Quote from: GreatProfe on April 20, 2014, 03:32 AM
could I give an advice? Would be better if You rank the players individually. People could make different pairs everytime and the points gained would count in a single rank. The teams concept is really nice, but We have a kind of inactivity so less rules = more games.

Quote from: avirex on April 20, 2014, 04:01 PM
...  or 1v1 singles TUS - Played with partners, which seems like alot of people do not want to do, because some put alot of effort into their 1v1 ranking, to trust it in other peoples hands...

Prof, your idea is not great, keep in mind this is a forum based league, it would be nearly impossible to run your idea strictly through forums.. if your idea was coded, it would be ok... but still, then it just seems like its a 1v1 league, but with a partner... and there would be alot of avoiding, and people only wanting to play with top players.... so again, it would be a situation where the lesser skilled guys get shut out, or just dont want to play, because the skill level is always uneven...

I agree with both of you. If we want more 2v2 games, players should not be restricted to play only with their permanent clan/team mates but everytime with a different partner. Like avirex mentioned there are some problems that should be solved

1. there should be own league table for 2v2 individual ranking (called "doubles") because some people dare to lose their 1v1 points.
2. players should not be allowed to select their partner and opponents -> we need a matchmaking system that appoints you a partner and opponents, and with some added rules you would be forced to play the arranged match (penalty points if you refuse to play).

The problem is that we need someone to code this kind of system. MI won't do that until it's proved to work someway. Tomi said he could possibly code this system and create a league table on a separate website (at experimental basis) if there is enough support for this. So what do you think? Should we have a vote?

Murder Click (VoK & Senator) beat Ae Team (dibz & Sbaffo) : Roper (their pick)

Murder Click (VoK & Senator) beat Ae Team (dibz & Sbaffo) : Shopper (our pick)


****UPDATED*****

BB-code template for reporting games:


[b]Murder Click[/b] (nick & nick) beat [b]team name[/b] (nick & nick) : [b]scheme[/b] ( pick)


Opponents:

Ae Team GreatProfe Crash Johnny Wolfgang dibz Sbaffo pizzasheet Xrayez
The Oxygen Is Not Enough Tomi Rocket Ryan HHC TOMT ANO TheWalrus Impossible
The MILF squad Husk Chelsea Masta Silvan Berria avirex Dmitry Dragon

Activity: 6

Quote from: barman on April 04, 2014, 09:53 PM

Quote from: Senator on April 04, 2014, 09:22 PM- for a match there only has to be four players online the same time

This applies to every type of a 2v2 match.

No There might be single players from clans/pairs online but they can't play because there is no partner. They could however enter a matchmaking system and have a 2v2 match.

QuoteI never mentioned they have to be from the same clan.

You can play only when your permanent partner/clan mate or whatever you call him is online.

QuoteThis is pretty much unsolvable, isn't it? Playing with a clueless or uncooperative partner is not something everyone likes to spend their time at, no matter if the pairs are random or pickable by hand.

I already told a solution: you play everytime with different partner.

QuoteThere's a difference between 2-player teams and fully-fledged clans. However, I could call such teams "microclans" if you insist. Anyway, you can be in as many microclans as you want at the same time.

So everytime your partner is not online, you may create a new "microclan" to play a 2v2 match. This could lead to a explosive growth in the number of microclans. This could work however if you can have only 5 microclans at a time, for example. Another concern: you may use this draft tool just to cherry pick your new partner (if you don't like your new partner, you may just ignore him and get a new one). This would lead to unbalanced pairs as top players pair with another top player and less skilled players are left with each others.

QuoteI'd rather be able to pick my own bad partners than have to be assigned one

For this there is already clanner league. If people are ready to play everytime with a new random face, this new league could be more active than the current clanner league because it's much easier to arrange a match.

The main problems with the current clanner league

- for a match there has to be two players from both clans online the same time
- you get beaten over and over again by the same top clans, which discourages to continue playing clanners

The main problems with your as well as avirex's suggestions

- for a match there has to be two players from both clans online the same time
- if you get a bad partner you don't want to continue playing with him

So your concept would be basically just a mean to create new clans. I suspect it would be just another "clanner league" that would die slowly. Matchmaking system, however, would solve these problems.

- for a match there only has to be four players online the same time
- if you get a bad partner you may get a better one next time. You don't have to play always against the same pairs either.

P.s. this was not to criticize your concept. I'm just trying to sell my own suggestion... 

Quote from: barman on April 04, 2014, 11:04 AM
- everyone can pair up with anyone else,
- every time a new pair plays, their team is automatically registered in the database,
- you can have standings of the best pairs, as well as the best players.

So in this concept you would have a couple of random partners, right? Or what's the point having standings for the best pairs if you play every time with different player? If you know something about coding could you make a system I was thinking (see my earlier post)? The system could be quite simple: 4 players in queue -> balance the teams and create game id's for reporting. I don't know anything about coding/programming but I guess it would be quite an easy task for  a guy who knows... (just some php, sql & javascript?)

Quote from: avirex on April 02, 2014, 05:19 PM
so, i will beat them to the punch, and tell you to host a cup, see how the people like it!!

You were probably just sarcastic here A mini league created on the periphery of TUS website (the cup sites) would not be a good indicator... It's just totally different when implemented at permanent basis and more visibly.

TUS doubles league would be just like the singles league with the exception that you don't play alone. Matchmaking system would just make it possible to arrange matches (imagine yourself on AG gathering people for a 2v2 league match). You can play whenever you like, no stress of arranging matches or commitment to play every week or so (this is why 2v2 cups fail).

So the question is, do we want to play doubles matches besides singles? Like you mentioned, people don't play clan matches that actively anymore. So this league would be a choice also for clan members when there is no clanner available.

Quote from: avirex on April 02, 2014, 05:44 PM
i thought more people would be interested in this, i guess not....   

1. The sign-up is not at a visible place.
2. This self evaluation prevents some people from signing up.

1. You could send private messages about the sign ups to all potential participants (to all the players who have played some games this season, for example).
2.1 Ask people only to put the schemes in order from best to worst. Put the players you know in pools based on your knowledge about their skill level and their scheme preferences. Then select players randomly from the pools to the teams. Unfamiliar players you can just add randomly to the teams based on their scheme preferences.
2.2 Make the evaluation more simple and write an explanation for each class, like 1= bad, 2= average, 3= good.

Here is a more detailed description of the matchmaking system I was thinking...

A new "2v2 league" is created and all players have the same starting points (1000). In this league you can play matches only via matchmaking, no clan or otherwise predetermined matches.

1. You click button "Find a 2v2 game" on the website.
2. You're put in a queue and your button changes to "Searching for a game...". If you click the button again it will change back to "Find a 2v2 game" and you will be removed from the queue. Simple.
3. As soon as there is 4 (proper) players in the queue, the system balances the teams based on players' overall points and creates two separate game id's on TUS 2v2 league site.
4. The button changes to "Match found" and players are moved automatically to their "Pending games" site where they see the game id's and their ally and opponents.
5. Both teams choose their own scheme (the order is decided on the game site). After the match the winners go to report on these already created game sites.
6. If one of the players doesn't show up for the match, the other three players can go to report a no-show which means some penalty points for the reported player.

At the beginning it could be better to keep it simple and allow all players to join a game. The system would just make the teams balanced like 750p & 1450p versus 1200p & 1100p.
Later the algorithm could be set to make only matches where all players are within specific point marginal, let's say within three groups.

There could be five groups, for example, that are based on overall points like this way:
1= -800
2= 800-1000
3= 1000-1200
4= 1200-1400
5= 1400-

The algorithm would work this way

Player1 enters the queue with 1450p -> Game 1 (Now the following players for game 1 can be only from groups 3, 4 or 5)
Player2 enters the queue with 1050p -> Game 1
Player3 enters the queue with 1150p -> Game 1
Player4 enters the queue with 970p -> Game 2 (Now the following players for game 2 can be only from groups 1, 2, 3 or 4)
Player5 enters the queue with 750p -> Game 2 (Now the following players for game 2 can be only from groups 1, 2 or 3)
Player6 enters the queue with 1100p -> Game 1

Players 2 and 3 couldn't join the game 2 because game 1 was the first suitable game in the queue for them.

If player 1 had left the queue, the next player in queue would have become determining player for the game 1:

Player2 stays in game 1 (now the following players for game 1 can be from all groups)
Player3 stays in game 1
Player4 moves from game 2 to game 1 (Now the following players for game 1 can be only from groups 1, 2, 3 or 4)
Player5 moves from game 2 to game 1
"Match found"

How about a match-making system (already discussed elsewhere)? You would get in queue for a match by clicking a button on TUS site. As soon as there is four players in queue, the system would balance the teams based on players' points. All players would have the same starting points (1000, for example).

After a match is found a game id would be created on TUS site. Players can then go to report the result OR a possible no-show of some player. No-show would mean penalty points for the reported player. Penalty points would be given only in situations where one player doesn't show up for the match (and the other three players report this).

After 5 games or so players could be also divided into skill groups from 1 to 5, for example. Then the system would make only matches where all players are within two or three skill groups. This would result in longer wait times, though. You could of course promote/demote from one skill group to other.

So in this system all players would have their individual team game ranking (and skill group). If you want more permanent teams then this is not for it.

TUS name: Senator
Country: Finland
Current clan:
ttrr: 2
roper: 5
elite: 2
bng: 2
shoppa: 5
wxw: 5
hysteria: 2
t17: 7
GMT: +3

Why not make the pairs based on tus classic league points/rankings?

We will play rematch later because I forgot it's 4 worms not 3.

Quote from: pizzasheet on December 16, 2013, 04:09 AM
I made great effort in trying to arrange times but nothing is good with senator and vok..

Heh, you make it sound like it's our fault. Me and VoK are both available from 8am to 11pm GMT which is quite a big time slot. Mayhem gave us a time slot of only six hours and that happened to be worst possible for us. Next time time zones could be taken into consideration when drawing groups. Europeans in one group and people from North & South America, Australia etc. in the other.

Quote from: Mayhem on November 19, 2013, 08:16 AM
I am available 5-11pm pacific time.. Someone please convert to gmt pls.. I always see pizza at my time so anything in that time we can do.

5-11pm pacific time is 1-7am GMT. No way we could play that time...

Our time slot 8am-11pm GMT is 12am-3pm in pacific time.

Time slot which is ok for us and pizzasheet is 8am-3pm GMT and that's 12-7am pacific time... So could you play at midnight during weekend?