Game counted?

Post by **Tigereye** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:37 pm

The "game counted" threshold has been adjusted to .70/.30.

--TE

sableflame · Post by **sableflame** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:44 am

Grimmwolf_GB wrote:QUOTE (Grimmwolf_GB @ Sep 11 2006, 06:04 AM) No, if you are the worst player in Allegiance, the system will initially balance it to a 50/50 chance. BUT: you suck. You chances are lower than 50 just because of YOU. Your team will lose more often, thus you will lose more elo than you will gain. The next games will reflect that imbalance. After a long time, you should have a lousy rank.

Same with you being the best player in Allegiance. ELO balance you on a mediocre rank and the game has 50/50 chance. BUT: you rock. You defend all the miners and kill the enemy economy. You are a huge part in winning the games for your team. Teams win more often than predicted, because you rock. After a long time, you should have a very high rank.

Im not so sure that this is true.
Absolutely a super pilot is going to have a huge affect on the abillity of a team to win a 50/50 game. And they should rise up the rankings.
The worst player in allegiance can be on the same side as the super pilot . the team with the super pilot is still likely to win and said worst players ranking will go up. As long as he plays on the side with a super pilot (in 50/50 games)he will continue to win....... Every game requires PEON work and the worst player can still carry this out when ordered or instructed to do so. It is the abillity of a great pilot that would affect the outcome of a game far more than the worst player not having much of a clue. /unsure.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":unsure:" border="0" alt="unsure.gif" />

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:00 am

It doesn't work like that really... it would require that supernoob and supervet were always on the same team, doesn't happen. Mind you, it could, one of the things about a team game. /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

Grimmwolf_GB · Post by **Grimmwolf_GB** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:20 am

sableflame wrote:QUOTE (sableflame @ Sep 11 2006, 06:44 AM) Every game requires PEON work and the worst player can still carry this out when ordered or instructed to do so. It is the abillity of a great pilot that would affect the outcome of a game far more than the worst player not having much of a clue. /unsure.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":unsure:" border="0" alt="unsure.gif" />

The worst player in Allegiance would not do any helpful work. That's why he is the worst.
The best player would do anything for the team, just because it is the best use of his abilities at that point in the game.
/smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Of course my example is hypothetical, but that's the idea of the ELO rankings.

FingerBang · Post by **FingerBang** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:36 pm

well now that you went ahead and told them EXACTLY HOW to increase their low ranking hugely....

I stil lthink that we NEED a method to include the OLD MS ranking system with ELO.

As ive pointed out and others too, why should a peon flying around in circles at the outer edge boundary get the same points for a with that a vet does ( a useful vet), while unfair that probing and naning does not incur points, we should still use the old MS system as a modifyer to ELO, kills and base kills should garner a player extra ELO point for a win an LOWERED ELO for a loss.

If im playing a RELATIVLY EVEN GAME, and i log 50 kills, and that 50 is over 2 times as many as the whole rest of the team combined, should i not get more ELO than the others who didnt get kills, same for base killing.

While this isnt a perfect system, it is a better judge of a players ability in a team setting.

AND FOR GODS SAKE A DRAW IS A DRAW, NOT A LOSS!!!!!!!!

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:47 pm

Well, in an elo based team environment everybody should share in the win...

The way it usually works is that the people with the higher elo gain a proportionally larger share (based on their elo) then those with lower elo... it works the opposite if they lose.

high elo + win = higher share of elo gain

high elo + lose = higher share of elo loss

Of course, this really only works if there's a k-factor limited on elo variance per game as you increase you elo ranks. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

sableflame · Post by **sableflame** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:08 am

As a Voob, i think nanning, probing deprobing should most definitley incur points.
This is a huge game and all factors need to be used effectivley to get the most out of a game.

There should not be any points in a game if all things are not scored..

Is the rankings not lopsided if you only score when doing things that advanced players tend to do or have priority to do in a game?

Without PEASANTS there would be no KINGS.......................... /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

bigheadzach · Post by **bigheadzach** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:59 am

Agreed, and the scoring system built into Alleg already has some reward for deprobing and picking up tech, but this shouldn't INCREASE the team's ELO, but award more of the "team points" to those who contributed more to the win.

Come to think of it, the current algorithm only awards K-points individually. What if we treated each team as a single chess player, then split the point gain/loss by both a measure of team time contributed (player-minutes) and rewardable activities accomplished? Whoring wouldn't help except give you more of the team's share, but it can't increase the overall point change.

I had a huge essay prepared and this turned it on its ear...damn you people /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

Grimmwolf_GB · Post by **Grimmwolf_GB** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 7:49 am

FingerBang wrote:QUOTE (FingerBang @ Sep 11 2006, 06:36 PM) well now that you went ahead and told them EXACTLY HOW to increase their low ranking hugely....

I did not work on the ELO stuff. I read some of the already available info on the board and wrote my post. It is not that hard to figure out and is not meant to be a secret information.

FingerBang wrote:QUOTE (FingerBang @ Sep 11 2006, 06:36 PM) As ive pointed out and others too, why should a peon flying around in circles at the outer edge boundary get the same points for a with that a vet does ( a useful vet),

Well, if the game is balanced to 50/50 and the useless peon is flying in circles, then the Team ELO is wrong, therefor it needs adjusting by losing a game .(unless there is a similar peon on the other team as well)

Grim_Reaper_4u · Post by **Grim_Reaper_4u** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:19 am

In theory giving more ELo to usefull players is perfect (and fair). It would make sure that ELO ratings are more accurate than they are now.

However :

- as long as nanning or probing gets no points it is unfair and detrimental to good gamemplay (not to mention that lotsa peeps wouldn't nan anymore and just go chase a newb so they could pod him /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> )

- the person who gets the kill is often not the only person who should be credited with the kill (if 5 peeps attack a con, bump it, prox it and kill it then I doubt 4 peeps get an assist point /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> )

Solution :

Not possible : there is no fair way you can reward nanning and probing (it would be very easy to exploit and create a point farm)

possible : create ELo modifiers that do the following : after say 50 games played you look at a persons stats and if

kills>1/minute ----> move up to expert1 base ELO
tech base kills>=1/game ----> move up to expert1 base ELO
miner kills>2/game -----> move up to expert1 base ELO
etc.

This way top players are bumped up to the rank they deserve without having to wait for ELO to do it so game balance is a lot easier to achieve. (although it still doesn't reward our poor nans and probers /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" /> )