The Iron League - discussion and debate

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

So, I would like you guys to have a bit of input into something I was thinking about at weekend. I'm trying to gauge opinion on a (currently) unofficial Citadel ranking system and perhaps even an organised group of PvP fighters that transcends the boundaries of powergroups.

This idea is called The Iron League.

The idea works like this:

I collate data going back, say, to January 2015 (or a chosen date) on everyone's wins and losses in the Citadel. From there, I can determine a ranking list of our brawlers. To do this I would use a co-efficient (yet to be determined) that would rank our members from one downwards.

The Iron League would then "invite" people to join and participate in "order matches" where people can increase their rank to try and become the most prestegious fighter on Althanas. It is essentially a PG without actually being one.

That is the concept. It needs flesh but before we go any further I'd like to see who would be interested and what kind of feedback we get.

[Ashla]

I like it! Although only people who have won Citadel matches can enter, right? Also, are the "best Citadel fighters" are determined by results IC or OOC?

If you need any help fleshing it out; a neat idea of an area the IC headquarters of an organization like this could be in could potentially be Scara Brae's The Zirnden. It is well known for fight rings, gambling and stuff. Just an idea though :)

[Philomel]

This is a good idea. I like.

Would it be determined on loses by judgement or by if you outside won the fight in character? I'm guessing by judgement but it's an interesting thing to think about IC.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

I'm thinking that rankings will be determined by judgment wins and losses as that is the only definitive way to prove a result. At the moment I think we can either rank by overall win to loss percentage or on a points basis (5 points for each win, -5 for each defeat).

So to take Breaker's record:

13 wins, 1 draw and 2 losses (I think)

His rank would either be determined as:

81.2% Win to Loss ratio
50 ranking points (excluding the draw)

To compare, I am currently 5-0 in the Citadel. So, with W/L % I would rank above him but on points I would be half his score at 25. Which is fairer? He's had more battles, so I would argue that the points system probably better reflects the cirumstances. In any case I would do the legwork with the record keeping so no need for anyone to worry about keeping up to date.

I am more than happy to have The Zirnden as an IC headquarters. Also to answer your question Ashla that would be for anyone who has participated in the Citadel in the past time period we determine AND registered on here.

By the way I also intend for the ranks to be IC relevant. If Breaker was rank 1, I would expect people to be a little in awe of him.

[FennWenn]

I support this idea! <3

[Amari]

My question is the same as Phi's

how do you determine the win/loss do you do it from the IC perspective
Or who won the judgement?

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

I did answer the question above by saying that we would use judgment outcomes to determine the rankings.

We have to take into consideration that some of the Citadel battles on 3.1 were scripted and therefore if we are using past results to determine initial ranking a judgment is the only fair way of determining who is truly deserving of their rank.

The only way around it otherwise is to mark each Iron League order match accordingly and ensure that battles are not scripted. However, I also believe this will lead to people taking more liberties in the Citadel, and therefore judgment by a non league judge seems the fairest way.

[Amari]

OOPS I must have missed that, thanks for the clarification friendo! That was going to be my worries/concerns but alleviated now. Yay.

[Philomel]

Also are you purely basing this on Citadels or is there potential for competitions?
And is it character by character? So we don't add alt's winnings into those of main characters/accounts?
-Mainly here I am trying to throw hypothetical questions that might come up with others.-

With the percentages, I get that it is the percentage of winnings compared to the overall amount of battles done by that person.
Points, that is an interesting way of doing it, it will be interesting to see though how you compare that in the Iron League rankings. As in who do you score higher in first place, Shin or Breaker in this?

I would be happy to work with you on this if you want.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

I had put some thought into whether or not this would include representation at tournaments. I actually quite like the idea myself but it is still an idea for debate.

The rankings would purely be per account. So Vaeron and Phi would be ranked seperately according to their previous records and then kept track of seperately going forwards.

If I understood your last question correctly, its as I said above. For the initial rankings, we would all agree a date to go back to and get the information from on 3.1. From there I would collect everyones wins, losses and draws and score them accordingly (5 for a win, 1 for a draw, -5 for a loss). The highest points total will achieve the starting rank 1. Future battles will be scored the same way.

My reasoning for this is fairness. If we took, for example, Breaker's record vs mine then Breaker has 13 wins and 2 losses overall since he began here. I have five wins and no losses. If we ranked off win percentage, then I am above Breaker.

However, he's had 13 victories to my 5. So it seemes fairer to score on the points system above then to determine rank by percentage.

Remember, it's all about rankings. This isn't a league table in the sense of a season - it is a rolling thing that records who kicks the most ass.

Am I making sense?

And yes, I would like help if it is available!

[redford]

I'll join if the ranking system puts John as the fitiest fiter.

[Lye]

Sounds like the Theatre of War back in 2005. I liked the idea. Been rallying for it. Just not a fan of keeping track for the whole site for extended periods of time. Maybe like an event or annual thing.

People used to keep their win loss records in their sigs.

[Philomel]

Ah okay, I was looking at it like it was containing percentages AND points in the rankings, but you are saying we are just going on the rankings systems.

So the more battles you have been in, the higher you are. I like it - encourages people to firstly write, and also to improve their writing.

I like this Shin. He is a clever man.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

I'm glad there is some positive opinion here. That's good. I hear what you say Lye and appreciate the position you are coming from, but The Iron League is planned to be a constant. It will be easy for me to maintain once the initial rankings are done.

I want people battling it out to be number one. I know I will be. I want it to encourage writing. I also want the ranks to be recognised IC too - so if Shin is rank three, I want other characters to be able to say "Oh shit, there's Shin, the rank three guy in the Iron League".

My endgame is that I want the Iron League rankings to be feared in Althanas IC, and therefore make the place competitive again.

[redford]

The issue I see with that is something like The Outlaw Torn, there wasnt a clear IC winner as I recall. If we want to transition iron league rankings into IC interactions, then we might have to base the standings on IC wins rather than judged writing.

Because shin beat me in the judging, then John would have to be like "oh shit shin is higher rank than me" when there's no basis for that feeling since they IC drew the match, more or less.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

The issue I see with that is something like The Outlaw Torn, there wasnt a clear IC winner as I recall. If we want to transition iron league rankings into IC interactions, then we might have to base the standings on IC wins rather than judged writing.

Because shin beat me in the judging, then John would have to be like "oh shit shin is higher rank than me" when there's no basis for that feeling since they IC drew the match, more or less.

A valid point. We will need to find a way to win IC, though. If rankings are up for grabs then I can't see too many people wanting to concede. It might make for more intense battles, but how do we ensure / enforce that it is fair? A thought needed on that I think.

Still it might actually encourage some old school battling. Which im up for.

[redford]

I'm with you, man, but I don't see it working out that simply. For example, John could probably wreck most people's faces, but that's because a large part of his character focus is combat. And while I appreciate the compliments people give me concerning my writing, there's just no way that John's record in the citadel according to judgment is reflective of how his standings would turn up. Sorry for sounding like I'm complaining.

I think one of the things we could do is add a teeny tiny extra judgment section to citadel battles marked for the Iron League. We could have a judge make a ruling for who "won" ICly. I'm thinking the ranking system would be some kind of combination of the two judgment sections. For example, we could have the standard +5 / 1 / -5 idea, but the judge can modify how many points get awarded for the fites that occur. For instance, in my fite with Ashla, I won ICly but lost the judgment by a point. So the judge might award me only 1 point for the win and only deduct 1 from her as a result. The 'wins' are determined by the IC Iron League judgment, but how much you win by might be determined by how well or poorly you wrote.

We could package this idea pretty easily in fact, I think, by involving the Ai'bron monks a little more in the story. Each Iron League match would be judged by a panel of like 3 Ai'bron monks who would 'referee' the fites of the League. The IC wins would have a better grounding in the world of Althanas, and have a more direct impact. The quality of your writing is also going to play a factor though, and poorly described actions, bad setting, and poor narrative will all transition into real character interaction, which the Ai'bron will be able to 'score'.

Thoughts? I hashed this out in like 3 minutes so it's probably half baked.

[Philomel]

You could have a secondary less official ranking of people who won IC. thoughts?

I like the Ai'Brone monks idea of them being part of it. It could even be they who create the Iron League; decide it, structure it, judge it, what have you. If you are going to go for the full in character idea. This could come out, as red suggests, as an IC commentary by them. So even if a character wins IC but loses by the judgement, there is a reason behind it according to the monks.

This is what I am gathering from your suggestions, red. Is this what you meant? I also like the adding or subtracting of one point here and there for particularly amazing fights. But that would have to be closely watched, making sure it stays equal.

I think though, by what Shin is saying, is that all citadel battles from 2016 onwards are marked for the Iron League, they are not even going to be specially marked. But we could start adding a little thing to the end of battle judgements that is essentially a commentary by the Ai'Brone. Would that be too much work though?
> here is a bit for admins to have their say and figure out what is able to be done realisitically.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

I can see both sides of it. Personally, I would be happy with the Ai'Brone birthing the Iron League. I would also be happy if judges were able to perhaps customise Iron League judgments a little to tailor to the threads in some way; by either incorporating some or all of the ideas above without making it too complex .

That is, however, a matter for discussion with Rayleigh. Remember, although this concept is gathering momentum nicely it is still unofficial.

I don't know how feasible it is but perhaps we could make it so that an IC win is a bonus wildcard on a judgment score by say 5 or 10 points. Judgment scores tend not to be massively apart these days so I think a "win bonus" of 5 to 10 points is probably enough to ensure that we don't need two ways of deciding whether or not someone has won for ranking purposes. Thoughts?

[Gum do Mugu]

awesome idea

[redford]

As a cool aside we could have rankings for everybody in the Iron League.

Say we take the 3 top fighters from the league and give them "adamantine" status. We could have medallions made of the respective metals down to iron. Though there probably won't be that many characters in it, it might give a feel of bigness to the organization, more like it's taking place in an actual world.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

Everyone in the Iron League is going to be ranked. I'm quite happy to do some sort of tier or grouping system within that if there is appetite.

I'm just running the judgment situation by Rayleigh. I realised this morning that adding a win bonus to the score would mean that some people would get higher rewards unfairly through the Iron League matches if it was agreed we were going to do it that way (as reward increase if you beat your opponent by a certain score). So, I have asked to see if we can waive that for order matches.

I think we are getting close to being able to do signups for this.

[Philomel]

Have signed up for it.

So you sign up for it, ultimately? That is good, after all there are some who might not want to take part and not have to see their name at the bottom of any list just because they prefer quests.

We could just base the EXP and GP gained from the battles with the pre-Iron League results for judgements.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

That's the plan Phi :)

[Philomel]

Sweet. We're on the same page then!

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

First Iron League match is a triple threat between William Arcus, Philomel van der Aart and Shinsou Vaan Osiris.

Let's rock!

[Ebivoulya]

Neat idea, reminds me of the Dajas Pagoda. Would like some clarification on two points, though.


Firstly, a bit of wording confusion:


Normal rewards will apply, but rewards that arise as a result of a large points gap between the winner and loser will be waived.

I had to check this thread to know what that meant; it sounds like if you win by enough points, all your rewards will be waived. I think "but bonus rewards that would arise" would be enough to clarify.


Secondly, and most importantly:


Battles will be determined by a normal Citadel judgment, with an added "win bonus" for any character who wins the battle IC.

I would like to know exactly how big that win-bonus is. Earlier in this thread, you said this:


Judgment scores tend not to be massively apart these days so I think a "win bonus" of 5 to 10 points is probably enough to ensure that we don't need two ways of deciding whether or not someone has won for ranking purposes.

As you say, it is often the case that larger point differences are 'softened,' so as not to put people off trying to improve. If that win-bonus is 10 points, that could combine with those softer gaps to ensure that IC victory leads to judgement victory most of the time. On the flip side, 5 would be a rather paltry bonus for outright winning a fight. I don't mind either, but would like to know the exact bonus, so I know what I'm getting into.

Other than a static bonus, you could consider dividing a number of points, say ten (or fifteen, in the case of three-ways), between the player's wildcard categories based on how strongly they performed ICly. Close fights could have 4 for the loser and 6 for the winner, all the way up to 0 and 10 respectively, if someone gets completely crushed. Might require removing the cap of 10 on wildcard, depending on the number of points divided. More complicated than a static bonus, but it's an option.

[Shinsou Vaan Osiris]

Neat idea, reminds me of the Dajas Pagoda. Would like some clarification on two points, though.


Firstly, a bit of wording confusion:



I had to check this thread to know what that meant; it sounds like if you win by enough points, all your rewards will be waived. I think "but bonus rewards that would arise" would be enough to clarify.

I can clear that up for you. So, the main idea was that the Iron League would try to focus more on the IC aspect of fighting. As you know you can sometimes lose a fight but win the judgment, which would make no sense if the Iron League was something recognised and canonised in character. After some discussion we decided that most fights tend to be decided by fine margins.

To try and bring judgments for the Iron League more in line with the IC result, we are offering a "win bonus" of 5 points to the judgment score. That may not seem a lot but, when I did my research, most fights (and I suspect ones that are in the Iron League will fall into this category) are decided by fine margins of a few points. There are exceptions, obviously (such as when the quality of a writer overwhelms their opponent), but 90% of the time you would be surprised to learn the average win gap is 4.75 points.

Now, there is a rule when calculating battle EXP for the winner that the formula is based on how much of a gap there is between the two scores. A win bonus that isnt part of the official Althanas rubric may well trigger additional EXP (due to increasing the points gap between winner and loser) and this could be seen as the Iron League threads giving an unfair advantage to players.

Therefore the idea is that we waive the bonus EXP idea entirely and stick purely to standard EXP. No one gains or loses out on the rewards front.

Whilst I appreciate the additional scoring is not foolproof, and people can still win by judgment, it will make it harder to just get by on good writing and the idea is people will try harder to actually win by use of tactics. Its not completely foolproof, granted, but in every battle I have seen so far I have felt there is more intensity, more will to win. Less scripted shit and more classic battling. Yes, there will be an argument to say we may see more tenious situations where people avoid hits they may otherwise have taken in a "writing quality" battle, but judges will be on hand to ensure that any powergaming is marked down.

Its still in its infancy, so im hoping to see results pan out well.

To clarify, i'm still open to ideas. I'd like to see how these first battles pan out and then we can sit down and judge whether or not the scoring, judgments and battles are going the way we would expect them to using the above criteria.