-=-
Menu
Tournaments
Profile
Poll
Latest videos
Latest comments
2019-09-16: "CDF in, vetoes ..." -Laro24
2019-09-15: "GG lads ..." -GrytmasternCC
2019-09-15: "-t3> in." -Vivando
2019-09-15: "no scam" -Vivando
2019-09-15: "After a dozens ..." -Krzysiek
2019-09-15: "Postponed to a ..." -Vivando
2019-09-13: " ..." -Vivando
2019-09-13: "I should be abl..." -Loon
2019-09-09: "weirdchamp ..." -ThunDer
2019-09-08: " ..." -batata
2019-09-08: "GG guys ..." -GrytmasternCC
2019-09-07: "hm, i should sa..." -Loon
Latest matches
flag -t3> [13:05] [GpW]flag
flag CX [17:18] -t3>flag
flag [CDF] [13:10] CCflag
flag [GpW] [05:03] [CDF]flag
flag CX [13:03] [CDF]flag
flag CX [08:07] [CDF]flag
flag [GpW] [09:03] [CDF]flag
flag [GpW] [13:00] [CDF]flag
flag [CDF] [05:04] CXflag
flag CX [14:01] [CDF]flag
Latest forum posts
By: Toni, in: What JJ2 level title best describes your sex life?JJ2 related 2019-09-08 01:11
Underrated Paradise
By: DanZeal, in: Funniest moments!Forum games 2019-09-07 20:02
[20:00:05] DannyZ[CDF]: Jag var i Finland tidigare...
By: SirEmentaler, in: What JJ2 level title best describes your sex life?JJ2 related 2019-08-21 20:45
I just wanted to say this topic was inspired by a ...
By: Slaz, in: What JJ2 level title best describes your sex life?JJ2 related 2019-08-20 14:13
ELEKTREK PYRAMID :dizzy:
By: PurpleJazz, in: What JJ2 level title best describes your sex life?JJ2 related 2019-08-19 06:44
15 Second Rush
More...!

JJnet's forum

«Latest posts» «Latest threads» «Search» «User CP»

  Page: 1 2 3 4 5
     Improving rules v2 | [q] 2012-03-13 20:07
Lithium
aEsavatar
JJnet user

Posts: 1758
107
Grytolle asked me to check out existing rules and try to improve them. So here they go:

General rules with regard to the ladder site

Clans abusing the ladder system in any way in order to gain an advantage or just to be a nuisance will be deleted. Further punishment may include deletion of the accounts of the person responsible for the abuse, in extreme circumstances. For example, someone who has made fake accounts for fake wars may lose all of his/her accounts and banned.
All clans with atleast 20 points may not refuse a CW against any clan more then 3 times (It's 3 times in total. It still counts if it's different clans who sent the challenges. But it's 3 per league.). But they may refuse to play normal matches and to reschedule the CW by using the "change day" button. If they do refuse 3 CW challenges in a row, they will lose 1/3 of their points. Repeatedly rescheduling CW to senseless dates or only playing very low ranked clans in order to be able to decline challenges will be considered abusing the ladder system and the clan will risk penalties. If a clan has a CW scheduled within the next 30 days, this rule does not apply and they may refuse all challenges sent to them. Also, remember that the CTF and the TB ladders are separate competitions. So the CW refusal rule is also separate for each ladder.
And remember that the site is using GDT+1

A player may only be a member of one active clan at a time.


Besides arranging the text (fix grammar errors and for example place CW rules on one place only, not throughout the entire text), I believe the CW system should be made more clear and fair. People are basically forced to play clanwars. Maybe remove the limit or change it to 5 or 7 times? The rule could also apply only for the first ranked, as before.

§15 If one clan for some reason can't continue the game, they have 10 minutes to find replacements. If they are unsuccessful in doing so, it is up to their opponents to decide whether they want to claim a forfeit win or not. They are within their full right to do so, but should keep in mind that it can be harmful for clan relations and not really worth it in what is supposed to be a friendly game. Submitting a tie is allowed, provided that the score in indeed tied. The choice remains completely with the team entitled a to a forfeit win. You are entitled to a forfeit win even if you are behind 39-0 when the other team runs out of players.

Should be made more clear. Teams usually continue to play short of one player - it isn't allowed by the rule. Allow it or officially disallow it. Also, does this apply to clanwars as well?

Quote:
Gry: The coin flipping procedure should be formalized for clanwars, or replaced with the "challenged decides" system that we have for ladder matches


You mean if the teams can't agree on the color? I say the challenged should decide, as in normal ladders, but there is already a rule about it:

§13 Concerning what colour teams should play as, a team choses colour on the opponent’s map. Upon agreement, other manners of choosing colours are allowed.

It should be the same for choosing the map order IMO.


§6 There must be atleast two rounds played. Two rounds is the default case. If you want to play more rounds, remember to save proof that both clans agreed on this. If the CW ends in a tie, there soulde be a final round played.

A clanwar rule that was recently added, but it wasn't announced on the frontpage, I think. IMO one round clanwars should be allowed IF both teams agree.

There are other issues too (mappool, veto system). Discuss here.

EDIT: TB season is quite inactive. How about returning the first season system? (TB and DOM get allowed in the regular season).






We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
Replies
cooba
[si]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 323
51
#26 | [q]2012-03-15 16:45
If you don't wish to win the season then why care about losing points after declining a challenge.


Jazz 2 Online
http://www.jazz2online.com
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#27 | [q]2012-03-15 16:54
I never said we don't want a decent place instead emo


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
Ragnarok
CX
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 151
24
#28 | [q]2012-03-15 19:21
Make a goddamn rule about warning before /stop. BECAUSE I ALWAYS DIE AND GIVE FREE POINTS BECAUSE OF THIS AND IT PISSES ME OFF.

Also even if there is a warning and you land next to enemy, THEN NO SHOOTING.
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#29 | [q]2012-03-15 19:37
Agreed.


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
Krytical
[GpW]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 90
13
#30 | [q]2012-03-15 20:08
/cstop ftw!!!
GLaDOS
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 123
28
#31 | [q]2012-03-15 20:45
Definitely agree about that. Though it would be much better if /stop actually froze you at whatever position you are, not applying gravity, sucker tubes and any other movement along with (of course) not letting you move/shoot until the game is started. But then again, blur deaded a long time ago, so we might as well forget about this feature suggestion and should rather change the rules as suggested by Rag.
Grytolle
avatar

JJnet admin
Posts: 847
87
#32 | [q]2012-03-15 21:14
/stop is indeed a technical issue, more than a rules issue...

Quote:
But why would a higher ranked clan challenge us, if not to humiliate us? They don't gain much.

As the ranking doesn't reflect only actual skill, but also activity, it makes perfect sense to wanna prove that your clan is better than a lower clan which has a reputation for being skilled!
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#33 | [q]2012-03-15 21:15
y u always find arguments emo

At least make it 5 refuses emo


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
[GpW]Urbs
[GpW]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 377
54
#34 | [q]2012-03-15 22:25
IDC tbh, so if you all wan't more options to decline cw's then fine. But I personally don't think it's right. Since a normal jj2 cw takes about 2 weeks to prepare, the worst case scenario is you will be able to postpone a cw for 10 weeks (unrealistic, I know, I'm exaggerating to make a point).

The problem with the ladder was always that activity trumped skill, so this rule was put in there for more skilled and less active clans to prove their worth. For clans that aren't as skillful this is a good motivating factor to become better. However, if their aim is to get cheap points and place in the top 5 or 3, then I say there is nothing wrong if a clan like CC show's them where their true ranking lies (considerably lower probably).

Ofc if everybody want's the change in that rule (atm I only see aEs members wanting to change that rule), I won't have anything against it. Mby we could make the rule that Lithium mentions for clans from 4-8 and have the rule about 3 cw declines for clans 1-3. I personally, however, would stick with the existing rule.

I do agree the stops should mby be persecuted with more draconian measures. I've seen a game between CX and GPW where I was ashamed of some of the stuff we did (no, it wasn't intentional, and we didn't gain points, in fact it made us look like complete imbiciles, but that doesn't mean the rule couldn't be abused if one were to time the stops perfectly etc). Less stops, and mby make it obligatory to type stop or sth in chat b4 actually stopping. It can be annoying, I know, but because of some clans (like usemo)) I believe a changing in the rules actually warrants consideration. I don't want to see rag bitchin about our behaviour anymore, if we misbehave, let CX get the point, simple as that.
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#35 | [q]2012-03-15 23:47
It's easy for you, you have a bunch of relatively skilled members ready to train every week, if not every day. It's different in aEs. We all lack both skills and time, and it's still frustrating when you have to train even for a challenge sent by DoA just because you can't refuse it. Either allow us more refusals or add a rule that prevents a certain clan from repeatedly challenging one specific clan.

Also, what's with the vetos? Do they get reset?


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
[GpW]Urbs
[GpW]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 377
54
#36 | [q]2012-03-15 23:49
Dude u were the clanleader in gpw, does it seem like we have the active membership u speak of?emo

I'm not gonna profit from this rule. Hell I should be very scared of cw'semo
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#37 | [q]2012-03-15 23:51
They are still more skilled and have more time to train.


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
cooba
[si]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 323
51
#38 | [q]2012-03-16 00:46
Dude, if you say your clan doesn't have the skills and time to be good at this ladder thing, don't expect a "decent place" as if every clan deserves one. There's already a rule which covers your non-issue:
Quote:
Clans abusing the ladder system in any way in order to gain an advantage or just to be a nuisance will be deleted.


About the stop overuse: can /stop perhaps be removed from the First and Second admin levels, and then the Third would be given away to a much stricter ring?


Jazz 2 Online
http://www.jazz2online.com
[GpW]Urbs
[GpW]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 377
54
#39 | [q]2012-03-16 09:04
Agrees with cooba. I mean, after all, this is a competition, and while I understand you want to place as high as possible in the rankings, I see no problem whatsoever with there being an instrument in place (non-declineable cw's) to act as a counterweight to activity.

In ladders you can often see small imbalances in teams (say 2/3 of a warteam vs a full warteam can lead to a run-over, ask gry and fofel) which you normally don't see in cw's, because both sides tend to field their best sides (or what they believe are their best teams).
the fact that a clan might see you being inactive and think they can get points off of you is definitely not nice, but then again, competition isn't always just about being nice. And besides who's to say their plan won't backfire (has happened to us vs CC and to VS vs us).

Still not sure about the stops. Me being a bit of a sheep, am still waiting for massa gry to come up with a brilliant solution to the whole conundrum.
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#40 | [q]2012-03-16 10:32
I said we don't have time to train for pointless CWs, and we're not that skilled to stop training. Also, would you not be annoyed if... let's say the new NF keeps challenging you and you don't want to play that CW?

But I guess you have a point, the new season will be dominated by clans who play 10 ladders a day and a clanwar every week, so I doubt we can gain a high place by playing ladders and necessary CWs only.


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
Vegito
CC
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 398
31
#41 | [q]2012-03-16 12:58
This and

Quote:
It's easy for you, you have a bunch of relatively skilled members ready to train every week, if not every day. It's different in aEs. We all lack both skills and time, and it's still frustrating when you have to train even for a challenge sent by DoA just because you can't refuse it. Either allow us more refusals or add a rule that prevents a certain clan from repeatedly challenging one specific clan.


..this..

Quote:
I never said we don't want a decent place instead emo


doesn't go with each other. Either you play for a good rank and accept the CWs that go with it cause clans will wish to steal your points, or you simply don't play as much.
If you have the time to get a good rank you have the time to train for a CW too. It's simple as that.
And really, I am pretty sure you won't get 500 CW challenges as you won't have the points to be interesting for any clan to be challenged.
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#42 | [q]2012-03-16 13:35
Quote:
add a rule that prevents a certain clan from repeatedly challenging one specific clan.


This matters.

For example, if we get to the fourth place and the fifth wants to challenge us, we could find time to train. But clans like DoA repeatedly challenging us the moment we gain our 20th point? No thanks.

And alright, I get it. No one likes us. hf with IB


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
KRSplat
avatar

JJnet user
Posts: 189
15
#43 | [q]2012-03-16 13:54
that there are stops as have been agreed to by JJ2 Clan Ladder. were there no stops we would not be allowed to play ladder matches with any frequency without a host or referee.
cooba
[si]
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 323
51
#44 | [q]2012-03-16 13:55
Quote:
For example, if we get to the fourth place and the fifth wants to challenge us, we could find time to train. But clans like DoA repeatedly challenging us the moment we gain our 20th point? No thanks.

If that happens, report the clan so they can be taken care of? Sounds simple.
Quote:
But I guess you have a point, the new season will be dominated by clans who play 10 ladders a day and a clanwar every week, so I doubt we can gain a high place by playing ladders and necessary CWs only.
Quote:
And alright, I get it. No one likes us. hf with IB

Always having an easy explanation for everything doesn't make you seem like the victim, it makes you seem just petty, and also lazy as hell. But I digress.


Jazz 2 Online
http://www.jazz2online.com
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#45 | [q]2012-03-16 13:58
Report for what? The rule allows it, that's why we're trying to change it...


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
GLaDOS
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 123
28
#46 | [q]2012-03-16 14:31
Reporting exploitative behaviour that is not explicitly against the rules tends to lead to biased decisions by admins as they are members of clans themselves.

One reason that makes me support changes to the 3-refuse-rule is that losing 1/3 of your points for refusing repeated CW challenges from one clan will probably be announced on the jjnet front page in a manner such as: "The clan AeS [sic] has been punished for repeatedly refusing CW challenges. 7 of their points have been removed."
The problem here is not the lost points. It's the fact that we would break a ladder rule, which would lead to people labelling us a "cheaty" clan which is what I would want least.

I repeat: I do not care about points, ladder ranking, or anything like that. I care about playing fun occasional ladder matches, without the hassle of having to do long preparations and training for clanwars. While losing a ladder match is no problem, a lost clanwar (due to lack of training) instantly makes us look much worse to the rest of the community. I would be willing to opt out of or simply ignore the clanwar part of this site at the cost of the inability to win seasons, but apparently that is not possible without looking like a completely lame clan, by declining the CW challenges or not training for the CW matches.
Robee
avatar

JJnet user
Posts: 19
4
#47 | [q]2012-03-16 14:33
Current rules about the clanwars are ok, I even reckon that there should be more clanwars than 4 in the whole season. As for the /stop, I don't actually see any problem. The stops don't occur frequently and they don't have major influence on the game and in the more important games like clanwars there's always a ref.


[20:02:17] [ib)SlaYer]: cj what should we pick
GLaDOS
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 123
28
#48 | [q]2012-03-16 14:44
Stops CAN occur very frequently depending on your opponents and teammates. The fact that stopping simply disallows any movement rather than freezing you in place can cause issues when you fall down right next to an enemy somewhere, or into a pit if the level has one. As not everyone agrees to "no shooting" or "recap", there have been quite a few questionable scores caused by this, even if it was just by the lack of ammo by getting killed unfairly.
Lithium
aEs
avatar
JJnet user
Posts: 1758
107
#49 | [q]2012-03-16 14:46
Yes. Also, most stops are unannounced and the reasons are quite lame ("Y U LAG NOOB", "FUCK WRONG PATH" and such).


We rode on the winds of the rising storm,
We ran to the sounds of the thunder.
We danced among the lightning bolts,
and tore the world asunder.
Robee
avatar

JJnet user
Posts: 19
4
#50 | [q]2012-03-16 14:56
My point is that stops occur but I don't think they really change the run of the game. As Lithium said, there are indeed the players who stop the game with the bullshit reason, I found the simple solution: don't play against them. (it works emo)


[20:02:17] [ib)SlaYer]: cj what should we pick
(This post has been helpful to 1 of the forumers.)
  Page: 1 2 3 4 5