Jump to content

UK Malifaux Rankings


mythicFOX

Recommended Posts

Some of you may have just seen this tweet from Rankings HQ...

Malifaux rankings for the United Kingdom are on their way! Looking forward to launching a new game system on RHQ. :)

Just to let everyone know this is something being done in conjunction with the UK Henchmen. We've been planning it for a little while now and are really excited about it!

More news soon, but if anyone has any questions here would be a good place to ask them.

-------------------------------------------

UPDATE

Below is an outline of the basic system we are looking to introduce in conjunction with RHQ. This mirrors the existing 40k / Fantasy systems in use in 20 countries and over multiple other game systems.

Since I posted initially a lot of comments have been made about players concerns about the effect rankings will have on the UK scene. I'm going to post my thoughts on those concerns later today.

Thanks to everyone for keeping the discussions sensible and reasonable.

-------------------------------------------

Qualifying Events

An event qualifies for UK rankings if it meets the following criteria;

  • The event has at least eight participating players
  • It is advertised at least two weeks in advance on the Wyrd Forums
  • The event uses one of the pairing and scoring methods from the Gaining Grounds document
  • The event takes place in the United Kingdom
  • A Wyrd Henchman attends the event

These criteria make it as easy as possible for players to run events. All they need to do is advertise in advance and get eight players and a henchman together. Simple, any FLGS or Club should be able to hold a ranking tourney. The advertising requirement helps prevent fake tournaments from happening. The pairing and scoring restriction keeps the Gaining Grounds document front and centre and makes sure the event is fairly rigorously run.

How Rankings are Determined

This system is a version of the system currently used for WFB, 40k, Hordes & Warmachine and other systems.

Players each have a Ranking Score (Rs), and are ranked from highest to lowest, with the highest player being ranked first, the second highest second and so on and so forth. Each player’s Ranking Score is made up of the three top Event Point (Ep) scores from events they play in a rolling twelve months.

Example 1:
If a player plays five events in twelve months and gets Event Points of: 100, 90, 50, 75 and 25 Ep they receive a Ranking Score of 265 (100+90+75).

Now as time roles on the first tournament becomes more than 12 months old. The event points (100) for the tournament no longer count to the players Ranking Score. This means their new ranking score will be 215 (90+75+50).

This system means, no one can get great scores and retire lifetime champion from the game. This need to play in events is tempered by the fact that only your best three count, so the rankings aren’t simply determined by how many events a player can afford to attend. This also opens the door for players who have a good set of results 'in the bank' to play less competitively for a while.

How Event Points are Determined

I’ll start by saying this system sounds more complex than it is. I recommend everyone try the calculator I’ve included a link to below as this will help you ‘get it’ quicker (I hope).

Each player who completes a qualifying event will receive Event Points (Ep). The number of Ep a player receives depend on two factors;

  • What place the player finishes the event in
  • How many players completed the event

The maximum points for an event are set by the number of players. Twenty or more players gives the winner 100 Event Points. Events with less than twenty players have the maximum Ep reduced proportionally.

Example
2
: A ten player event is half the size of a twenty player event and is therefore worth half the Event Points (50) to the winner.

Note that 100 Event Points is the MAXIMUM that a player can earn from an event. So a 30 player event is still only worth 100 Ep to the winner.

Player’s Event Points are also proportional to a player’s position at the end of the tournament.

Example 3
: The winner of a twenty player event receives the maximum 100 Ep, second place receives 95 Ep, third place 90 Ep, and so on until the last player (20th) who receives 5 Ep.

Example
4
: The winner of a ten player event receives 50 Ep, second place receives 45 Ep, third place 40 Ep, and so on until the last player (20th) who receives 5 Ep.

Example
5
: The winner of a forty player event receives 100 Ep, second place receives 97.5 Ep, third place 95 Ep, and so on until the last player (20th) who receives 2.5 Ep.

I’ve created a quick excel document which will calculate the number of points players receive for each position. You can find it here;

Note the file was created in Excel 2007 and saved as a 97-2003 format file. Let me know if you have any problems with it.

Pros of this system

  • Highly tested and currently working well for multiple systems and twenty countries.
  • Accessible to players from other systems, which should help player ‘pick up’ Malifaux.
  • Players have to keep playing to maintain a ranking but the system does not hand first place to the player who can afford to attend the most tournaments.
  • Simple to administer, TO’s only need to publish a list of players after the event to have it included in the rankings.
  • Supports ‘Best in faction’ and ‘Best in Master’ awards.
  • Works irrespective of scoring system used in the event.

Cons of this system;

  • Generic,
  • Can be confusing to new players,
  • Not every game counts, only the end result of events.

Edited by mythicFOX
update
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I support the use of RHQ for event tracking and higher level statistics; but in terms of individual rankings, I cannot stress my concern highly enough. Of course, nothing more has been said so it may be that you have chosen the former rather than the latter. If this is the case, then I thank you for that choice and your efforts. If the latter, then I suppose this counts as an objection.

Warhammer fantasy took a real nosedive in quality at events as soon as the rankings came in to force. Now there may be some who think the game wasn't terribly balanced before this occurred, and while that is true the effect was exacerbated many times over by all the people rushing to show how 'great' they were at warhammer. The effect was so pronounced that when Warmachine and Hordes was given the opportunity to join it was decided that individual rankings would not be used in case the same happened.

Keep Malifaux the fun and sportsman-friendly game it is now, that's my 2-penneth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no experience with rankings at all. Could someone explain what we are talking about, and the difference between the 2 types of rankings referred to?

Are we saying everytime you play a club game/UK tournament/registered only tournaments, you pick up points?..are these annual or rolling? etc

Some clarification would be great, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that, although I can see why some like it, but I'm always reluctant to get involved in anything with 'rankings', it seems to move away from games where people try to make sure both sides have an enjoyable game to the sort of win at all costs drabness which afflicts the WFB scene so badly. The idea that one can in any way claim to be the number one at any game is a bit flawed anyway. But it's OK, I'll stick to narrative events and less formal environments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to bed now but I could ramble on about this for years. Rankings improved fantasy in terms of both quality and quantity of gamers, give it a chance. It gives players that don't wanna be near the top something to work toward (best in faction/master/however it's gonna work), and is a mere bit of banter aside from the maximum 2% that take it too far.

It isn't the end of sportsmanship guys, it's the introduction of banter, new gamers, and some nice looking information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the use of RHQ for event tracking and higher level statistics; but in terms of individual rankings, I cannot stress my concern highly enough. Of course, nothing more has been said so it may be that you have chosen the former rather than the latter. If this is the case, then I thank you for that choice and your efforts. If the latter, then I suppose this counts as an objection.

Warhammer fantasy took a real nosedive in quality at events as soon as the rankings came in to force. Now there may be some who think the game wasn't terribly balanced before this occurred, and while that is true the effect was exacerbated many times over by all the people rushing to show how 'great' they were at warhammer. The effect was so pronounced that when Warmachine and Hordes was given the opportunity to join it was decided that individual rankings would not be used in case the same happened.

Keep Malifaux the fun and sportsman-friendly game it is now, that's my 2-penneth.

Have to agree with everything said here. Hope they handle it like Warmachine and Hordes did and not WFB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gives players that don't wanna be near the top something to work toward (best in faction/master/however it's gonna work), and is a mere bit of banter aside from the maximum 2% that take it too far.

I think that's the problem, that even players nowhere near the top move to min-maxing, lack of character, best combos plucked off the net and all the perfidiousness of that type of play. The point is that it changes the character of events.

And I've always managed to banter without help...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rankings improved fantasy in terms of both quality and quantity of gamers, give it a chance.

I found it had the total opposite effect. Made gamey types far more gamey and the casuals dropped out of fantasy tournaments due to the ultra competitive nature that ranking points brought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not sure what the problem here is...granted the Ranking system I have no idea about, but if people want to go and play in a tournament, then they go and play and have fun.

Tournaments are often 4-6 games. By the 3rd game, the ultra competitive players (the minority in my experience with Malifaux), will be higher in the tournament and playing each other, so less likely a fun gamer is to play against them at that stage. Therefore unlikely this is going to be an issue.

But honestly, Malifaux is a fun game, and yeah I may play to try and win (it is a wargame afterall), but I always play for fun, first and foremost. I dont see Malifaux becoming a hyper competitive environment. Certainly not until it becomes a main stream game at the very least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to bed now but I could ramble on about this for years. Rankings improved fantasy in terms of both quality and quantity of gamers, give it a chance. It gives players that don't wanna be near the top something to work toward (best in faction/master/however it's gonna work), and is a mere bit of banter aside from the maximum 2% that take it too far.

It isn't the end of sportsmanship guys, it's the introduction of banter, new gamers, and some nice looking information.

Don't forget you're speaking as one of the best Malifaux players in the UK, would you see it that way if you weren't particularly any good but played just because you loved the game? It isn't nice to be constantly reminded you're not as good as someone else.

Im not sure what the problem here is...granted the Ranking system I have no idea about, but if people want to go and play in a tournament, then they go and play and have fun.

Tournaments are often 4-6 games. By the 3rd game, the ultra competitive players (the minority in my experience with Malifaux), will be higher in the tournament and playing each other, so less likely a fun gamer is to play against them at that stage. Therefore unlikely this is going to be an issue.

But honestly, Malifaux is a fun game, and yeah I may play to try and win (it is a wargame afterall), but I always play for fun, first and foremost. I dont see Malifaux becoming a hyper competitive environment. Certainly not until it becomes a main stream game at the very least.

The problem is, tournaments are over once the rankings have been finalised at the end of the day/weekend - you can go, have fun, get ribbed for coming last and then forget about it. Rankings stay there for much longer and that will affect people who aren't in the top percentile (I notice how the people supporting this are VERY good players btw...)

On a side, it will affect the top tier of players too (I'm going to include myself in this to illustrate a point, but keep the emphasis on the point I'm making, not in how awesome I think I am ;))

For example, in the GT and a couple of bigger events with people I haven't played against before I'm going to rock Hamelin, Pandora or Zoraida and go for the win. But in some of the smaller events I'm going to try Guild crews, or Rasputina, or Gremlins - just for fun and for some variety (as I said in another post, no-one wants to deploy against Pandora and JackDaw everytime they play me)

If there's a ranking system, chances are I'm not going to do this and I'll be sticking with my "power" crews, which makes the game a lot less fun for me and the people I'm playing (plus it means a lot of the match-ups will be repetitive - will I drive 2 hours to play in a tourny against MythicFox knowing I'm putting down the same Pandora list and he's putting down the same LCB list? Probably not)

I'm sorry to say (given I think very highly of the specific Henchmen behind this) that personally I believe all of this to be bad for the game in general.

And re the above, whilst people may say that it's my issue rather than the rankings issue if I decide to take power crews all the time - isn't the point of rankings to place as high as you can? The very nature of "rankings" makes things hyper-competitive, and I'd worry that it will kill the middle and lower end of the gaming spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picking some points on what you've said Magic has sparked a few idea's, there could be about 6 ranking tournaments a year (Including the GT for example, that way if you're not at your best you have another two to drag the points back up) and the rest all be unranked casual tournaments (With attendant bragging rights) Just an idea to throw out there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picking some points on what you've said Magic has sparked a few idea's, there could be about 6 ranking tournaments a year (Including the GT for example, that way if you're not at your best you have another two to drag the points back up) and the rest all be unranked casual tournaments (With attendant bragging rights) Just an idea to throw out there

In the fantasy scene, it was noticeable that people dropped out of the smaller tournaments in order to attend an event, any event, with ranking points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that a rankings system should affect how you see or play the game. I will be taking Marcus again to the GT wether there are rankings or not as that is the master that I like to use.

Taking filth and using the rankings as an excuse isn't one really. Take the master that you want to play with regardless if you take a weaker master you might not be fighting it out for #1 but every place higher will be a little victory :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking filth and using the rankings as an excuse isn't one really.

Slightly unfair phrasing as there's two sides to that argument - wanting to place high and taking "filth" (or a strong crew) to do so is fine. However I don't believe anybody on the UK scene takes "filth" for the sake of it (except maybe ukrocky :lol:), but there are a lot of competitive players who see tournaments as (shock horror) a competition they want to win, so they take crews built to win.

My point is that I worry rankings will do the same thing but over a much longer time frame and across more and more events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly unfair phrasing as there's two sides to that argument - wanting to place high and taking "filth" (or a strong crew) to do so is fine. However I don't believe anybody on the UK scene takes "filth" for the sake of it (except maybe ukrocky :lol:), but there are a lot of competitive players who see tournaments as (shock horror) a competition they want to win, so they take crews built to win.

My point is that I worry rankings will do the same thing but over a much longer time frame and across more and more events.

I see tournaments as a competative thing don't get me wrong and I have no problems with people taking strong crews with the intent to place high as you said that is the point. I don't think that adding rankings will make that any worse however as the tournaments will still have a winner even without ranking points so the desire to win will still be the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see tournaments as a competative thing don't get me wrong and I have no problems with people taking strong crews with the intent to place high as you said that is the point. I don't think that adding rankings will make that any worse however as the tournaments will still have a winner even without ranking points so the desire to win will still be the same.

Thats exactly how I look at it right now... it will make the number 1 spots in tournaments more contested. and also add some fun competition between groups of friends / clubs .etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all I wanna say well done. It's a brave man who will take on so much work unselfishly just to try and give the people what they want.

Yes im running the GT and yes I'll provide the results to anyone who wants them. If you don't want to be involved in the rankings people then don't be! But let the people who do want to be ranked enjoy it, I know loads of people in WFB who don't get involved with the rankings but will go to a ranked tournament. They wanna play the game. We're a community, let's leave aside the fighting and each enjoy the things we want to enjoy about the hobby.

I'm crap at malifaux and perfectly happy with being at the bottom of the rankings and still be happy to banter. But at the same time I know James will take on all comments and fears and iron them out. We aren't hordes and warmachine or WFB so let's see how well it can relate to malifaux before we all say no :D even though I love to say no :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is no harm in trialling this at the very least. I doubt it will have a negative impact, and if it did, the option would still remain to remove the ranking system.

I imagine it would add extra depth and club-interclub fun. As a new person to Malifaux, I think the community here is great and feel adding this extra depth to the tournaments will only help them grow. This is a fun game and i'm sure it will stay that way for a long time to come....

And finally, as has been said, anyone can always opt to not be included in the rankings if they really feel strongly about not doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information