Finalized LIHL Reform

[eldryan]

@nabo. "Same as dc, you reamining players wont get elo. So I think this is fair enough. Compared to accidental merc occurances, disconnections are a lot more common and frequent." ?? In dc elo points, both dcers and mercers will give their ELO to others. Don't think this is very checked up info.

Also, as to the PPS awarded.... 2 PPS for an AFK vs 1.5 for rage-quitting. This is just stupid. 4 PPS for not playing a game, 2.5 for intentional TK by not healing. These points are without exception terrible....

[ILOCOS_NORTE]

Penalty Points System:

Well, assuming we have bad mannered players, we encourage them to "use" their "unused" ban penalty points in the last month of the season in a way to gain more ELO (By taking higher risk with build (higher chance to pull), going afk with bad rolls to force draw etc). It might be better to handle the new system like a traffic offender register. For an offence you gain the stated ammount of points.
=> If you play clean for a month your count will be reduced by 3.
=> If you dont play clean for a month you collect more points without reducing.

If you reach 10+ points you will be unvouched until your Penalty points drop below 10 due to the monthly reducing. You will not be whitelisted after the start of a new season


Further thougts:

Rather harmless offends like disconnect or unintentional pulling do not affect the monthy reducing by 3.

For fairness, scale down the reducing dates for floating counts. (like one point a weak that someone with 13 points can play after 4 weaks, when he had to wait 2 month instead to drop below 10. Someone else with 12 points could play after a month already wich would be just halve the punishment).

[nabo.]

@nabo. "Same as dc, you reamining players wont get elo. So I think this is fair enough. Compared to accidental merc occurances, disconnections are a lot more common and frequent." ?? In dc elo points, both dcers and mercers will give their ELO to others. Don't think this is very checked up info.

As mentioned on the original topic post, we will not be using the dc penalty tool we have been using. Well think of it this way: For disconnection, you will receive small penalty point which doesnt matter unless u dc too much (game ruinning) and a dc penalty elo will be accumulated and subtracted at the end of season from your real ELO score. There are no +elos to others (afaik). Whether dc penalty will be a certain fixed number, we have not discussed yet.
Same for merc, but you do get more penalty points to note you to be careful. Most accidental merc picking happens when you double click cancel and click merc by accident. Picking merc due to lag seems possible, but I rarely expect this happens compared to the other case.

Are you suggesting to make the punishment for both the same?

As for the penalty #s, that is the number we have come up with survey responses and discussions. Perhaps we can break one into two listed on the list, just like how we ended up doing for no heal. For me, the penalty points should be derived based on expected number of acceptable rule-break offenses by an avg league player during the 3 months with the mindset that the league should be harsh with rules and expect its players to be of higher quality player both in skill and in mind.

@ILOCOS_NORTE
There was a suggestion on the survey to have merit points or free-card points after certain number of no-offense games played, etc etc.
Currently, we dont wanna complicate things with too many +/-s. Depending on number of offenses and how players behave during the next season, we will make our adjustments.

If you reach 10+ points you will be unvouched until your Penalty points drop below 10 due to the monthly reducing. You will not be whitelisted after the start of a new season

Noted.

[eldryan]

@nabo. I am suggesting making the two equal or merc worse, but disconnecting shouldn't be penalized worse then mercing which is easily avoidable and really shouldn't happen...

It's more that almost all the PPS are bad. How is dodging 2 games equal to ghosting, or dodging 3 worse then MH? How is it that going AFK for a combined 25 minutes is significantly worse then anti-stuck abuse and teamkill combined? etc.

[nabo.]

@eldryan
You cant compare game dodging to vouch dodging and mh. The punishment lvls are totally different. As arty and I mentioned, if you dodge your unvouch and maphack, they will be treated with bans on ENT bots. If I recall correctly, the last one or two mh reported cases from an lihl game were reviewed and processed by ENT staffs, not lihl. Anyway, just know that maphackersr will not be given the chance for revouch. This decision was finalized with lihl mods.

For the number of "elo penalty" you will get from a dc or picking merc, it'll be similar or same. The current dc penalty which is applied via a mod tool is not how it will be applied from now on.

As for other PPS, here is what you could do for us:
Why dont you copy our list and put down the reasonable points you think are appropriate? Once you do so, I'll take ur suggestion, compare, and adjust if I think is reasonable. As I said, perhaps splitting one offense to two is an idea (just like no heal). Remember comparing "severity" is fine, but you should also consider the fact how many offenses of the same offense are "expected" + other different minor/major possible offenses which may result to unvouch for the remainder of the season.

[eldryan]

@nabo. Game dodging, if you unvouch everyone who has ever done it, you will have to unvouch all of LIHL. Game dodging is not comparable to TK but for a completely different reason then MH isn't.

To be honest, the simplest method for the system would be to take the days banned under current system and just make each day count for a point? Antistuck would be 5 points first offense, more second offense (maybe 14, obviously severity can be different). Rage quit 3 days. Game dodge 1 day maybe. etc. And after 20-25 points can be unvouched for a season. I think in this method since it's 20-25 points, resetting every season is too often - maybe every other season, to account for repeated rule violations. I think if you look in the LIHL archive, you can find a list of each offense and recommended ban times.

[nabo.]

You dont get unvouched bcz u dodged one game? Game dodging and unvouch dodging is different...
Why you comparing tk, game doding, and mh? oO?

There is no difference making it out of 10 or 25.....just need the points to measure relatively correct.

We will make adjustments as we go.

[Krumme]

"Intentional no heal 2.5"
you leak 80 to king lvl 17 and the other doesn't leak to king. You have 1 heal and you don't heal cause why bother = you get 2.5
and when is it intentional and when is it not?

So with this very flawed 10 point system I can go ahead and do whatever the fuck I want for lets say 2 games each season without getting any punishment assuming I control my 10 points which is fairly easy to do.

Double build is currently being punished with 1.5 point? "Dark Green/Pulling 1.5"
So that gives me 6 games each season I can double build assuming I don't ever disconnect without getting punished - well hurray for a fair system.

When is it rage quit and when is it disconnecting? Disconnecting gets punished much less.

Drawing regardless of lvl has it's ups and downs but I can't quite tell yet if the downs will be as problematic as we think.

Dodging your ban in LIHL will be punished on ENT bots aswell? Mind blown. The way to dodge your ban in LIHL is to be swapped in - how about the guy that swaps you in? how about all the other guys in the game that agrees to doing so - say you dodge your ban because 5 players can't find the 6'th guy and have been waiting for ages - I get the point that dodging is a terrible thing to do and you should take your punishment but transferring that punishment to all ENT bots is simply too much.
The few times we have had ban dodgers in this league it has been with all the best intentions of the league and getting games going. Not trying to defend players breaking the rules but modify the ban harsness.

Adding elo at the end of the season is hugely in favor of the active players. If say AchillesGr play 400+ games one season and rarely if ever dc's but people in his games do he will get a shitton of elo at the end of the season. It's basically undermining the entire idea of end season ELO being the goal you want to achieve. It's a lottery who wins the season if say 3 guys are fairly even it comes down to who played with most people dc'ing compared to how many dc's he has. If you never dc and you play alot of games you have a chance of being "the best player" in the league - how is this fair?
I think alot of the things you have done is for the better but dc penalties should stay as they are now as it's simply flawed regarding end season elo.

The old dc pen system was that you get an immediate punishment which sets you back and then you work your way back. Elektro as a example is quite good. He gets a immediate punishment that doesn't effect his elo alot and thus not really affect the balance in his games for the next few games thus him still having his "correct" elo. Say he dc's at 900 elo - sets him at 875 (give or take) then he has a slight advantage the next few games. Next time he dc's he worked his way up to 890 elo and now at 865 giving him another slight advantage regarding elo balance but it's a very little difference. It's not like the dc penalties affect his elo too much to completely move him away from his real elo. It's not like Elektro is a 1100 player stuck at 850 because of dc pens. It's more likely that he is 900-950 stuck at 850-900 due to dc pens. It's divided over several months so the affect of dc pens is so little at the very time that is barely makes a difference.
Giving/taking elo all at once at the end of the season is ruining the entire idea of the league (being having as much elo at the end of the season as possible) and if you have a unstable internet OR doesn't play alot of games with players that do you have very little to no chance of ending with a proper end season ELO.

I am 100% for changing the dc penalty system back to the old

[Krayyzie]

I guess i´ll also join in and post my thoughts on this reform...
I´ve been reading over the comments also, but this post will be mainly on the first post of the thread...
I would say the fact that 23/32 players in the poll said they are not happy how the league runs at the moment probably has alot with the new mods to do, which doesnt have the knowledge of the game needed to judge well. Hopefully it will get better, but its gonna take some time...

5: Clog rule: Does this mean that the new clog counts as 1 player being below 50% value in a 4s = clog, or is it meant as whole team has to have above 50% of value total?
Does the mods or whoever came up with this idea have any idea about the problem with clog?
There is 2 problems with clog
1: Clogging on a race level, which means you die very slowly and the other team leaks way less and dies fast, today , this is not the biggest problem with clog
2: The time gaining clog. This is when a team leaks big to king, without and even tries to kill units as slow as possible to gain lumber/income.
If I understand right ,the new rule says 1 player will get points for failing/fully pushing, this is not clog and this doesnt benefit the team or the leaker at all, and if the rest of his team is doing well, he wont recover and will be fucked. While a team fully yoloing and gaining enough income to recover pre 10. This rule will damage the players failing while the "cloggers" get away... People taking ADVANTAGE from clog should be penalized

6. Penalty Points System (PPS)
This is probably overall a bad idea? I would like this system to be additional to the normal bans, over half the league voted for harsher bans, while this system will let go of most abuses... also the points set up is quite bad(some) for example Rage quitting should be way above 1,5. Probably 4,5 or something in comparance to the rest of the points. Keep normal ban system and ADD this as a whole season ban if someone breaks to many rules

7. Vouch Request Procedure (VPR)
I like this, even tho i´d prefer the old system, but with the case of our current mods gameskill. I think the power of who gets vouched needs to get abit pushed over to the players of the league... Positive change!

8. Postponed ELO Score (PES)
Doesnt matter, its just 2 different ways to do it, neutral change...

9. Anonymous Player Report System (APRS)
Not sure what to think about this... I´d say its good overall, the negative part about this is that there is a sportsmanship rule kind of in lihl, when it comes to for example dcs, most of the dcs are not even reported, because dcs are very uncommon by most players. This change will probably lead to more dc reports and maybe other stuff also (some players are wild elo hunters and doesnt care for anything else) which means there are gonna be alot of reports and alot of unnessesary work for mods... But its another neutral change, it will be good in many cases but in some cases it will create more drama and it will gain some players


The following FAQ is about your general feedback.

The Q/A´s i dont write anything i fully agree with and its a good change/move

Q: “In my oppinion should be harsher on handling rule-violations. All this "first time = just a warning" or "but he is an active player ..." and stuff like this is just unfair and not reasonable.”
A: With the new Penalty Points System (PPS), this should no longer be a problem. As well as with the new mod handbook which has clear guidelines on how to deal with cases.

This point system will Allow players to abuse to a certain point, without any kind of action taken against them, for example if you are normally a fair player,who doesnt do anything against rules, the player who´s never dcing or breaking any other rules, can just abuse this system by pulling units 6 times/season(or more if they are not reported every time)... one of few ways to abuse, like written above, keep normal bans and ADD this whole season ban for people to who break the rules to get 10 points.


Q: “protect the pro play (cause on last season they protect the noobplay and we force to play like pubs to not get banned”
A: It used to be "pro" to juggle the king, to merc, cross/double build, to anti-stuck abuse all in order to win. The league is designed to play single lane without any abuses of game mechanics, glitches, hacks, etc. The best way and most professional way to play this game is not to abuse these mechanics.

Its NEVER been pro to juggle the king, antistuck abuse, clog abuse, mass to glitch units to now move and so on, just drop it, use glitches to gain advantage is NEVER pro in any game, its like saying maphack is pro because then you can see enemy units?


Q: “we cant respect mods since they r not good on game we did respect diablo cuz since he is here he is on top and play a good game”
A: This is simply a no-go and sadly reflects a major issue of this league: the lack of respect towards each other. ENT mods aren’t chosen by skill and LIHL mods either. Of course, you need a basic knowledge of the game and it is true that if you understand the game better and are practically also good, it is a plus. However, moderators do not necessarily need to be top players to enforce rules which are not based on gaming skills. They do the boring administrative work and for that they invest some time of their lives; and get bad-mouthed anyway. The sooner you learn to respect one another including mods, low elo players or anyone else, we will have a better gaming community.

True, but the problem with current mods are the fact that they dont even know the game to an acceptable grade to make good decisions, and we are forced to have them as obs even tho we dont want to, one which has once said ghosting was okay because the stuff he said was not ghosting, and another one who interfers with gameplay through chat at times(for example a game today player 1 trashtalk: i held lvl 1 with blah blah blah, moderator on obs spot : no he is trolling you). If someone would believe what team 1 said they´d be fooled, instead moderator gives out info he was lying... if you want more examples i could add..


Q: “i like the idea but the no heal penalty should be at least 2.0 since players tend to miss heal very often which can make a 100% won game into a loss and that basically makes it a lot worse than pulling”
A: While it can ruin a game, it often happens "by mistake" (see above regarding merc). We have separated no heal to “intentional” and “unintentional” no heal. Those who refuse to heal will be penalized for game ruinning and those who are “not focused” or “forget” to heal, will also receive small penalty points as a warning (should still be effective if repeated).

This one is alittle bit more complex, as there are so different cases of no heal
1: Intentional, not much to say here
2: unintentional when its simply a heal needed and someone without a reason waits for the last second and fails(should be penalized more than next)
3: unintentional when you are are most likely dieing, and you actually Have to wait till last second to give u the small extra time to actually have a chance of surviving(this shouldnt be penalized at all, because in a case like this you are actually forced to push the limits to have a chance of surviving)
4: just team missunderstanding of who´s heal
.
.

The observer spot can be denied to players who are not in the vouch trial phase or a moderator if there're at least....

Why change this? works well already and this will just create more drama, if 1 player worries about 1 obs ghosting, that should be enough...?
Should be fully acceptable to kick mods also if players dont want them as obs, there are usually a reason why people dont want another player as obs, and even the moderators have the possibility of ghosting and such...

*edit: after reading krummes post, i kind of agree, the new rule will set frequent dcers down more, which would be positive and make people try to dc less, BUT, its gonna give a very unfair score at the end of season on the other side, people gaining alot of elo after league finishes is quite bad...

[Diablo_]

Eh, that's wrong. If a player violates rules worth 10 points in the last two weeks of a season (in your case the last day), the points will
migrate to the next season. And since he has >=10, he is unvouched from the entire next season.

Fine, but still, don't try to hide the flaws by just responding by jumping on details. Unvouches will still vary between 3 months and 2 weeks. That absolultely makes zero sense. Nor does "ignoring" all rule breaks until someone gets 10+ points make sense. If someone breaks a rule then ban him.
There's a perfectly fine suggestion from me (and godlike) in the admin forum, every rule break wll be punished by a fixed ban length varying from rule to rule and every offence increases the ban length for future bans in the next x months by a certain time. 100% fair with no bias at all while every rule break resulsts in bans and those who break rules more often get punished harder. What is speaking against that? Such a system is 100 times better than the one you guys are suggesting.

That's only the case because they can balance their ELO by playing on a better team due to their "bad" ELO which in return gives them most likely a win. Making the punishment + win ~= 0 elo difference. Where did the punishment go? About this whole ELO thing, I would want more players to comment on.

It won't be 0 Elo difference and he still has to work hard to get the lost Elo back. Also see Krumme's post for a more practical description of the system's inferiority.

I already gave a general definition of what clogging is in many topics. Perhaps noting a general definition of clogging on wiki may be useful. But, I do not think this is necessary for lihl. All clearly knows what a clog is. Identifying a "clog" event has not been the problem. The problem has been about deciding upon a standard (set rules by mods) to differentiate between "intentional" and "unintentional" clogging + to what extent should a certain type of clogging be bannable or not. Clogging is a resultant of underbuilding, optimal building, and outdated map.

Some type of anti clog rule was demanded as per the lihl poll. Legit builds are destroyed? Not really. Let me clarfiy: If you have a lower than half recommended and the rest of your team dont underbuild so much that you guys leak 90+, you wont be penalized. Clog happens as either a team effort or team strategy resultant. If you see that your whole team gotta yolo due to w/e towers u have and underbuild to optimize ur startegy and win chances, AT LEAST make sure that all of you are half recommended value. That is all this is about. This will clearly not stop clogging since you can still clog with half recommended value built. This is in hopes to minimize the number of clog cases and clog effects and as an awareness against clog. Although we will only penalize individuals, the whole team together should try to minimize the chances of clogging and its effect.

You guys wanted to make the no clog rule more black and white, so of course you have to give a concrete definition of clogging. Is 50 units leaking clogging? 60 units? 70? 80? What if one or two players hold but the rest leaks said amount? What about sends? Do levels where you leak said amount against a send count? What about delaying creep killing like hell which is far worse than just leaking a lot (many leaks lvl 5 and 6, 0 attack, max hp max reg, finish other team on 7)? If you want the rule to be black and white then do it properly and don't just add a "you must have 50%+ value" which only cripples the players' freedom of playing without helping anything against clogging. Identifying what clogging is (with no grey area) was/is the problem, nothing else.
The last sentence once again shows how little thoughts were put into these suggestions (or the responsible persons lack competence). You will only penalize individuals? You know that everyone loses Elo by !ff yes? So if my team is that stupid to leak massive while I had nothing to do with it I still have to !ff and lose Elo, so where are you punishing individually? Also, why does clogging even give penalty points if the clogging team has to !ff anyway?

[nabo.]

"Intentional no heal 2.5"
you leak 80 to king lvl 17 and the other doesn't leak to king. You have 1 heal and you don't heal cause why bother = you get 2.5
and when is it intentional and when is it not?

Intentional no heal would be the cases ENT has been banning for (aka refusing to heal). Non-intentional no heals would be anything that would be considered between the lines or due to one being unfocused. Delay heals which are evident through drm would not be penalized.
Works in pub. So, should work perfectly in lihl too.

So with this very flawed 10 point system I can go ahead and do whatever the fuck I want for lets say 2 games each season without getting any punishment assuming I control my 10 points which is fairly easy to do.

Double build is currently being punished with 1.5 point? "Dark Green/Pulling 1.5"
So that gives me 6 games each season I can double build assuming I don't ever disconnect without getting punished - well hurray for a fair system.

So you are going to exploit and game ruin to prove that others will think like you or believe that others will do the same? So much for a "mannered" league you mentioned. But honestly, I was quite surprised with the number of response for the survey. This showed me that a lot of people care for this league.

When is it rage quit and when is it disconnecting? Disconnecting gets punished much less.

Well all know when someone rages and voluntarily leaves. Whether it is a disconnect or rage quit will depend on gameplay, chat, etc. Not sure why you even care about the 0.2 penalty point when currently, a disconnector doesnt get any bans.

Drawing regardless of lvl has it's ups and downs but I can't quite tell yet if the downs will be as problematic as we think.

Yes, it has its ups and downs. But, it will depend how much you care about your ELO. If you have a good internet and you guys are indeed high quality players, it should be fine.

Dodging your ban in LIHL will be punished on ENT bots aswell? Mind blown. The way to dodge your ban in LIHL is to be swapped in - how about the guy that swaps you in? how about all the other guys in the game that agrees to doing so - say you dodge your ban because 5 players can't find the 6'th guy and have been waiting for ages - I get the point that dodging is a terrible thing to do and you should take your punishment but transferring that punishment to all ENT bots is simply too much.
The few times we have had ban dodgers in this league it has been with all the best intentions of the league and getting games going. Not trying to defend players breaking the rules but modify the ban harsness.

This one is interesting. You seem to care a lot about ban durations yet you dont seem to want to enforce them properly and strictly. You guys talk of bias and unfairness all the time, yet you guys want to bend the rules for those who dodge? You can dodge with good intentions? The fact that you break a rule is what makes you a "violator" in the first place...
Dodge to fill in? Why should this be acceptable when unvouched players can play a friendly game? Just play a non-elo involved, non-official lihl game by !draw and play on. Easy.

You are ban-free until you get 10 points. So, there is no hindrance to the league's overall player activity due to unvouches. If someone gets unvouched due to 10 points...he should definitely not be allowed to play. If you ruin games, others will learn about your deed. With the assumption that everyone wants a fun league, players should act accordingly.

Adding elo at the end of the season is hugely in favor of the active players. If say AchillesGr play 400+ games one season and rarely if ever dc's but people in his games do he will get a shitton of elo at the end of the season. It's basically undermining the entire idea of end season ELO being the goal you want to achieve. It's a lottery who wins the season if say 3 guys are fairly even it comes down to who played with most people dc'ing compared to how many dc's he has. If you never dc and you play alot of games you have a chance of being "the best player" in the league - how is this fair?
I think alot of the things you have done is for the better but dc penalties should stay as they are now as it's simply flawed regarding end season elo.

First of all, when did we say you will get elo when another dc? I thought we already said we wont be using the dc penalty tool. We have yet to decide on how the dc elo amount will work.
Second, if I put your saying in other words, are you saying that players need disconnections to be above others? Anyway, wont matter since there wont be +s due to someone disconnecting...

The old dc pen system was that you get an immediate punishment which sets you back and then you work your way back. Elektro as a example is quite good. He gets a immediate punishment that doesn't effect his elo alot and thus not really affect the balance in his games for the next few games thus him still having his "correct" elo. Say he dc's at 900 elo - sets him at 875 (give or take) then he has a slight advantage the next few games. Next time he dc's he worked his way up to 890 elo and now at 865 giving him another slight advantage regarding elo balance but it's a very little difference. It's not like the dc penalties affect his elo too much to completely move him away from his real elo. It's not like Elektro is a 1100 player stuck at 850 because of dc pens. It's more likely that he is 900-950 stuck at 850-900 due to dc pens. It's divided over several months so the affect of dc pens is so little at the very time that is barely makes a difference.
Giving/taking elo all at once at the end of the season is ruining the entire idea of the league (being having as much elo at the end of the season as possible) and if you have a unstable internet OR doesn't play alot of games with players that do you have very little to no chance of ending with a proper end season ELO.
I am 100% for changing the dc penalty system back to the old

So answer me, why should disconnecting even affect your elo in the first place? Isnt ELO your rating based on skill?
If you have an unstable internet connection, you shouldnt be playing. If you know you will highly likely disconnect, yet you decide to play = this act is disrespect and selfish. Disconnecting too often should be treated as game ruinning imo.

Rage quitting should be way above 1,5. Probably 4,5 or something in comparance to the rest of the points.

But, It is not just penalty points alone. You also lose elo for leaving.

Keep normal ban system and ADD this as a whole season ban if someone breaks to many rules.

That is a suggestion.

You guys wanted to make the no clog rule more black and white, so of course you have to give a concrete definition of clogging. Is 50 units leaking clogging? 60 units? 70? 80? What if one or two players hold but the rest leaks said amount? What about sends? Do levels where you leak said amount against a send count? What about delaying creep killing like hell which is far worse than just leaking a lot (many leaks lvl 5 and 6, 0 attack, max hp max reg, finish other team on 7)? If you want the rule to be black and white then do it properly and don't just add a "you must have 50%+ value" which only cripples the players' freedom of playing without helping anything against clogging. Identifying what clogging is (with no grey area) was/is the problem, nothing else.
The last sentence once again shows how little thoughts were put into these suggestions (or the responsible persons lack competence). You will only penalize individuals? You know that everyone loses Elo by !ff yes? So if my team is that stupid to leak massive while I had nothing to do with it I still have to !ff and lose Elo, so where are you punishing individually? Also, why does clogging even give penalty points if the clogging team has to !ff anyway?

Wth? At first, we tried to have some type of preventive measure to stop clogging, but due to "optimal" building you guys have made this game a game of clogs where clogs have become a natural phenomena. What is clogging? All know this. When team leaks too much at similar interval, creeps get clogged up at dark green area, animation clustered and units moving slower than normal pace and being hindered while running to king.

We asked you for any alternative additional suggestions for clog. You gave none. You just wanted no rules for clog.

Stopping clog 100% would make games not fun enough due to compromised building. Yet, you guys wanted some type of clog rule and among the 5 options we have suggested, votes ended up with #3. So, we are only saying that those (yes, INDIVIDUALS) who are less than half recommended value and if a clog happens, you will be penalized for underbuilding too much and risking clog. + that players have to !ff if there are two consecutive clogs since most likely this will result in saving too much resources and sending a too unbalanced amount of sends (=broken game). With this suggestion, are we breaking your lihl strategies and builds? Not really. We are only restricting a few.

[Krumme]

"Intentional no heal 2.5"
you leak 80 to king lvl 17 and the other doesn't leak to king. You have 1 heal and you don't heal cause why bother = you get 2.5
and when is it intentional and when is it not?

Intentional no heal would be the cases ENT has been banning for (aka refusing to heal). Non-intentional no heals would be anything that would be considered between the lines or due to one being unfocused. Delay heals which are evident through drm would not be penalized.
Works in pub. So, should work perfectly in lihl too.

And in case of someone wanting to punish their fellow players in case someone doesn't heal because you are dead for sure will you still punish it? or is it a grey area? - answering my questions will be highly appreciated.

So with this very flawed 10 point system I can go ahead and do whatever the fuck I want for lets say 2 games each season without getting any punishment assuming I control my 10 points which is fairly easy to do.

Double build is currently being punished with 1.5 point? "Dark Green/Pulling 1.5"
So that gives me 6 games each season I can double build assuming I don't ever disconnect without getting punished - well hurray for a fair system.

So you are going to exploit and game ruin to prove that others will think like you or believe that others will do the same? So much for a "mannered" league you mentioned.

I'm assuming you very well know I would not do such things as I care alot for the league but never the less the rules is build up the way that someone can do that without getting a punishment so assume someone did what I wrote he wont be punished - please give your thoughts on such a situation instead.

Dodging your ban in LIHL will be punished on ENT bots aswell? Mind blown. The way to dodge your ban in LIHL is to be swapped in - how about the guy that swaps you in? how about all the other guys in the game that agrees to doing so - say you dodge your ban because 5 players can't find the 6'th guy and have been waiting for ages - I get the point that dodging is a terrible thing to do and you should take your punishment but transferring that punishment to all ENT bots is simply too much.
The few times we have had ban dodgers in this league it has been with all the best intentions of the league and getting games going. Not trying to defend players breaking the rules but modify the ban harsness.

This one is interesting. You seem to care a lot about ban durations yet you dont seem to want to enforce them properly and strictly. You guys talk of bias and unfairness all the time, yet you guys want to bend the rules for those who dodge? You can dodge with good intentions? The fact that you break a rule is what makes you a "violator" in the first place.
Dodge to fill in? Why should this acceptable when unvouched players can play a friendly game? Just play a non-elo involved, non-official lihl game by !draw and play on. Easy.

I know you have to say this, but enforcing something on all ENT servers that only affect LIHL is taking it too far, but I still agree with you.

Adding elo at the end of the season is hugely in favor of the active players. If say AchillesGr play 400+ games one season and rarely if ever dc's but people in his games do he will get a shitton of elo at the end of the season. It's basically undermining the entire idea of end season ELO being the goal you want to achieve. It's a lottery who wins the season if say 3 guys are fairly even it comes down to who played with most people dc'ing compared to how many dc's he has. If you never dc and you play alot of games you have a chance of being "the best player" in the league - how is this fair?
I think alot of the things you have done is for the better but dc penalties should stay as they are now as it's simply flawed regarding end season elo.

First of all, when did we say you will get elo when another dc? I thought we already said we wont be using the dc penalty tool. We have yet to decide on how the dc elo amount will work.
Second, if I put your saying in other words, are you saying that players need disconnections to be above others? Anyway, wont matter since there wont be +s due to someone disconnecting...

The old dc pen system was that you get an immediate punishment which sets you back and then you work your way back. Elektro as a example is quite good. He gets a immediate punishment that doesn't effect his elo alot and thus not really affect the balance in his games for the next few games thus him still having his "correct" elo. Say he dc's at 900 elo - sets him at 875 (give or take) then he has a slight advantage the next few games. Next time he dc's he worked his way up to 890 elo and now at 865 giving him another slight advantage regarding elo balance but it's a very little difference. It's not like the dc penalties affect his elo too much to completely move him away from his real elo. It's not like Elektro is a 1100 player stuck at 850 because of dc pens. It's more likely that he is 900-950 stuck at 850-900 due to dc pens. It's divided over several months so the affect of dc pens is so little at the very time that is barely makes a difference.
Giving/taking elo all at once at the end of the season is ruining the entire idea of the league (being having as much elo at the end of the season as possible) and if you have a unstable internet OR doesn't play alot of games with players that do you have very little to no chance of ending with a proper end season ELO.
I am 100% for changing the dc penalty system back to the old

So answer me, why should disconnecting even affect your elo in the first place? Isnt ELO your rating based on skill?
If you have an unstable internet connection, you shouldnt be playing. If you know you will highly likely disconnect, yet you decide to play = this act is disrespect and selfish. Disconnecting too often should be treated as game ruinning imo.

Well since you haven't told us an alternative DC pen method/harsness or w/e you decide to do I had to assume you used -25 and +5 for the 5 others, but if this is not the case please do elaborate what you plan to do. I would be up for punishing people dc'ing with something else than ELO but I'm not sure how that would work. Again I agree that dc'ing should be punished and is a form of game ruin, but I know some players wouldn't be in the league if it were up to you as their internet tends to be too unstable - we can throw them out of the league but I know you don't want that either. Some people can't simply fix their internet as you suggest.

Keep normal ban system and ADD this as a whole season ban if someone breaks to many rules.

That is a suggestion.

I second this. Sounds like a solution to me.

[Diablo_]

And you seriously think that people will come to an agreement whether a team has clogged two consecutive levels without any definition of clogging? Let's see what the suggestion does ...
- Random players will have to decide if a team is clogging 2 lvls in a row in a game when even the Moderators' decisions were causing drama.
- Moderators will still have to decide whether it was clogging or not, exactly like it was previously.
- On top of that you restrict our playstyle with the 50% value rule.

Like why? Why three evils if one (the mid one) is already enough (enough as in the other two don't add anything helpful)?

[nabo.]

And in case of someone wanting to punish their fellow players in case someone doesn't heal because you are dead for sure will you still punish it? or is it a grey area? - answering my questions will be highly appreciated.

Here are two ways to go about this:
1) Watch the replay and judge whether a heal mattered or not (which is how we handle no heal cases currently and so I would take this approach), if comparing other team (no king race), and there was no way your king would have lived due to the amount of send and you dont heal...ofc you should not be punished. Game ruinning is based on impact and intention. If the intention is not to game ruin but to save time due to an obvious loss (no way to come back) + the impact is nothing, there should not be a reason for punishment.
2) We could make it so that all should heal nonetheless w/e the expected outcome is. So, punish the person who does not heal with the "non-intentional heal" penalty.

I'm assuming you very well know I would not do such things as I care alot for the league but never the less the rules is build up the way that someone can do that without getting a punishment so assume someone did what I wrote he wont be punished - please give your thoughts on such a situation instead.

Yes, you are right. We have to create rules with the expectation on how players may react to these rules. The wording, exploitations, etc should be considered, and I thank you all for your criticisms.

First of all I would like to say that I was quite surprised with the number of survey responses despite being a quite long survey. From this, I have come to realize that there are many of you who care for this league. Therefore, the basis of our rules, despite the exploitation you have mentioned, we are expecting that players will act better than such. However, if they try to exploit the system, we may need a countermeasure. As stated numerous times, it is a trial season and we will make necessary adjustments if needed as we go.

I will throw off ideas:
1) We could make the penalty point x1.5 or x2 of the original offense
2) We could unvouch this players for attempting to ruin and troll the league. Game ruinners are one thing. Those who are trying to take advantage of our standards and ruin games alternatively is another.
3) Current points were labeled as such after discussion amongst mods. but we could change the point system to be a lot more harsher, so there is no room to troll. I expected 1 serious rule break, + 2-3 minor rule breaks from a regular bad behaviour player.

Well since you haven't told us an alternative DC pen method/harsness or w/e you decide to do I had to assume you used -25 and +5 for the 5 others, but if this is not the case please do elaborate what you plan to do. I would be up for punishing people dc'ing with something else than ELO but I'm not sure how that would work. Again I agree that dc'ing should be punished and is a form of game ruin, but I know some players wouldn't be in the league if it were up to you as their internet tends to be too unstable - we can throw them out of the league but I know you don't want that either. Some people can't simply fix their internet as you suggest.

Currently this is what we have decided on:
Simple disconnection elo penalty at end of season (only -elo for the dc person). By doing this, the dc player will stay with his true ELO during the season, so autobal will be more fair, but his ranking will change at end of season due to his disconnections.

Ideas:
-After a certain amount of disconnections (or making the bot record stay rate only for lihl bot...so separate stay rate statistics for lihl), you are unvouched or autoban to play for a day or two as a warning for you to fix your internet.
- Perhaps a better bot location?

And you seriously think that people will come to an agreement whether a team has clogged two consecutive levels without any definition of clogging? Let's see what the suggestion does ...
- Random players will have to decide if a team is clogging 2 lvls in a row in a game when even the Moderators' decisions were causing drama.
- Moderators will still have to decide whether it was clogging or not, exactly like it was previously.
- On top of that you restrict our playstyle with the 50% value rule.

Like why? Why three evils if one (the mid one) is already enough (enough as in the other two don't add anything helpful)?

Give me any replay. I'll identify if it is a clog or not. I can tell you most replays will be definitely clog. Whether it is extreme clog (acceptable) or not OR whether it was an intentional or not...is the harder question which caused all the drama and conflicts.
If you want the general clog definition that I wrote few posts ago, sure, we can post that as our clog definition on wiki as a note.

Did you really read what I wrote? If there is no clog, idc w/e value u have. Yes, 1 out of 4 or 2 out of 4 may have to build a bit more to meet the condition and perhaps prevent a clog from happening, but as long as all 4 are half recommended value, there is NO issue.

If you clog two consecutive levels = that is a broken game. You dont deserve your win imo.

After arena, I dont see why people even should consider going under half recommended value.

[supersexyy]

The purpose of this 'reform' is for clarity and less mods discretion in decision making, yet you haven't outlined the mechanics of the new dc system and subjective decision making (especially around clogging) still remains. There is no point making a reform of this nature if transparency decreases and subjective decision making remains.
A lot of these changes are completely unnecessary like the penalty points system, some rules don't seem to be finalised and some rules are not good in practice (delayed penalty system).
I'd go as far to say the majority of this reform is pointless. The only issues which needed discussion were regarding clogging and punishing rule breakers - in which both of these issues remain in the new system.