FED2k Emperor Ladder

desertway · August 22, 2003

Well Gob, if only one is needed to record the game, than I have another question. Is there a way to check to see if both players at least HAVE the proxy? Lets say I download the proxy and than go single out some noob that doesnt even realise that this message board even exists. I could than rack up a @#$% load of points, all the while tell him that I'm training him. If both players at least have the proxy than you at least know they are aware of the existance of FED2k.

Am I the only one who thinks this pretty much leaves the door wide open to abuse? Now either way it wont really effect me, because I don't care about standings. However I do have some buddies online that I don't think have the proxy, yet their names are showing up as losses to other players. Anything you can do to insure the integrity of the standings must be done, otherwise they mean nothing.

Gobalopper · August 22, 2003

Nope no way to know unless they send a report. We could run our own server that would act just like WOL but I don't know how easy that would be and it would split up the players. If we did that then yes all game reports, regardless of whether or not you had the proxy, would be sent in.

desertway · August 22, 2003

Gob, so if my buddies agree that they don't have the proxy and they didn't know they were in recorded games, would you void the games?

Gobalopper · August 23, 2003

I'm not 100% sure about how I will do it yet. It will probably be in cases where the other player is only playing unlisted people.

Kyle · August 23, 2003

I don't know about you guys but I like how the ladder is now. true, some people won't know that the game counts, but if they don't have the xcl proxy then they probably don't even visit this site, anways. If they don't even know that their name is on the ladder, it won't really matter to them.

desertway · August 23, 2003

So you think its ok for some noob to get played for a fool, just because he isn't aware of it? Don't you think that maybe if they did know, they than might care? Sorry Kyle but I can't agree with your logic on this. I'm pretty sure that most of the players who are in the ladder are looking for competition and not just easy points. I am also fairly sure those players will be playing other reputable players. Trying to get a good game, not just easy points. Those that are taking the easy points...do you really think you will feel any sense of accomplishment at the end of the month? After all with no prizes being awarded, isn't that feeling all your going to get out of this?

Kyle · August 23, 2003

I just think it would be too hard to make both players have to have the XCL Proxy program. There wouldn't be enough people to compete against. A solution would be that you would have to let your opponent know that this game will be recorded on the ladder. I don't know if it could be done but possibly Gob could develop a way to detect if a certain phrase is said to your opponent during the game like "This will be recorded on the fed2k ladder". If the person running the proxy program does not say this, the game would not be recorded(just like if the person running the proxy program does not have the right starting settings it is not recorded).

desertway · August 23, 2003

I'm not saying they should both have the proxy. I do think they should both be aware the game is being recorded for ranking purposes. If the one who doesn't have the proxy doesn't object, than let the battle begin. What if they do both have the proxy and one doesn't turn his on? He thinks the game is just for fun and tries something off the wall just for fun. Do you think that game should count?

Kyle · August 23, 2003

I just modified my message above and i stated a possible solution. I think that could possibly work.

desertway · August 23, 2003

I think something like that would work also.

How bout it Gob? Can you do something like that?

Gobalopper · August 23, 2003

Not really no because how am I supposed to know when that message should be sent and if the other person actually read it. If someone is listed on the ladder and they don't want to be or the game shouldn't have been recorded I'm willing to remove some but only if the game happened recently. For example if its the end of the month and suddenly all of Joe's friends ask to be removed from the ladder so that Joe can surpass the points of the person ahead of him.

Navaros · August 23, 2003

I see exactly what desertway is trying to pull here.

desertway could not care less about

lowzeewee · August 23, 2003

If that guy gets recorded and is unhappy about it,then its his own fault. :D Who asked him to lose? ;D

ken124578 · August 23, 2003

No it isn't, would it be a victim's fault for being killed by a gunshot in the head?

desertway · August 24, 2003

Actually there goes nav's paranoid delusions again. The most recent game that came to mind was scymaxim vs cbrick04. I noticed because cbrick doesnt have the mod. When I talked to him he said he never knew the game was recorded. It will be up to him to persue it if he wants. But if you think that makes me out to get you nav, than so be it.

Now don't confuse this with an earlier posting of mine. I don't think scy was picking newbs or anything. But the fact that cbrick didn't know the game was recorded and it was makes it wrong. When I asked him about it, he asked me if both games they played were recorded. I told him only one was on the ladder. They played 2 games and split them, but apparently the one cbrick won wasn't recorded.

And just to make perfectly clear...I don't think scy was doing anything wrong, this is just an example of what I was talking about.

lowzeewee · August 24, 2003

Anyway,the discussion should end.There is no way to improve this.

slaphapy · August 24, 2003

I see exactly what desertway is trying to pull here.
desertway could not care less about “justice for WOL players”. He is just putting up a “diplomatic front” as a Ruse in order to act out on his personal vendetta against me.
If you think I am exaggerating that he has a personal vendetta against me, I need only to draw your attention to most of his posts since he has registered. The very first thing he did was flame me as many times as he could.
Now, I can give you a typical situation of the thoughts that are brewing in desertway’s head about this:
desertway: “I hate Navaros, so how can I screw with him? I know - I’ll look at everyone who he has beat on the ladder, and then go solicit those people to tell me what I want to hear, so I can steal his points away.”
….then, desertway goes to Player X: “Navaros beat you on the ladder, you know? But we don’t have to keep that game there. Just tell me that you didn’t know that it was a ladder game and I’ll get rid of it for you.”
…since Player X has lost the game and his loss is recorded, *OF COURSE* he is going to lie to desertway and say “No, I did not know that game was recorded” *EVEN IF* he *DID* know.
If Gob allows desertway’s solicited lies to be acted on, then you’d have chaos. What if *I* say that the Player X *DID* know that the game was recorded? You’re gonna take Player X’s word over mine simply because Player X was the one to lose? To that I say, *PROVE* that Player X did not know that his game was being recorded!

can you spell paranoid?

lowzeewee · August 25, 2003

Looks like I have to spell it for nav... :D

JB · August 25, 2003

If there is much abuse of the current ladder system, one could also make a list (by signup on this site for example) where people can "register" their nick. Then only games for which both the players are on this list would count for the ladder. Only one of them needs to have the proxy, and both will be aware of the ladder system.

-JB (who hopes to one day find time to start playing the ladder, sigh.)

darkd3th · August 25, 2003

where can i get the proxy to play on the ladder

DjCiD · August 25, 2003

JB has the right idea going. Before the start of the next ladder you have to register your nick with Gob or Fed2k and only games where both members are register would be counted. But then it would still take someone to weed through all the games to take of the ones that aren't pre-registered.

Should it also mean, if you don't register before the start of the month you don't count that month?

desertway · August 25, 2003

Sure, why not? If the players for the Masters don't register on time, they don't play. This is also a way to make sure people are talking about it before they launch. If the person says "I don't have the proxy". Than you have a choice to make. Either you can play and it will not count, or you can ask him to leave because you want a tourny game.

Apollyon · August 25, 2003

I don't think there enough people playing for that to be a truly viable option.

Chris Longpre · August 26, 2003

:)

BTW, Great work on the ladder everyone! It is very nice to see a viable ladder emerge post-Westwood closure. Kudos to all who worked on it!

--Chris

lowzeewee · August 26, 2003

I guess its still best to continue with these proxy settings,normally players wouldn't want to purposely play worse than they normally should be right? :D

And I thought when 1 player out of 2 in a game has a mod while the other doesn't,the handshake will fail? :O

Sign In

FED2k Emperor Ladder

Recommended Posts

desertway

Gobalopper

desertway

Gobalopper

Kyle

desertway

Kyle

desertway

Kyle

desertway

Gobalopper

Navaros

lowzeewee

ken124578

desertway

lowzeewee

slaphapy

lowzeewee

JB

darkd3th

DjCiD

desertway

Apollyon

Chris Longpre

lowzeewee

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information