• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived. You can find them at the bottom of the forum in the Archives (2021) section. The archives are locked, so please use the new forum sections to create new discussion threads.

Europe PC Danisen League: EU Edition

zeknife said:
2nd Dan match~: zeknife conquers Kuroonehalfs point 2-0
This match is invalid as zeknife already advanced to 3rd Dan after winning vs Ward here.
 
Wooo I'm still in dan 2. I'm so good.
 
1st Dan Match: DragonM wins vs VIVr 2-0
 
2nd Dan Match Sanji wins vs Kuroonehaf 2-1
 
I have some questions

1) " - CHARACTER LOCK. You have to start with the team order you first signed up with. Assists and team order can only be changed on a LOSS."
If there is a Team lock and we are only allowed to switch order/assists on a loss
Wouldn't it kinda make sense to have us register with our default assists?
Like, I'm not sure whether this means "You have to play the chars you registered with, but can choose order and assists in the respective 1st game of a match, but then have to stick with that until you lose", or "You have to play the 1st match in the order you registered with"
If it was the latter, I'd think the 1st set of assists should also be a lock?

2) What do you/ppl think of making games in higher Dans 3/5?
2/3 is better for 1st Dan due to the likely skill disparity and not wanting to have 3-0 slaughters, but at (random example) 5th Dan, ppl should be of similar strength, and it would remove some random factor?

3) I presume you just copied the ruleset from US Danisen, but did you take into consideration that we probably have a quarter of the entrants?
Eg there's that "No second team until Dan 5" rule, but I'd guess that D5 is a lot harder to attain here, simply due to lack of people to fight against.



For now, my team:
Steam ID: isavulpes
Characters: Parasoul / Cerebella / Peacock
 
  • Like
Reactions: dragonos451
@IsaVulpes
I initially copied the rules from the US version and wanted to keep it pretty much the same to have all leagues unified rules-wise. With time I did realise though that some of the rules don't work as well for us as they do for US due to a smaller number of players. As fun and functionality is more important than standardization, I'm open to suggestions and feedback to make the system work better for us.

IsaVulpes said:
1) " - CHARACTER LOCK. You have to start with the team order you first signed up with. Assists and team order can only be changed on a LOSS."
If there is a Team lock and we are only allowed to switch order/assists on a loss
Wouldn't it kinda make sense to have us register with our default assists?
Like, I'm not sure whether this means "You have to play the chars you registered with, but can choose order and assists in the respective 1st game of a match, but then have to stick with that until you lose", or "You have to play the 1st match in the order you registered with"
If it was the latter, I'd think the 1st set of assists should also be a lock?

It's the latter. First match of a danisen set is: characters in the registered order with any assists. Order and assists are kept unless there's a loss, in which case both can be changed if needed.

This approach is kind of a compromise between a strict "order AND assists stated+locked until a loss" (with no counterpicking on first match of a dan set) and a loose "no order nor assist lock" (with potential counterpick extravaganza). Said compromise results in no character counterpicking (but maybe some assist counterpicking) plus the liberty that if you change your mind about your fav assist somewhere down the way, you don't have to choose between either stick with your previous assist or starting all over.

I've heard some beginner players saying they feel "intimidated" by the character+order lock already as they were still discovering what works best for them, making it hard for them to decide on one team for the league, not registering until they're more sure about it, etc. I fear requiring default assists might worsen this, which might be a greater disadvantage for the system as a whole than the benefit from limiting counterpicking assists on the first match of a dan set.

For that reason I was actually partial to going the other way and removing order lock as well to make the system more "forgiving" for indecisive players, but thought that would be a bit too much.

IsaVulpes said:
2) What do you/ppl think of making games in higher Dans 3/5?
2/3 is better for 1st Dan due to the likely skill disparity and not wanting to have 3-0 slaughters, but at (random example) 5th Dan, ppl should be of similar strength, and it would remove some random factor?
For a short recap, Izzmo suggested FT3s from the start, I replied with why I think FT2s work better, dragonos suggested that maybe FT2s from the start and FT3s later on.

That said, I don't mind FT2s all the way through, but I'm curious what are people's opinions on "FT2 for the first few dans, FT3 later on" idea, as the demotivating beginner-slaughtered-by-expert situation should indeed no longer be an issue at higher dans.

IsaVulpes said:
3) I presume you just copied the ruleset from US Danisen, but did you take into consideration that we probably have a quarter of the entrants?
Eg there's that "No second team until Dan 5" rule, but I'd guess that D5 is a lot harder to attain here, simply due to lack of people to fight against.
I was thinking about this lately. Given our lower numbers, I was considering lowering the dan at which you can add another team from 5 to 4.

I was also pondering the idea of broadening the number of opponents available to a given player by changing the rule from "you can only play people in your same rank" to "you can only play people within one rank of your own", as it is used in some danisen league systems in other games and communities.

Again, feedback on all of these ideas from participants is welcome.
 
Muro said:
I've heard some beginner players saying they feel "intimidated" by the character+order lock already as they were still discovering what works best for them, making it hard for them to decide on one team for the league, not registering until they're more sure about it, etc. I fear requiring default assists might worsen this, which might be a greater disadvantage for the system as a whole than the benefit from limiting counterpicking assists on the first match of a dan set.
Okay! I thought it may have been a simple oversight, but I can follow these reasons.

I was thinking about this lately. Given our lower numbers, I was considering lowering the dan at which you can add another team from 5 to 4.

I was also pondering the idea of broadening the number of opponents available to a given player by changing the rule from "you can only play people in your same rank" to "you can only play people within one rank of your own", as it is used in some danisen league systems in other games and communities.

Again, feedback on all of these ideas from participants is welcome.
Both of those sound decent to me.

I shortly played with the thought of changing the points system and only awarding "half a point" for winning against someone from the lower Dan, but I don't think I actually like that.~

Perhaps something similar to the Setlength/Team-Lock could work though, eg "From Dan 4 and onwards, you are allowed to play people within one rank of your own" (Dan 3 only being allowed to play vs higher Dan then), as it is not necessary for Dans 1-2.

---

Bonus note after a bit of trying around:
It would help if the Spreadsheet used the actual SteamID rather than some random nick (or "as well as").
I know the group is there, but I still wanted to just add everybody from the Google Spreadsheet to my Friendlist -
"Smile" and "Shark" became impossible to add; Even someone like "Pombear" required a good bit of scrolling until I landed at steamcommunity/id/MrPombear
+ makes it annoying to find people in the Group; there's a "Penguindrill Superfist" in the Group whom I don't see on the spreadsheet. Who is that? How am I gonna know which Dan he has..

E: Also, is this locked to Retail, or is Beta fine if both players are happy with that?

E2: Perhaps sort the Spreadsheet within the same Dan/Points by "Matches Played"?
Right now if you eg look at "Dan 1 / Points -1",
the first is Kuro who is 8-13 ;
then there are 3 people with 0-1 ;
then there's Placiam with 1-2 ;
followed by Bigtonney with 5-6.
I'd think it would make more sense to have it sorted Kuro-Tonney-Placiam-3 Guys,
so one could see at a glance who plays lots of matches and who doesn't?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dragonos451
1st Dan Match: Placiam beats Isaceo (IsaVulpes) 2-1
 
Last edited:
Isaceo is me btw
So I am -1

1st Dan Matches:

IsaVulpes
vs Bigtonney 2-0
vs ??? of the Stars 2-0
vs Shark 2-0
vs Kuroonehalf 2-0

Should be in Dan 2 now, yes?
 
Last edited:
In any case there is a vote running, I'm highly in favor of FT3 sets.
Since this is no tournament, so there is no schedule to meet, I do think it is for the best (I would even go for FT5 actually).
 
IsaVulpes said:
Perhaps something similar to the Setlength/Team-Lock could work though, eg "From Dan 4 and onwards, you are allowed to play people within one rank of your own" (Dan 3 only being allowed to play vs higher Dan then), as it is not necessary for Dans 1-2.
At the moment there's a lot of matches at 1st Dan but already it feels pretty empty for 2nd/3rd Dan players, though maybe that's just because the league as a whole is still at a fairly early stage.

IsaVulpes said:
It would help if the Spreadsheet used the actual SteamID rather than some random nick (or "as well as").
A good idea, I'll go with "both" and add steam profile links to the ranking soon.

IsaVulpes said:
E: Also, is this locked to Retail, or is Beta fine if both players are happy with that?
"Retail by default, beta if both players agree" works for Skullbats, so we might as well go by that rule here as well.
That said, another thing allowed for Skullbats is "if you're in beta and the opponent agrees, you're allowed to use Beowulf", especially now when he is pretty close to completion. Sooo...

I'm allowing teams with Beowulf in the league. HOWEVER, Beowulf enthusiasts should keep in mind they're limiting themselves by entering with Beowulf now, as players who agree on both using beta and you using Beowulf will understandably be the only opponents you'll get until Beowulf gets released as DLC.
(@shadowparrot)

IsaVulpes said:
E2: Perhaps sort the Spreadsheet within the same Dan/Points by "Matches Played"?
Right now if you eg look at "Dan 1 / Points -1",
the first is Kuro who is 8-13 ;
then there are 3 people with 0-1 ;
then there's Placiam with 1-2 ;
followed by Bigtonney with 5-6.
I'd think it would make more sense to have it sorted Kuro-Tonney-Placiam-3 Guys,
so one could see at a glance who plays lots of matches and who doesn't?
So far there wasn't any sorting past "dan->points". If a third filter by matches played will be helpful then sure, why not.

IsaVulpes said:
Should be in Dan 2 now, yes?
You are indeed.
 
1st Dan Match: Muro wins vs ath 2-0

I can be now found in 2nd Dan.
watch in 720p for the 60fps experience

Full Danisen playlist: [link]
Added a link to everyone's Steam profile in the spreadsheet to make finding opponents easier.

Added rules on playing in beta and with Beowulf to the Rules section in the thread's first post.

 
  • Like
Reactions: IsaVulpes
1st Dan match: VIVIT_rv00 wins against Den 2-0. owo
 
Can't you atleast spell my name right after winning from me ;-;
 
Btw, I once again encourage League participants to post feedback on the points raised in the conversation between IsaVulpes and me a few posts back starting here. If there's no feedback, I'll assume participants and fine with it either way and do the thing that I think is best at the moment, MikeZ style. :>
 
Muro said:
Btw, I once again encourage League participants to post feedback on the points raised in the conversation between IsaVulpes and me a few posts back starting here. If there's no feedback, I'll assume participants and fine with it either way and do the thing that I think is best at the moment, MikeZ style. :>
It would help if I actually played some games, but yeh, that sounds brill.
 
Just a random thought: We could just have rank changes at +2 rather than +3 (Perhaps even +2 to go up with -3 to go down) if the ranks turn out to be thinning too fast (bit too early to tell)
 
About the character lock and assist lock I think as it is now is as it should be, just as was said some people haven't found an assist they are comfortable with and having to lock with one you're trying out might ruin the future for that team. However you seemed to agree on that point, so that's good because it's fine as it is.

FT2 or FT3 I'd say I want FT3 in higher Dans, I would kinda want it from the start since it as Isa said removes a bit of the random factor. I do however understand that there are beginners and people whom at the moment have players in their Dan on a way higher level and don't want to watch themselves being destroyed, and thus I'd say FT3 in higher Dans is what I personally want to see.

And about the challenge people one Dan away from you I don't really know how it would affect it all, higher level players could (I trust they don't tho) challenge people climbing behind them and are in the Dan below.
I'd like to have it though, because as I said I kinda trust people won't and there are some people I myself feel like I would want to challenge whom happened to climb away from me.
You could alternatively make it so you can challenge 1 Dan ABOVE you but not the other way around to make more players available but stop people from challenging less skilled players. Dunno if that's a good idea though, haven't really thought much about it and systems like these are new to me.

And about that random thought of yours about +2 to climb Isa, I agree it's too early to tell. Overall I dislike the idea of so few points for climbing because it could end with some players flying up in ranks while some players stay at their ~50% winrate.
We could be seeing the better players affected by climbing rank after rank at high speed, the players with low win rate unaffected and the ones in the middle would speed up a bit but not enough to catch up. So it feels it would benefit the best players the most.
However I might be wrong and I don't claim to be an expert on what I am talking about, it's just what I feel could happen.

Also a little thought of my own, playing a player over and over again to farm points is not something we want to see, but what is the thought on challenging someone you've lost to a while back that you now feel you might win against and want your revenge on?

And well yeah, there's the feedback, dunno how much it'll help, but those are my personal thoughts on most of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muro
1st Dan match: Shark won 2-1 vs Kuroonehalf
 
1st Dan Match: Kuroonehalf wins 2-0 vs Dragon-M
1st Dan Match: Kuroonehalf wins 2-1 vs Placiam
1st Dan Match: Kuroonehalf wins 2-0 vs Shark
1st Dan Match: Kuroonehalf wins 2-0 vs Pombear
1st Dan Match: Kuroonehalf wins 2-0 vs Rex

And why are so few people participating. :V
 
Last edited:
1st Dan Match: Placiam beats Kuroonehalf 2-1
 
1st Dan Match: DragonM wins vs Nac0n 2-0

And btw. it seems that Steam account links in the ranking got mixed randomly.
 
I was wondering how long it will be before I accidentally do that.

Apologies for the inconvenience and thanks for pointing it out. It's fixed now.
 
It might be useful to have a "Last Match" or "Last Update" thingie, where you either write smth like "2-0 vs Kuro" or "2014-02-05" or similar, so it is easier to check on the Spreadsheet whether something got updated already or not? May also help with not posting the same result twice (cus both players reported)
 
Cells I3 to K3 in the "Dan Ranks" sheet show the date/hour of the last update and post number from this thread up to which the spreadsheet is updated.

Is that enough or would a "last match" thing on the side still be useful?
 
Well, it would mostly be for you, to make sure you got everything and are up to date with everyone. If you feel that's enough, it's fine. ,
Does sound sufficient to me, dunno how I missed this.. perhaps sleeping more than 6 hours in 3 days is a good idea after all~ I will try, good night!
 
1st Dan Match: Den wins 2-1 vs azginporsuk
 
1st Dan Match: Nac0n wins 2-1 vs Den
 
Muro said:
I was also pondering the idea of broadening the number of opponents available to a given player by changing the rule from "you can only play people in your same rank" to "you can only play people within one rank of your own", as it is used in some danisen league systems in other games and communities.

I'd really like this rule to be added/tweaked. A few times already I've been in rank 2 and none of the other rank 2 players were available to play, but rank 1 players were, and vice versa.

Also, and I apologize if it's been mentioned already but what if you added weighted point increases/losses based on the different dan ranks of the players in question. Like if a dan 1 player defeats a dan 2 player he could get his win to be worth 2 points. Essentially it's a slightly simplified ELO system.

I was also talking with Muro on the Skullbats EU chat and I suggested the idea of point decay. This is to combat players sitting on their points and refusing to play, and to encourage others to be more active. A significant portion of the players have barely participated. It doesn't need to be anything serious, it could be like -1 point per 7 days of inactivity or something. What do you guys think?
 
Vladislav_Paizis said:
Every player is actually locked with one team/Solo character.

Alright if that's the case then my team is Filia/Cerebella
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back