What's a Blog?
Published on October 19, 2007 By Mumblefratz In Metaverse

This is where we will keep all the rules used for the Metaverse League (MVL). The point is to have a single place where all rules are defined and so there's a single place where people can refer to resolve all question.

I will continually update this OP to reflect the current state of rules that we have all agreed to. The point is to make this as simple and concise as possible. As we have seen argument and upset occurs when different people have different interpretations of what has been agreed. Keeping these rules as simple and short as possible will help reduce potential conflict.



Rule 1) Rule changes are not allowed in the middle of a round. If an unanticipated situation develops in the middle of a round all effort should be made to deal with it as consistently as possible based on current rules and precedent. In the hopefully rare cases this is not possible the Commissioner will make an arbitrary ruling on how the matter will be resolved for the current round. Once the round is over then the issue can be revisited and a more permanent solution can be decided by the members of the League. Note that this arbitrary ruling can only be made by the Commissioner. Also the Commissioner is the only person that can grant an exception to any rule, but this power should be used judiciously.

Rule 2) Team Size. People may join the League and start playing at pretty much anytime. In the middle of a round a new player should be randomly assigned a new team by either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner. The only limitation is that at any point in time no team should have more than one more player than any other team.

Also people may have to announce that they can't submit during a round. This can be treated using the scoring rules related to non-submission or if it's early in the round the teams could be re-balanced by the Commissioner. The decision to re-balance or not, and if so who to move, is soley the decision of the Commissioner.

The ideal team size is 5 since it provides some protection against an unforeseen non-submittal without being too unweildly. Team size at the beginning of a round should never be less than 4 or more than 6.

Rule 3) Honor System. Each round of play consists of a game (or games) of randomly selected settings and victory conditions. Very few of the required settings can be verified, namely galaxy size and victory condition. The fact that all other settings cannot be verified requires the league to operate on the honor system.

From time to time various versions of the game may exhibit a bug that temporarily allows some particular exploit. When and if this happens people should make sure the league is aware of the situation but no rule will be made to prohibit the particular exploit other than the same honor system that ensures everyone is playing the same game.

A final point about the honor system is that abuse of the honor system doesn't debase a single game played by a single player but debases every game played by every player. When seen in this light I'm sure that no one would be tempted to risk shaking the foundation of the league just to gain a miniscule benefit by intentionally bending a setting or rule. Also everyone should realize that honest mistakes do happen and if occasionally someone makes a mistake in a required game setting that it's no real big deal.

A corollary to the fact that only galaxy size and victory condition can be verified, along with the practice of taking a game submitted to the metaverse but not submitted to the league as a persons "intended" league submission, results in the rule that people should not have games submitted to the metaverse under their league character that might be confused with a legitimate league game. Note that clearly once a player has made a submission for the current round there can be no such confusion.

Honor System Addendum

The deliberate and determined use by a Player, with full knowledge and intent, of repeatedly and excessively, exploiting bugs, quirks, or other miscellanea in a game to achieve an outcome not normally possible is hereby prohibited in the MVL.

Rule 4) Reported Difficulty Levels and Race Customization in MVL Games

Every MVL player is honor bound to ensure that the effective difficulty of any game they submit is accurately represented by the games posted difficulty. To support this requirement the following guidance is provided.

External modification of any game related files are prohibited in MVL games.

In-game modification of opponent characteristics is prohibited in MVL games. The only choices allowed are the selection of opponents from among the default standard races and default custom race and the selection of their difficulty levels.

All opponent starting relations must be set to "Unknown".

DA games must be set to Allow Surrenders.

Rule 5) MVL Member Behavior

In the case where a MVL member has been found to be cheating, being overly disruptive, or detrimental to the League in some form, the commissioner is free to levy the following punishments as he deems necessary and appropriate. Such punishments may include; the loss of a team Captaincy or other MVL Administrative Position, the loss of the Player's points earned in a particular Round, forcing the Player to sit out a Round, or any other temporary punishment deemed appropriate.

For anything deemed worthy of a permanent ban from the league then besides the recommendation of the commissioner it should also require the consensus of the captains and other MVL administrators to make the ban permanent. Once banned then continued disruption of MVL threads and activities will be appropriately reported to forum authorities.



Scoring

A team's score consists of the sum of "base" scores plus individual and team bonus points.

Base Score

A player's base score is simply 2 points for a win of the designated type, 1 point for a win of the wrong type and 0 points otherwise. A team’s base score is the sum of the four top player base scores submitted. This is done so that a team having more players has no advantage over a team with fewer players.

There are two types of rounds that are treated slightly differently. One is a “Single Victory” type round where all players play for the same victory condition. The other is an “All Victories” type round where each team must submit at least one game of each of the 4 different victory types.

Non-Submission

In the Single Victory round if a player neglects to submit a game then there is no issue as long as the team still has at least four other players that submitted a game. However, if the team only had four players to begin with then they would be missing one potential contribution to the team’s base score. If this non-submission is pre-announced (this is highly encouraged), then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select another member of the team to submit another game to count towards the teams base score.

In the case where no notice is given, if the player has a single game that fits the rounds criteria as to date, galaxy size and victory condition posted to the Metaverse but not yet submitted to the league then that game will be presumed to be submitted "automatically" to the league during the last minute of the round. If there are more than one qualifying game posted to the metaverse under the players MVL character than the game with the highest score/year ratio will be the game submitted to the league. If two or more games have identical score/year ratios then the submitted game shall be randomly selected from these games by the commissioner or vice commissioner whichever is not a memeber of the team in question. Note that players should make sure that any games that "appear" to match the current rounds criteria posted to the MV do indeed satisfy all the current rounds criteria. This can always be accomplished by simply waiting until your official has been made before posting a game to the MV that might otherwise be confused with the current MVL game.

In the case where no notice is given, and if other members of the team have other games that satisfy the round’s criteria that have already been submitted to the metaverse then either the Commissioner or Vice Commissioner may randomly select one of these games to count towards the teams base score. In this case the team should identify *all* such games that satisfy the round’s criteria for possible selection not simply the *best* such game.

If the non-submission is not pre-announced and the team has no “extra” qualifying games then the team gets credit only for the number of base scores properly submitted.

Note that a team of 5 players with two players that failed to submit a game would be in a similar situation as described above and the same rules apply. The same is true with 6 players and 3 non-submissions, etc. It is also possible for a team to be more than one submission short of the required total of 4 in which case the same rules can be applied to possibly allow the team to make up for more than one non-submission.

Finally these same rules apply in the case of an All Victories round but with an extra qualification. This extra requirement is that in an All Victories round each team is required to submit at least one game of each victory type. In this case the team may be required to use an “extra” game as described by the rules above that duplicates the victory type of an already submitted game. In this case for base scoring purposes that game would have to be considered a 1 point victory of the wrong type. Note that such a game could still receive individual and team bonus points based on the correct victory category.

Individual Bonus Points

In the case of a Single Victory round a single bonus point is granted for the 4 top scoring games and the 4 fastest games.

In the case of an All Victory round a single bonus point is given to the top score and the fastest game in each of the 4 different victory conditions.

The fastest games are determined by the number of years reported by the metaverse. Game speed ties are broken by score and score ties are broken by speed. Any games tied in both speed and score will be left unbroken and both players will receive the identical bonus.

Team Bonus Points

All team bonus points are based on the average of the team’s submitted games. Just as in the individual bonus point case only wins of the correct type are counted. The 1st place team receives 2 points and the 2nd place team receives 1 point in the following categories.

Team Score

Team Speed (speed of game reported by metaverse)

Team Submission (number of days into the round before game is submitted to the league)

Any teams tied in any team bonus category receive the same bonus. However, any fractional result is not subject to rounding and any tie must be exact.



MVL Voting Rules

1. Any MVL member can call for a vote among any number of competing proposals which must be seconded by two other MVL members to be considered official.

2. All votes will occur in the Galciv II Metaverse Leagues forum at the Core and notice must also be given in the current MVL Round thread.

3. All votes should run for a period of time specified in the OP of the voting thread. This period should be no shorter than 1 week or longer than 3 weeks. It's encouraged but not required that votes should be completed before the start of the next round of play if at all possible.

4. A valid vote requires participation by at least 50% of active MVL members. An abstention counts as participation. A proposal requires 60% or more of the cast ballots to be accepted. If less than 60% is achieved by any one proposal there will be a runoff between the two most popular options. The winner of the runoff will be the proposal that achieves a simple majority of votes cast with no quorum requirement.

5. Editing of your vote is allowed although any changes should be made in such a way as to make it obvious that a change has occured.

6. Once the time specified for the vote expires the thread will be locked to maintain an accurate record of the vote. The results of any vote are final and can only be changed by a subsequent official MVL vote.

Rules accepted by Consensus

From time to time minor issues may crop up that may not warrent the full attention of the League. In such cases a limited number of members may discuss the issue and come to some agreement. As long as no member of the league voices any objection to such an agreement and as long as such an agreement has been posted in a prominent thread (the current round thread or the MVL Rule thread) for a period of one week then that rule will be considered to be "official" by the league.

Besides any MVL member voicing an objection to the proposed rule, thereby invalidating the proposal, any member could also move to have a vote taken on the proposal which, as specified in our voting rules, requires a vote be taken as long as the motion is seconded by two other MVL members.



Last update Mar 28, 2008. Added Race Configuration Rule and Honor System Addendum

 


Comments (Page 14)
31 PagesFirst 12 13 14 15 16  Last
on Jan 15, 2008
this is why I made the suggestion that a captain and/or team could possibly select games to present for random selection to the Commissioner in situations where there is NOT an obvious choice (i.e. one game). If the captain wants to select the best games, or best speed, fine, but it wouldn't be a guarantee on which one was chosen.

This I would hope would help alleviate some members thoughts on Captaincy choice and also the moderating effect of others that feel that lack of official submission shouldn't be given undue award.

EDIT Since me and Kzinti posted at the same time LOL; maybe a random selection of a player is best, and it most closely follows already set procedures.
on Jan 15, 2008
i know this whole issue in progress hasn't been nailed down yet, but i have another thing that occurred to me, and i'm not sure if it's ever been discussed really: determining season winners.

last season it was a clear no-brainer that team C won, as they swept all three rounds. but this round is shaping up to be much more competative. how do we or will we determine the winner of the season?

this came up because FB created a chart to show how the current team C has shaped up against the other teams, and while we haven't won a round yet, we have more total points than anyone else. so this begs the question, in my mind at least, will the season 2 winners be the team with the single most winning rounds, or the team with the most overall points at the end of the season? don't know if this has even been discussed; if it has i'll say "oh, thanks" to the answer and move on.
on Jan 15, 2008
in the League Results and Ladder thread, Neilo posts the scores and points earned each round by each team

at the end of the Season, the team with the most points wins the Title. In case of a tie, the ranks are determined by score.

hope that helps!
on Jan 15, 2008
I think you are being a bit harsh on people in general, by thinking in a way in which to punitively influence players' "behavior" as you said. In my opinion, that's not in the spirit of the league, and I think you will likely end up turning-off some people if you project that attitude.

I agree that punishment is not what the league has stood for and not something that I really want. Sometimes I exaggerate for effect, as do we all.

Does anyone disagree that in the case where a player has a single game played and posted to the MV but not submitted to the league that it's "obvious" that is the best possible and only logical game to submit to the league? If so then we must figure out a way that extends what is easy and obvious to the case where there are simply two or more such games.

As I said before the only difference between these two cases one where everyone agrees what the right thing to do and the other where there is all this disagreement is that there is no choice in the that case where everyone agrees and if one can only remove the choice from the second case then I think we could get far closer to agreement.

My only disagreement is in allowing the captain the best possible choice in all cases. Eliminate the choice and I think it's safe to say we eliminate the opposition. I am willing to accept any predefined criteria *except* the following.

Choose game
Calculate round results
Choose next game
Calculate round results
.
.
.
Pick game with best round results

Besides the fact that I think the above process is unfair what happens if God forbid we have two or more teams in such a position. Now the captain might not be able to select the best possible game because it will depend on which game another captain may pick. Who picks first in this case? This opens up an entirely new can of worms. However if there is a predefined criteria in place then no one can argue or complain. The predefined criteria should result in the "best" game being submitted most of the time but should not take advantage of knowledge of specifically how fast a game or how high a score is needed to gain a particular bonus in that specific round.
on Jan 15, 2008
hope that helps!


sweet--if it was already set, then i'm happy (and it was already set the way i would have wanted it anyhow). FB would have probably told me as much, i just didn't feel like waiting for him to check the team C private forum.
on Jan 15, 2008
What I would like to see as a predefined criteria is the following.

First throw out all the obviously "bad" games. Clearly any game with a lower score and the same or slower speed as another game is a bad game. By this criteria three of PlayJeff's four games would have been thrown out leaving the game that any reasonable person would select as the only choice. This may not eliminate all games but it does eliminate all but one game at any one game speed. It also insures that if a slower game remains it does so because it has a higher score than all faster games.

So what is left? All that are left are the legitimate choices between speed and score. For example there could be a 1 year 4K game and a 2 year 8K game and a 4 year 16K game. But there can only be one 1 year game, and there can be no 2 year game with the same or lower score as a 1 year game, etc.

Dependent on the exact scoring in the round any one of these might be the best possible game to use. For example if the team has no chance at a score bonus then the fastest game is the best to use. Obviously if the team has no chance at a speed bonus then the highest score is best to use. There is also the possibility that choosing a medium scoring game that is also medium fast could give a team a little of both speed and score bonus.

So once all the "bad" games are removed then all that are left are games that could be the best game dependent on the precise scoring of that round. From there the answer is simple. Just select one of these games at random. The choice is eliminated and there is no more argument.
on Jan 16, 2008
Games selected by random, sounds fine to me. Of course for transparency any situation that may arise no MVL admin could make a random selection should they be a member of that team.

That is perhaps a given but it's good to have it on paper.
on Jan 16, 2008
Games selected by random, sounds fine to me. Of course for transparency any situation that may arise no MVL admin could make a random selection should they be a member of that team.

That is perhaps a given but it's good to have it on paper.

Selected by random yes, but from only the set of "good" games. I wouldn't be overly concerned about the transparency thing but since the commissioner and vice commissioner are on different teams it makes sense to add this. Probably should be added to the random assignment of a backup game if that ever happens as well. I wonder if we should then specify that commissioner and vice commissioner always be on different teams.

Haven't heard a response to this from any of the major proponents of captains choice though.
on Jan 16, 2008

Selected by random yes, but from only the set of "good" games.


I can certainly agree with this.

And, just wanted to get it straight, we're using the Score by speed and vice versa tie-break method, right? 17 out of 22 active members' votes is voice enough to represent the majority of the league.
on Jan 16, 2008
And, just wanted to get it straight, we're using the Score by speed and vice versa tie-break method, right? 17 out of 22 active members' votes is voice enough to represent the majority of the league.

Certainly seems like it. Technically I had stated that the voting would be open until the start of Round 6 but we are probably very close to that. The current results are 17 votes as you mentioned with 9 agreeing to break speed ties with score and score ties with speed, 5 supporting no tiebreaks, 2 supporting ties broken by submission time and 1 abstention.

Although it would be nice to get the remaining 5 votes in I think the outcome is pretty clearly in favor of the speed/score tiebreak method.
on Jan 16, 2008
i'm in agreement with Mumble's synopsis of randomly selected from 'good' games.

for the sake of record, do we have any other pressing matters that need to be addressed before Round 6? It seems that the vote, while not everyone, is at least a super majority of active players. We seem to have come to at least a basic agreement on submissions that we can clean up for use. I think those were the two active issues, with the AltMeta being the ongoing side one.

I did have another thing I had thought about. Now, don't read into this too much, but I was just wondering about if at the end of a season if we wanted to hold "elections" for the Commissioner and Vice-Commissioner offices.
on Jan 16, 2008
Random choice from among the "good" games (as described by Mumble), is an excellent compromise. I'd vote yes for that.

Kzinti empire2.JPG Sentient species taste better...
on Jan 16, 2008
Actually I've thought of a couple of ways to perhaps better the automatic selection criteria. The current method just eliminates obviously bad games and then requires random selection among the remaining games. However the criteria of what is a "bad" game is rather simplistic and it allows a number of game to filter through that most reasonable people would agree are obviously "bad".

To give you an idea of what I mean let's say we have a 2 year 10000 game and a 3 year 10025 game. I think most people would agree that it's "obvious" that the extra 25 points was not worth the extra game year and would conclude that the 3 year 10025 game should be excluded. However since the 3 year game is technically a higher score than the 2 year game my previous criteria would not eliminate the 3 year game from selection.

The problem with this method is how to actually quantify this effect and then how to decide at what arbitrary level to make this decision. Clearly the score difference should be based on some percentage of the score. The level is somewhat more problematic. Clearly everyone would agree that my above example that a extra 25 points (or 0.25%) isn't worth the extra year. OK what about 100 points (1%) or if not that what about 1000 points (10%)? For lack of anything concrete 10% seems to be a reasonable place to start.

So OK by this criteria a 2 year 10000 point game would automatically eliminate a 3 year 11000 point game from consideration but would allow a 3 year 11025 point game to be considered. Fine so far but now the problem comes into how the heck is this going to be calculated? Basically this requires that every game be compared to every other game with the same 10% margin required to avoid elimination. I'm still not sure of an easy way to do this but if someone sees an easy method to do this then let me know.

I do want to get back to the above method but first I want to suggest a third game selection criteria. Clearly for score purposes higher is better and for speed purposes faster is better. One thing we could do that would result in a far simpler selection that would almost always avoid the need for random selection is to simply calculate the score/years ratio for each game and then pick the game with the highest score per year. In the off chance that two or more games tie in this criteria then you use random selection to decide between them. Note that this selection method would have come up with the same result in PlayJeff's case as the game that was selected, but has the further advantage of being able to directly compare speed games and score games and comes up with basically the best "general purpose" game possible. This method is easy to apply and simple to understand, it selects the best "bang for buck" game without the potential of being specifically optimized for the current rounds scoring. I think I like this method better because it will almost always just give a simple answer that won't require random selection. It won't necessarily result in the best game each and every time but I think it will never select a "bad" game. All in all I think this might be the best option.

However using the score/years metric suggests a way to more easily implement the first method that I tried to describe above. In this case we calculate the score/years for all of the players games. Then we take that game *plus* any other game that has a score/years ratio of at least lets say 80% of the highest game. The 80% number is a totally random number and may require some tweakage but the idea here is to select the top "bang for buck" games and then allow random choice between them. This is less intuitative than simply selecting the max score/years as the only game but is more likely to allow the possibility of random selection between the "best" speed type games and the "best" score type games.

There's no way I know to "see" how this works so I'll use an example. In the following spreadsheet the years and scores are some quasi-random games that I made up. If the you use the method of using the biggest score/year ratio then the result is the 3 year 11000 game and there is no random selection required. However using the method of taking the top score/year game plus any other game at least 80% of that results in the random selection from the 4 games labelled TRUE. If we increasse the threshold to 90% then less games will be selected, in fact for the example I gave the only game that satisfies the 90% criteria is the 3 year 11000 game itself so we're back to only a single selection. Similarly, decreasing the threshold increases the number of games to select from. After playing around with this I think the 80% threshold is fairly reasonable.




Ok so I've now suggested three separate methods of selecting which of a players multiple MV games should be submitted to the League in this case of non-submission. I've summarized these three methods below. I would be happy with any of these but based on the combination of ease of implementation and of providing the best results, I think #2 is the best. Hopefully this provides a range of selection criteria that everyone can agree on.

1) Any game with a lower score and the same or lower speed as another game is eliminated from consideration and the game submitted to the league is randomly selected from the remaining games.


2) The score/year ratio is calculated for each of the players games and the game with the highest ratio is submitted to the league. If two or more games have an identical score/year ratio then the game submitted to the league is randomly selected from these games.


3) The score/year ratio is calculated for each of the players games and any game with a ratio less than 80% of the highest ratio is eliminated from consideration. The game submitted to the league is randomly selected from the remaining games.


on Jan 16, 2008
i wish i could think in these terms. I understand them easily enough, but its not a thinking pattern I would come to on my own....anyhow, I like #2, but I'm ok with #3
on Jan 16, 2008
Actually as a note to the above I think it's reasonable to use the criteria of option #1 as a pre-filter on submission method #3.

Clearly the method 1 criteria should eliminate the 3 year 9000 game and the 3 year 8800 game from consideration even before the games are compared. Note that this is not necessary in method #2 since those games will automatically be eliminated. This would leave the random selection based on a 80% threshold to the following three games.

1 year 3000
3 year 11000
4 year 12500
31 PagesFirst 12 13 14 15 16  Last