I was just thinking about how a cooperative ladder could work in theory. For arguments sake assume there are both players and demand for it. Heres some questions I'm using to develop an idea of how it could work. I'll edit this post with answers as and when they come but in the meantime (if you're interested), please feel free to contribute/question/challenge anything here as you see fit.
• How would you rank each player?
• What aspects of a reported coop game would you use to rank players? (i.e. time played, levels, campaigns, kill score, team kill score)
• What rules/restrictions would be necessary to ensure reported games are both legitimate and comparable?
• How would you appeal to both casual and competitive players?
• Would it be fair to award more points for matches that use a higher skill level?
• Should you restrict what version(s) of Descent can be used for ranked matches? (in terms of D1 retro 1.4x3/1.4x5 not D1, D2, D3)
• Would there be any restrictions on the levels used for ranked coop ladder matches?
• How would you determine the length of a reported game? (i.e. per level, per preset amount of time elapsed, per campaign)
• How would you account for saved coop games and the issues that sometimes arise from stopping/restarting previously saved coop games?
• Should players get ranked individually or by team?
• How could you create a ranked coop ladder without detracting away from the whole cooperative element of the coop game type?
All topics that are unrelated to the website.
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
You have some interesting ideas here. The more I think about it the more questions I have. We have talked some in mumble about this topic. I still keep coming up with questions.