The FGM Ladder for 2016

Do you like Ithikial's idea for the FGM CM Ladder?

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
PLEASE - I'M JOKING :D:D

Sorry Ian. Couldn't resist :p.

"I can resist anything except temptation"
 
I finally voted Yes because I think what Ithikial proposed is better than what we had in 2015, even if it didn't go as far as I would have liked towards an ELO type system. For the record, I am in favor of any change to the ladder that rewards winning games VS merely playing games.
 
I am in favour of whatever works for the betterment of game play, and I support Ithikial ideas,:rolleyes:
 
Meat Grinder said:
I believe it has been proven throughout the history of sports and gaming that competition works for the betterment of game play.
Click to expand...

That is why I VOTE... NO Nominate... NO ELECT... MEAT GRINDER to lead us into Battle!!! ... VICTORY, to volunteer to administer a CM Modern ladder!!!
 
A Canadian Cat said:
I figured but I was afraid I might get Shanghai'ed into it :)
Click to expand...

That is why I VOTE... NO Nominate... NO ELECT... A Canadian Cat to lead us into Battle!!! ... VICTORY, to volunteer to administer a CM Modern ladder!!!... :):):)
 
Just waiting on the boss to get back into the chair for the years to switch over and the 2015 results to be announced. Please keep in mind that any changes to the web form you guys fill out (such as adding in a new field for scenario name) I need his expert assistance.

In the meantime, please keep filling in game results as usual. Under this system there is no ladder downtime at all. The 2016 ladder is already underway.
 
I don't want to sound like an old man, but there have been attempts in the past to make do for the "inherent imbalance" of Combat Mission. Doesn't anyone here remember Nabla and his tournament rules?

http://cis.legacy.ics.tkk.fi/jarmo/nabla-system/manual-alpha.pdf

I wonder whether a revival of Nabla and Treeburst155 system would be a good thing for the community. I took part on an adaptation in a Spanish club during 2011 - 2012 and I quite liked the experience.

And I reckon that some of the system principles could be used on a Ladder environment - one needs just a fair bit of dense datapoints. theblitz.org has a quite extensive results database on scenarios. Doing so on QB's (by having their parameters carefully registered) should allow to provide a good set of features to group scores so that results can be leveraged amongst all players.

The main issue I see with this is that entering the QB params into a web interface would be a massive pain in the arse and expecting players to do this is far too much. The obvious alternative, to have the players to upload a screenshot of the QB parameters and someone here "processes" the screenshot is also a pain in the bum. A more entertaining alternative would be that ladder battles are generated by an umpire (so the data collection process has less steps). Not sure how to handle unit purchases, though.

Sorry if the above sounds like a rant! I am happy to further discuss this issue and I can certainly help with any coding needed.
 
Bletchley_Geek said:
... The obvious alternative, to have the players to upload a screenshot of the QB parameters and someone here "processes" the screenshot is also a pain in the bum.
Click to expand...
Hi,

I have tried a few OCR libraries to parse the end screen shot without success.
There are to much "noice" for me to get out anything meaningful.
And the further down the well with OCR processing we go, the more cpu every run takes..
I guess, if it works at the end there is no way that an little vps can handle the burst loads when uploading the screenshots :)

Way back when I did the CMAKdb and CMDBdb pages I asked bfc if there could be some way to get an export of the result at the end, so that was easy to parse and import into an db.. But something went sideways at the end om CMx1 era, and nothing more happend with it.

The data is already there, and if it could eject an json with the same data in an game directory.. unicorns and rainbows :)
But hey, who am I to complain. I really like the game(s) and if this is the only thing that isn't there.. I can live with that :D

Sry, for my OT post. This is not me saying that I dislike the Ladder system :)

--
Regards OldGoat
 
OldGoat said:
The data is already there, and if it could eject an json with the same data in an game directory.. unicorns and rainbows :)
But hey, who am I to complain. I really like the game(s) and if this is the only thing that isn't there.. I can live with that :D
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that experience OldGoat... and indeed, even just structured text output would give something to those unicorns eat and for the rainbows to hang out :)
 
OldGoat said:
Hi,

I have tried a few OCR libraries to parse the end screen shot without success.
There are to much "noice" for me to get out anything meaningful.
And the further down the well with OCR processing we go, the more cpu every run takes..
I guess, if it works at the end there is no way that an little vps can handle the burst loads when uploading the screenshots :)

Way back when I did the CMAKdb and CMDBdb pages I asked bfc if there could be some way to get an export of the result at the end, so that was easy to parse and import into an db.. But something went sideways at the end om CMx1 era, and nothing more happend with it.

The data is already there, and if it could eject an json with the same data in an game directory.. unicorns and rainbows :)
But hey, who am I to complain. I really like the game(s) and if this is the only thing that isn't there.. I can live with that :D

Sry, for my OT post. This is not me saying that I dislike the Ladder system :)

--
Regards OldGoat
Click to expand...

If the CMx2 titles had a result export feature (into a .xlsx or .csv file) it would make life a lot easier. If the export dump was built properly we could just set up some Macros to auto copy material into a master database. Alas not to be so manual entry by the players is still required. :) (Would also make campaign management a hell of a lot easier).
 
Is there a good way to formally request this kind of feature? It seems like something that wouldn't be a huge amount of trouble to do, since it doesn't impinge on any other systems, and you're just looking at a different way of displaying the same information.
 
Hi,

I think that the easiest would be some kind of structured text dump like @Bletchley_Geek said.
If you want to follow through with the question I am interested to join the cause again :)

Then the possibilities would be endless :p

tumblr_n1llld2ZA61smyrgxo1_500.jpg


--
Regards OldGoat
 
Domfluff said:
Is there a good way to formally request this kind of feature? It seems like something that wouldn't be a huge amount of trouble to do, since it doesn't impinge on any other systems, and you're just looking at a different way of displaying the same information.
Click to expand...

So, yes two ways actually. One is to start a thread on one of the BFC boards and make the request. Talk about the cool things you can do etc. The other way is to open a support ticket and make the request that way.

It has been requested before - more than once. One of those times by me. I have occasionally repeated that request but not in a long time. If you start such a thread I will add my voice to it.

Just to set expectations though - as in set them low :) The answer before has always been that it is more work than we think and would cause them to not do something else they could be doing. Don't shoot the messenger and don't let that deter you from bring it up again. After all it has been some time since it was broached.
 
Hi,

Have not completed one game with an FGM member yet, so, you can take this with a grain of salt!
Agree with the idea that the ladder should encourage participation but not overly reward the most games played - not that this is a bad thing.
Is there some criteria for what constitutes a "ladder" game - QB points min/max, approved scenarios, mirrored games, battle type - probe, etc.
Personally, I prefer scenarios because I'm crap at picking a force.
I have always thought, perhaps mistakenly, that defenders have a harder time than attackers. Should there be a weighting advantage for "defender" winners?
For some spice, there could be a bonus system that awards players who win with, for example, using planes, unusual and/or expensive eqpt.
I'm sure you guys know more about this than me, just a few ideas to throw in the ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom