take precedent for sure. Of course I would love to go to LAN but it really just doesn't make any sense and is super backwards to not count head to head at least. I agree with lucrative and hayes in keeping the points system in some form because it does give an interesting new spin to things, dead time suddenly does matter because if you slack off and drop two rounds that could hurt your playoffs chances given a tied record for example.
Hard to say points should be more important than head to head though, rat jail beat us twice (partially due to unfortunate timing playing them the very first roster and with a different roster from the end of the season, but that's our own fault obviously). Given this, it would be especially unfair if we made LAN over them, compared to h5 who we most recently beat 5-2 and narrowly lost to 4-3 at the start of the season (compared to 5-1 and 4-3 wins for rat jail).
As I said on twitter I totally agree that the W/L should take precedent for sure. Of course I would love to go to LAN but it really just doesn't make any sense and is super backwards to not count head to head at least. I agree with lucrative and hayes in keeping the points system in some form because it does give an interesting new spin to things, dead time suddenly does matter because if you slack off and drop two rounds that could hurt your playoffs chances given a tied record for example.
Hard to say points should be more important than head to head though, rat jail beat us twice (partially due to unfortunate timing playing them the very first roster and with a different roster from the end of the season, but that's our own fault obviously). Given this, it would be especially unfair if we made LAN over them, compared to h5 who we most recently beat 5-2 and narrowly lost to 4-3 at the start of the season (compared to 5-1 and 4-3 wins for rat jail).
https://www.teamfortress.tv/post/976246/rgl-6s-season-2-changes-and-details
y'all didn't listen...
https://www.teamfortress.tv/post/976246/rgl-6s-season-2-changes-and-details
y'all didn't listen...
y'all didn't listen...
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.