search

ctftime / ctftime.org

meta repository for ctftime.org issues, feature-requests etc
69 stars 1 forks source link

Team merging process #3

Open kyprizel opened 9 years ago

kyprizel commented 9 years ago

Should it be automatic? What rules should be applied to this process?

  1. Not later than 2 weeks after the last event team participated
  2. Teams participated in same events can't be merged
  3. No merges for past-years (history is history, we don't merge MSLC, LeetMore and SmokedChicken)

Any suggestions?

gynvael commented 9 years ago

Automatic is OK as long as before the merge rule compliance is verified.

Otherwise, I think it's good as is.

NinnOgTonic commented 9 years ago

I will buy you guys a pack of beer if we could get our Gallopsled + previous team names merged already :)

I guess we're in a somewhat unique position since we actually were two teams who merged, rather than using alt names.

So your basic proposal seems to some what go against even allowing our team merge to be shown on CTF time, in bassically all the stated arguments.

I want to point out this seems somewhat unreasonable as CTF time holds a central position in the community, it is destined to be used as a historic lookup tool.

By enforcing your conditions and thus "hiding" the acomplishments of a team you're implicitly making the proccess of picking up sponsors more difficult. This in terms damages the teams economics. So history might be history, but the accomplishments should still be linked to the "current" team in some way atleast?

kyprizel commented 9 years ago

overnine, merging old teams isn't a good idea, i think - history is the reason why we haven't merged Leet More, MSLC and Smoked Chicken. You always can add links to old teams in your team profile :)

NinnOgTonic commented 9 years ago

I'm not sure I follow your argument for why it is not a good idea though. It seems somewhat conflicting to even have a team alias functionallity if it's not allowed to be used? Does your problem lie with difficulty of implementation or what?

kyprizel commented 9 years ago
  1. it ruins past years ratings
  2. if your teams participated in the same events - they can't be merged b/c thus they get summarized rating.

If those teams have no intersections during the years - I can merge them

NinnOgTonic commented 9 years ago

Wouldn't it be possible to create a holding team to take the place in order to prevent double awards?

kyprizel commented 9 years ago

I can merge Gallopsled + European Nopsled Team, but pwnies has too many intersections with Euronop :(

psifertex commented 9 years ago

i support not allowing (real, not just name) merges within the "season" as it were. If there's some way to link multiple teams together from past years to indicate they are now one team, I'm all for that, but it makes complete sense to me that you couldn't do that in a season already underway. Either combine at the new year, or accept the fact that the scores won't be totally integrated. And I've considered strongly doing a team merge, it was just part of the thought process that it really only makes sense to do for a new year.

Maybe there is a better way to treat team geneogies that would fix much of this. If individuals on teams were better tracked, it might be nice to see individuals moving around teams for example (though I don't know how often that occurs).

Long-term, I'd love to see the e-sports model where the top teams are competing for players who occasionally move to different teams. As we get more sponsorships, I think that might actually happen.

[EDIT: Typos from posting from phone fixed.]