I am sick of it

Cadillac · Post by **Cadillac** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:00 pm

Stacks are not over rated and they cannot be beated with teamwork.

This is because all the people who are semi-competent at teamwork are in the stack. The other comm is left with few a few competent pilots and a plethora of newbies. When you are that for down on team skill no amount of genius could pull off a victory.

The whole point of a stack is that it is not beaten. If you had more competent players on your side then it wouldn't be a stack to them now would it?

Sycrus · Post by **Sycrus** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:14 pm

Camaro wrote:QUOTE (Camaro @ Apr 20 2007, 12:59 AM) "the stack" can be beaten with good teamwork on the opposing side (provided of course there isnt a newbie stack on that team)... is this common? of course not because you are flying around going "oh god they are stacked... were so screwed."

woah thats never been said before, the game obviouslly isnt about teamwork, its just to win now, so why not stack in order to get a guerenteed win? just to boost your rank? so many newbs do this so they can get a higher rank and a so called 'position in the community' respected might i add..so stack, you cant avoid, especially on late night games and cadet/newbie games. if you have a cadet commanding againts a (1)? thats overkill, because the cadets normally go with the cadet comm, and by seeing that, newbs want to be with someone as skilled as possible, so they try to join under the most experienced.
i will bring this up again, guitar said to me over ts (which is a great way to use teamwork, so i advise getting it if you dont have it) that everyone will join aarm's team, because hes #1 on the leader board. so people say its a true win.

check this out

1. aarmstrong 294 81 5532 1339 14 102 comm wins. 9 comm losses

4. DreamWalker 318 160 2185 1585 4 155 comm wins 61 comm losses

they are both great commanders, but you would probably go with aarm if you are new, because you see the expert 4 title by his name, and only an expert 1 title by dreams name.

i hope this doesnt get taken wrong, im just trying to porve guitars point that EVERYONE JOINS UNDER HIGHER RANK

i was on ts last night with angela helping a cadet learn the basics of commanding. even though i was on blue helping yellow out, he learned a lot, i will edit this post when i find his name /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> `gu

you never know what the result of the game will be, again

Dengaroth · Post by **Dengaroth** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:27 pm

I logged in.

I looked around.

I logged back out.

(kudos to Cuculet)

Jormagund · Post by **Jormagund** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:35 pm

OK, Heads you win, tails you lose. Take a random samping of ~300 coins (active players) and flip them each ~100 times and calculate the deviation from the 1:1 norm. Now throw that data out the window bc you forgot to add that some of the coins are trying awfully damn hard to come up heads. I know your argument is that over time everything evens out if you have perfectly even games and perfectly even comms and enough games under these conditions to tend toward a statistical average. However, such conditions do not, cannot, will not, exist. The fact is I have seen people get stacked and lose the game bc of the comm or the 'overstack' as I like to term it when you have 12 whores and 0 nans on a team. I have seen Aarm defend a teleport from an entire galv run by himself. Deviations from 1:1 are not a result of flying with the stack so much as at least being part of the stack. You either have the skills so that you can be a stacker or you don't. Even then the vast majority of games are merely unbalanced not stacked.

Look at it like this- I agree with you that 1:1 would prolly be every pilots win ratio if it were a perfect world, no one was overly lucky and human nature was more defensible. However, communism proved this world did not exist. It is one of those look good on paper things. Look at how many ifs/ands/buts you have to throw into your argument all mystically provided by the phrase "over time." I get it. It will all balance out over time- except that this is not how it will happen. There will be a LONG line of horrible games before ranks are accurate followed by a whole new method of stacking when the high ranks decide they don't want to fly with Noobs1-9 and the whole system will be shot. Not to mention say AB gets the perfect mix of pilots to make two teams full of 10s and 11s that equal Helo of 121 to 110 and joeUber shows up with his 24. Well, 121 to 110 is not so inbalanced as to deny him his choice of teams... bam. That was the sound of human nature, a variable, an individual breaking the perfect statistical moulde you had cast.

Greator_SST · Post by **Greator_SST** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:43 pm

Dengaroth wrote:QUOTE (Dengaroth @ Apr 20 2007, 10:27 AM) I logged in.

I looked around.

I logged back out.

...AHAHAHA! Priceless. Apoch and company beating on the newbs...fFor 30 some minutes AHAHAHAHA!!! /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />

mcwarren4 · Post by **mcwarren4** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:57 pm

Jormagund wrote:QUOTE (Jormagund @ Apr 20 2007, 09:35 AM) ...Not to mention say AB gets the perfect mix of pilots to make two teams full of 10s and 11s that equal Helo of 121 to 110 and joeUber shows up with his 24. Well, 121 to 110 is not so inbalanced as to deny him his choice of teams... bam. That was the sound of human nature, a variable, an individual breaking the perfect statistical moulde you had cast....

You've just nailed the 2nd flaw of our current system. The 1st flaw is the 'bug' that won't allow pilots to join either side. That is fixable through programming. The 2nd flaw was intentionally put there. For what reason, I don't know. Assume "Team A" = 121 and "Team B = 110". joeUber can still join Team A provided that his joining doesn't cause a threshold violation creating a game of 145 - 110. Get rid of the threshold issue then he either has to join Team B or has to wait until Team B gets more pilots. Assuming two more 10's join Team B, and we've play enough games so that rank = skill, then you still have a fairly balanced game of 145 to 130 with the next pilots going to Team B (ranksum 130). Its beyond me why you would ever allow additional pilots to join the higher ranked team.

Addressing the two biggest concerns I've read about using autobalance:

#1 Well, having 2 10's is better than one 24. You can't overcome the pilot imbalance... That isn't true. I am currently an Inter 6. I have no idea where I fall out in true ranking, but I regularly pod 2 and 3 people ranked similarly to me while they are attacking me simultaneously. I'm certain I'm not one of the elite pilots, so I can only assume that better pilots are worth more than me and would do even better. If the weight of the sheer number of pilots beats your team then perhaps you should reconsider what team you join and spread out the vets a little more. Then it won't be a problem. Eventually what would happen is that the 'stacked' team's rank would fall enough so that they can add another good pilot the next game. If that isn't enough to overcome the numbers, then they can add another, and so on. But eventually you will hit an equilibrium.

#2 I want to fly on the team of my choosing... This would be NO different than our current system as far as joeUber's having to wait in NOAT to join the team he wants to join. If it were an Max Imbal = 1 game (just like 99% of our current games) you can bet the higher ranked team will be up in pilots 90% of the time and he would have to wait anyway.

Do I think all games should be autobalanced? No. Do I think all games where statistics count should be autobalanced? Yes. That's your incentive to use autobalance and a way to ensure that the ranks are accurate relative to each other. If Pook's 'wave' theory is true that would only mean that ranks would expand and contract, but Weedman would still be one of the highest ranked pilots and less skilled pilots would be near the bottom, which would be correct.

Dengaroth · Post by **Dengaroth** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:13 pm

Greator_SST wrote:QUOTE (Greator_SST @ Apr 20 2007, 05:43 PM) ...AHAHAHA! Priceless. Apoch and company beating on the newbs...fFor 30 some minutes AHAHAHAHA!!! /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />

Greator, when I looked, Fraser and TheFeared already left.

So the ranksums were 18 vs... 108 I think. With poor TrashMan stuck in the big chair.

Sycrus · Post by **Sycrus** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:44 pm

fine deng, you win, you actually have proof of horrible stack...but thats a late night game....i still hae a breath left in this debate! ish...notreally...but yeah!
i would go with my squadies in any game!

ImmortalZ · Post by **ImmortalZ** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:59 pm

Sycrus. The earth is not flat. If its late night for you, its morning or afternoon somewhere in the world.

batman · Post by **batman** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:31 pm

I would ask that some of the folks railing about auto balance PLEASE read KSero's posts ealrier in this thread.

Also, McWarren -- you are right on the money concerning the big concerns about auto balance.

I am also assuming Dogbones or one of the development crew is working on the patch to fix the programming or threshold bug.

Regarding playing with who you want to play, it probably will be a different version of exactly what folks do now.