COE Agenda 2010/11 - GCCG

[marcos]

The software itself, i think it is very good, i don't think it is missing anything but maybe the others can suggest stuff to bring it to wigy for development. In my oppinion GCCG is the salvation of the game, even tough there is nothing like playing a real life card game while laughing with your friend and having a drink. Still, it is good to create more interest on playing online, so the community will never cease to exist:

How to do it:
Make a tutorial on how to use GCCG, start with how to install, how to build a deck, how to play, etc. I think there is one in spanish forum, will try to find it.
Organize "official" online events more often. Aternate formats is an easy way to not get the people bored (sealed Hero/minion, challenge decks, hero 1 deck, scenarios, DC, VC, 3/4-deck, etc)
Offer real prizes for events (for example: 1,2)

To make it happen we basically need people with spare time and spare money to spend on the game. If we get the treasury funds back, it could be a nice thing to use that money for. Of course a prize like number 2 will require huge planning, but it's a good example and probably the best prize someone could get. Regarding free time, i offer myself to organize any event, anytime

So, what do you guys think?
In which other ways could the online game be improved?
What are the pros and cons of the ideas i am suggesting?
What i am missing?

[Bandobras Took]

Under alternate formats, you forgot to include 3 and 4-deck games. Significant balance changes, and a chance to do the fun "quest" cards that never see the light of day.

[thorondor]

there is a german how-to- play tutorial made by steffen lutter:
http://www.meccg-berlin.de/files/misc/g ... eitung.pdf

maybe someone of our german fellows is able to translate this?
in addition, a complete list of all the short cuts would be nice (the document above has only the most important ones listed).

first we need these tutorials. more sample decks would be nice as well.
then the most important thing is to convince people to give it a try. once they are there they like it. thats my impression, but i am not spending that much time in GCCG.
the program itself is fine. also, there are tourneys regularly. keep this and grow the player base - thats it!

[marcos]

maybe someone of our german fellows is able to translate this?
in addition, a complete list of all the short cuts would be nice (the document above has only the most important ones listed).

ok if a german guy can translate that one would be nice, otherwise i will try to find the spanish one.
there already exist one list with shortcuts: http://www.councilofelrond.org/forum/vi ... =20&t=1399

first we need these tutorials. more sample decks would be nice as well.
then the most important thing is to convince people to give it a try. once they are there they like it. thats my impression, but i am not spending that much time in GCCG.
the program itself is fine. also, there are tourneys regularly. keep this and grow the player base - thats it!

Regarding decks i can donate my own decks. But then again, how do we do to lure people into gccg? I believe that 3 tourneys per year -Champs, Nations Cup and the new FWSLC- isn't that much and they are not very regular (almost all of them at end/begginig of year). I think that more "official" events would be nice and real life prizes will make them even more attractive.

What do you guys think about creating some sort of "Lure of GCCG"???
organizing maybe a week, weekend or month with different kind of online events.

[thorondor]

what about a permanent league? here is a quick draft:

single games are counted. players agree before starting, if the game is added to the league. they can choose to play "normal" GenOpp (1,2,3,4-deck), selaed, or DC.
each player starts at 100 league points.
when you win a game, you get league points counting regular tournament points (3:3, 4:2, 5:1, 6:0, 7:0, 10:0)
when you win against an opponent, that has 20 league points MORE than you(before the game), you receive +1 LP.
when you win against an opponent, that has 40 league points MORE than you(before the game), you receive +2 LP.
when you loose against an opponent, that has 20 league points LESS than you (before the game), you receive -1 LP.
when you loose against an opponent, that has 20 league points LESS than you (before the game), you receive +2 LP.

league period: 1 year (starting with 1. january)

minimum of games that have to be played: 10
minimum of different opponents: 5
excluded from the league: tournament games.

of couse there should be prizes.

what do you think about this? any suggestions?

[marcos]

i like the idea

[Bandobras Took]

what about a permanent league? here is a quick draft:

single games are counted. players agree before starting, if the game is added to the league. they can choose to play "normal" GenOpp (1,2,3,4-deck), selaed, or DC.
each player starts at 100 league points.
when you win a game, you get league points counting regular tournament points (3:3, 4:2, 5:1, 6:0, 7:0, 10:0)
when you win against an opponent, that has 20 league points MORE than you(before the game), you receive +1 LP.
when you win against an opponent, that has 40 league points MORE than you(before the game), you receive +2 LP.
when you loose against an opponent, that has 20 league points LESS than you (before the game), you receive -1 LP.
when you loose against an opponent, that has 20 league points LESS than you (before the game), you receive +2 LP.

league period: 1 year (starting with 1. january)

minimum of games that have to be played: 10
minimum of different opponents: 5
excluded from the league: tournament games.

of couse there should be prizes.

what do you think about this? any suggestions?

As I read it, there's no penalty for losing!

[thorondor]

As I read it, there's no penalty for losing!

yea, isnt that nice
well, when losing, you get less LP. thats it.

another method would be:
when winning for example 4:2, the winner gets 4 LPs. and the loser looses 4 LPs.
and when winning against an opponent, who has 20 league points MORE than you(before the game), you receive +1 LP.
while when loosing against an opponent, who has 20 league points LESS than you (before the game), you receive -1 LP.
and so on.

the gap of 20 and 40 points is probaly too big in the first counting method. in the second it should be okay.

[Thorsten the Traveller]

Hmm, so most active competitive players end up higher on the list? Doesn't seem very useful to me then. A point average seems more useful.
Anyway, if you feel people crave this sort of thing, I'll gladly yield any type of objection, as indeed competition seems a major reason for a lot of people to play.

[thorondor]

Hmm, so most active competitive players end up higher on the list? Doesn't seem very useful to me then.

correct. the idea behind is to motivate to play a lot.

A point average seems more useful.

would be definately fairer. and i am in favour of that one.
maybe there is a special prize for those that played the most league-games (top 3 or so).

[marcos]

Are we still implementing this league? Any more ideas on how to implement the LP system?

[thorondor]

this needs some refreshing ...

lets start with and use this system:

GCCG League

single games are taken into account.
players agree before starting, if the game is added to the league. they can choose to play GenOpp (1,2,3,4-deck), Hero/Minion/FW-only, Sealed or Dreamcard.
each player starts with 100 League Points.

when winning 4:2, the winner receives 4 LPs, the loser looses 4 LPs.
when winning 5:1, the winner receives 5 LPs, the loser looses 5 LPs.
when winning 6:0, the winner receives 6 LPs, the loser looses 6 LPs.
when winning 7:0, the winner receives 7 LPs, the loser looses 7 LPs.
when winning 10:0, the winner receives 10 LPs, the loser looses 10 LPs.
nothing happens when tied.

in addition:
when winning against an opponent, who has 20 league points MORE (before the game), the player receive +1 LP.
when loosing against an opponent, who has 20 league points LESS (before the game), the player receive -1 LP.
when winning against an opponent, who has 30 league points MORE (before the game), the player receive +2 LP.
when loosing against an opponent, who has 30 league points LESS (before the game), the player receive -2 LP.
and so on ...

report to the registrar who then implements the result inot the League Scoreboard.
minimum of games that have to be played (per year): 10
minimum of different opponents (per year): 5
excluded from the league: tournament games.

Prizes:
to be announced

now most important: who wants to be the registrar? guess it should be one that is very active in GCCG. and i already have someone in mind

[Frodo]

Regarding sending suggestions to Wiggi for a new version of gccg...

Years ago, I tried several times to get Wiggi to implement changes. I wrote him some very long and very detailed emails about items that could be improved with the software, ways to make it more popular to new players.

He was grateful, but he never did anything with those suggestions. My understanding is that he is overwhelmed, or perhaps not that interested in creating a new/updated version. He DID seem open to new programmers working on gccg. But where are they?

Frodo

[Jose-san]

I missed this topic (among many others!).

I don't think a register is needed. We could have a google spreadsheet where players enter their results. Someone can periodically collect the results to update both ratings and ranking. Something like:

Date-Format-Player1-AlignmentPlayer1-ScorePlayer1-Player2-AlignmentPlayer2-ScorePlayer2

You can get a lot of statistics from that. There are a lot of ratings systems suitable for online leagues, there's no need to invent another one. ELO system (like in chess) is one possibility, TrueSkill looks good, but there are many to choose from. Absolute ratings systems like the one proposed can be very unfair because they don't take into account the differences of skill between de players, and that makes ratings not comparable between players. Given a rating system, is easy to build a ranking, even a ranking by format, by alignment, etc.