ACS will help the commander situation. All the ACS vs ACS games I've seen so far were pretty even in both teams and com skill.
AB won't balance coms. However, it will give us useful data which can maybe be used to try and balance coms or take com ability into account for future balancing.
What we cannot tell at the moment is whether a com is good or whether they draw the stack. The two may well be synonymous but there's just no data to support any position.
HELO != Skill. Well, if AB were mandatory it'd be a lot closer than it is now. Stackers wouldn't gain points for joining a team that cannot lose and vice versa. HELO isn't my prefered system for ranking players but it's the one we're currently working with. AB will help any system to work better.
I am sick of it
-
DreamWalker
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:00 am
Ok, now Black-Eagle, way to be clueless or trying to use dishonest methods to prove a point. I will go with you being clueless and not lose any respect I might have for you.
9 vs 13, minute 25
What does that mean? It means either imbal was set to off, which I doubt. It means that AB was turned on, but if AB was turned on, the helo wouldn't differ that much especially with the algorithm as it is right now. What happened is that people fled from yellow and comm wouldn't resign. This is what happened. This is not stacking. Even if stacking occurs, you can't have 4 more players on one team than on the other with imbal set to 1. doah. doah. doah. At least 3 people must have fled from yellow, and I can only guess those were the better pilots. Newbies or voobies rarely know when they are getting screwed over, and hence it is sometimes so challenging to resign with a newb stack on your team.
This is what I mean by saying that incompetent people whore threads and whine about stack, seeing stack where there is none. This is extreme example, and it's nothing personal Black-Eagle. There is nothing wrong with erring, but if many people have flawed ideas like you, and are vocal about them like you are, than it becomes annoying.
No harm done, just please refrain from posting such strong statements as "For those who say there is no stacking in Alleigiance (...) Pictures speak a 1000 words" unless you want to get a rep of a troll. Strong opinions might lead you to becoming another BoG, who earned a very bad rep, one that he doesn't deserve all that much, due to his big ego.
So I'll see you in game and let's drop the matter of this completely misjudged game.
DW
9 vs 13, minute 25
What does that mean? It means either imbal was set to off, which I doubt. It means that AB was turned on, but if AB was turned on, the helo wouldn't differ that much especially with the algorithm as it is right now. What happened is that people fled from yellow and comm wouldn't resign. This is what happened. This is not stacking. Even if stacking occurs, you can't have 4 more players on one team than on the other with imbal set to 1. doah. doah. doah. At least 3 people must have fled from yellow, and I can only guess those were the better pilots. Newbies or voobies rarely know when they are getting screwed over, and hence it is sometimes so challenging to resign with a newb stack on your team.
This is what I mean by saying that incompetent people whore threads and whine about stack, seeing stack where there is none. This is extreme example, and it's nothing personal Black-Eagle. There is nothing wrong with erring, but if many people have flawed ideas like you, and are vocal about them like you are, than it becomes annoying.
No harm done, just please refrain from posting such strong statements as "For those who say there is no stacking in Alleigiance (...) Pictures speak a 1000 words" unless you want to get a rep of a troll. Strong opinions might lead you to becoming another BoG, who earned a very bad rep, one that he doesn't deserve all that much, due to his big ego.
So I'll see you in game and let's drop the matter of this completely misjudged game.
DW
-
DreamWalker
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:00 am
AB seems to be based on sound ideas. If it was introduced into broad use right now, it probably would produce some very silly games at start, but probably even within 2 - 3 weeks the games would start being more balanced as they are right now and within 2 months we would have an operational balancing system. These are only my speculations and I'm sure ksero could give us a more educated opinion on that topic.
Given the premises of helo, as long as games without AB on count, this system will never work. I am unwilling to play with AB on, just for the next couple of games without AB on to throw the system against more out of whack than the silly games I would have to comm given how the ranks currently are.
1. In order for helo to work, only ABed games need to count and be logged into the database. There is no other way to go about it.
2. If people want to indulge in offtime silly little games, they do not have to enforce AB.
3. AB has a potential to produce silly games at the beginning. We will have to put up with that but if AB is enforced on a consistent basis, it won't take that long for the helo ranks to become more meaningful.
4. I thought about making AB mandatory, but it is not necessary. IMHO, that would be a great idea to go with, as it addresses the problem of small games that some people in our community are so appeased by. Than again, we would need an algorithm that would scale well to smaller and bigger games. Nonetheless, probably giving people the choice will decrease the drama, and will still allow for tutoring session, silly small games, squad practices, and squad games without making special accomodations for servers where such things would take place.
For helo and AB to start working, all we need is
- only games with AB to count (to protect the database from bogus data)
- an alliance of comms who comm a lot to actually keep the AB on whenever they comm a bigger game. I am willing to put up with some games a bit out of whack at start (just as stacking setts the games out of whack) if I know that it will in the longer run contribute to better ranks and AB working. Such an alliance could be organized around the ACS and also particular squads could include it in their policies.
Additionaly, which is of lesser importance right now, I do not agree with curving helo by translating raw score into ranks. It is my believe that the system would work better on a scale from 1000 - 10000 (even new players, living probes, do contribute something to the game and it usually takes only a couple of games till they learn to probe and use nans, so starting at 0 would be uncalled for). Right now as it is, due to curving, Aarms rank is "undervalued" compared to his helo score. For now, this can be understood, as this curve partially counteracts helo earned by stacking. I think that it would be easier for the system to balance itself when only raw helo was taken into account. I don't see a particular need for ranks anyways, as it seems it only makes people angry and go stupid at times. Also, everyone knows everyone in the community, and can tell how good they are, and even what they excel in.
I'm looking forward to using AB but given how it is right now, I might only use it for the hell of it as as long as games with AB off count, and these are the majority of the games, using AB won't balance the games nor produce lasting changes in the database,
DW
Given the premises of helo, as long as games without AB on count, this system will never work. I am unwilling to play with AB on, just for the next couple of games without AB on to throw the system against more out of whack than the silly games I would have to comm given how the ranks currently are.
1. In order for helo to work, only ABed games need to count and be logged into the database. There is no other way to go about it.
2. If people want to indulge in offtime silly little games, they do not have to enforce AB.
3. AB has a potential to produce silly games at the beginning. We will have to put up with that but if AB is enforced on a consistent basis, it won't take that long for the helo ranks to become more meaningful.
4. I thought about making AB mandatory, but it is not necessary. IMHO, that would be a great idea to go with, as it addresses the problem of small games that some people in our community are so appeased by. Than again, we would need an algorithm that would scale well to smaller and bigger games. Nonetheless, probably giving people the choice will decrease the drama, and will still allow for tutoring session, silly small games, squad practices, and squad games without making special accomodations for servers where such things would take place.
For helo and AB to start working, all we need is
- only games with AB to count (to protect the database from bogus data)
- an alliance of comms who comm a lot to actually keep the AB on whenever they comm a bigger game. I am willing to put up with some games a bit out of whack at start (just as stacking setts the games out of whack) if I know that it will in the longer run contribute to better ranks and AB working. Such an alliance could be organized around the ACS and also particular squads could include it in their policies.
Additionaly, which is of lesser importance right now, I do not agree with curving helo by translating raw score into ranks. It is my believe that the system would work better on a scale from 1000 - 10000 (even new players, living probes, do contribute something to the game and it usually takes only a couple of games till they learn to probe and use nans, so starting at 0 would be uncalled for). Right now as it is, due to curving, Aarms rank is "undervalued" compared to his helo score. For now, this can be understood, as this curve partially counteracts helo earned by stacking. I think that it would be easier for the system to balance itself when only raw helo was taken into account. I don't see a particular need for ranks anyways, as it seems it only makes people angry and go stupid at times. Also, everyone knows everyone in the community, and can tell how good they are, and even what they excel in.
I'm looking forward to using AB but given how it is right now, I might only use it for the hell of it as as long as games with AB off count, and these are the majority of the games, using AB won't balance the games nor produce lasting changes in the database,
DW
-
Constanzus
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:02 am
- Location: USA
i dont mean to go against you DreamWalker but i would just like a bit of clarification.
if a game is 9v13 at the present moment you dont call that a " stack ". then what would you call it? "uneven teams"?
i thought a stack is when the teams are reasonably uneven in Helo and/or numbers
if a game is 9v13 at the present moment you dont call that a " stack ". then what would you call it? "uneven teams"?
i thought a stack is when the teams are reasonably uneven in Helo and/or numbers
" We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. " -Plato (427 BC - 347 BC)
-
blackeagle0001
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:30 am
- Location: South Australia
Ok, then, what do you consider a stack then.
(4) [8]
(5) [80]
The blue team told me that stacking is alleigance, and even replied that you cant learn when your winning
(I said you cant learn while your ass is in a pod)
(7) [22]
(7) [108]
Put it this way DW, your respect means nothing to me. Ive only seen you twice and both times it was in a stacked game. And you were supporting the stack. If i lose your respect just trying to have a fair, even and fun game- So be it.
(4) [8]
(5) [80]
The blue team told me that stacking is alleigance, and even replied that you cant learn when your winning
(I said you cant learn while your ass is in a pod)
(7) [22]
(7) [108]
Put it this way DW, your respect means nothing to me. Ive only seen you twice and both times it was in a stacked game. And you were supporting the stack. If i lose your respect just trying to have a fair, even and fun game- So be it.
-
Greator_SST
- Posts: 277
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 7:00 am
...in the VERY typical stack using imbalance, the team ranks are roughly 140 vs. 90. We've ALL seen it countless times. In addition, team 140 is always up one player for the duration of this short, pathetic games life AS WE ALL KNOW. Using my limited math skills, team 140 is up the equivalent of 5 (10)s. And as we ALL know, as we all SEE night after night, team 140 wins. EVERY TIME.
Yet all of you invent more and more convoluted theories as to why ab is the evil and should be banished, not imbalance.
Please, all of your protests are ridiculous. Team 140 forms every every night, wins every night and short of three consecutive multiple page threads full of people finally standing up to it, Team 140 is the de facto starting mentality for most of the people who are complaining here.
Here's the most telling quote in all the threads thus far.
And I'm going to make clear one more time. No one plays this game to lose. I sympathize with people who simply want to stack, have a good ol' time in the evening and go to bed happy with another few wins under their belts and their position on the leaderboard strengthened. Where I differ is that I don't think we should be dependent on the 'character' of our players or comms or, worse, on a cyclical fear of consequences. AB cannot possibly be 'worse' than Team 140. It may not be better, but who cares. It can't be worse.
Yet all of you invent more and more convoluted theories as to why ab is the evil and should be banished, not imbalance.
Please, all of your protests are ridiculous. Team 140 forms every every night, wins every night and short of three consecutive multiple page threads full of people finally standing up to it, Team 140 is the de facto starting mentality for most of the people who are complaining here.
Here's the most telling quote in all the threads thus far.
The ONLY reason we're having this discussion at all is that some people are starting to 'fear' that autobalance is going to become a reality. That's the ONLY reason we're seeing a modification of stacking behavior recently. It's not because people have suddenly gotten altruistic. It's because they're afraid that their behavior may finally have consequences.Lykourgos wrote:QUOTE (Lykourgos @ Apr 18 2007, 06:57 PM) people like me, who are trying to be reasonable and avoid completely enforced autobalance
And I'm going to make clear one more time. No one plays this game to lose. I sympathize with people who simply want to stack, have a good ol' time in the evening and go to bed happy with another few wins under their belts and their position on the leaderboard strengthened. Where I differ is that I don't think we should be dependent on the 'character' of our players or comms or, worse, on a cyclical fear of consequences. AB cannot possibly be 'worse' than Team 140. It may not be better, but who cares. It can't be worse.
...yea
-
DreamWalker
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:00 am
Constanzus: A stack is defined as when one team has pilots of greater skill than the other, and the disproportion is very high.
This is my definition. Many people would change the words "very high" to "high", or "slight", but I don't agree with that.
In general, a stack is an 'unfair' advantage over the other team. It is skilled players joining one team to completely run the other team over. To some extent its also occurs by friends chosing to play with friends, RL family members chosing to play with family memebers and/or friends, or unwillingness to fly for a certain comm cause a) he is clueless b) you don't like him for what he does even if you think he knows how to comm. Now, many people will completely dismiss those arguments, and will simply put that stacking is when one team has an unfair advantage over the other.
Thus stacking is a broader term. You can stack settings given the faction choice. You can say that "commanders" are stacked, when a vet comm manipulates the lobby, or plainly ends up randomly, comming vs a much weaker comm.
I have participated in 2 games two days ago when the same thing happened that Eagle speaks to in his earlier post. The comm screwed up, or the game went bad, and the whole team fled. Also, some comms do not resign, even when it is only a server crash that can save them from losing the game, and the other team is unwilling to finish the game. Than the team drops. In such a case, I will not draw a game. It's not stack. 99% of the games are currently played with imbalance set to = 1. You set it in game settings when you have GC = you are the comm with game control who controls settings/map choice, and can ban from the lobby when you are on noats. It is thus impossible to "stack" a game of 9 vs 13 by people willing to only join one team. When teams are 9 vs 10 you cannot join the team that is one up.
Black-Eagle, your first example was completely out of whack. These screens show small game stupidity taken to an extreme. I can tell you that those screens were taken between 11 am - 2 pm in europe.
one more thing @Const. Calling helo stack right now is not a good thing to do, given that helo ranks are so out of whack. A game can be 200 vs 300 in terms of helo and comms after the game will still agree that teams were rather even. This happened to me. When you have KGJV who is a (5), spidey who is a (14) and a guy who played for 3 months but plays during alleg dead hours like the games Eagle posted screens from in his second post, and he is 21, than you can see how helo means nothing right now, or at least not much of what it is meant to mean.
Eagle, your screens do not touch me. I have a particular attitude towards early afternoon in europe games, and that is why you won't see me participating that much in them anymore. I know the guys who play in them, I would play in them myself, and I know the weird things that happen than, and blaming it all on the vets and sounding the alarm is plainly silly. When I see a game 3 vs 3 launch, and I really want to play, I'm pretty much happy if I can fly around in a scout or a pattie. This is what these games are about to me. Or solo bombing and other stupid @#(!. These screens have no weight with me.
Nonetheless, it is true that in your earlier post you completely misunderstood the screen that you posted. Const did the right thing, he asked a question to understand a concept that was not familiar to him, just like galvs, or mini3, which are names/abbreviations particular to this game and this community. You decided to be vocal about your concerns and you will find many people here who will agree with you and take your side. I won't. You might even be right saying that these games from your 2nd post were imbalanced, but it seems that you are after an argument to prove taht stack exists more than anything else. And there is much more to those early games than only players stacking. I can bet that the comm on the newbie team grabbed comm and was one of the guys you mutiny when faced with a vet comm, or let him learn his lesson. When a newbie grabbs comms and won't give it up no matter what, and is not often to discussion, such things happen. So be very careful in blaming only one side.
DW
This is my definition. Many people would change the words "very high" to "high", or "slight", but I don't agree with that.
In general, a stack is an 'unfair' advantage over the other team. It is skilled players joining one team to completely run the other team over. To some extent its also occurs by friends chosing to play with friends, RL family members chosing to play with family memebers and/or friends, or unwillingness to fly for a certain comm cause a) he is clueless b) you don't like him for what he does even if you think he knows how to comm. Now, many people will completely dismiss those arguments, and will simply put that stacking is when one team has an unfair advantage over the other.
Thus stacking is a broader term. You can stack settings given the faction choice. You can say that "commanders" are stacked, when a vet comm manipulates the lobby, or plainly ends up randomly, comming vs a much weaker comm.
I have participated in 2 games two days ago when the same thing happened that Eagle speaks to in his earlier post. The comm screwed up, or the game went bad, and the whole team fled. Also, some comms do not resign, even when it is only a server crash that can save them from losing the game, and the other team is unwilling to finish the game. Than the team drops. In such a case, I will not draw a game. It's not stack. 99% of the games are currently played with imbalance set to = 1. You set it in game settings when you have GC = you are the comm with game control who controls settings/map choice, and can ban from the lobby when you are on noats. It is thus impossible to "stack" a game of 9 vs 13 by people willing to only join one team. When teams are 9 vs 10 you cannot join the team that is one up.
Black-Eagle, your first example was completely out of whack. These screens show small game stupidity taken to an extreme. I can tell you that those screens were taken between 11 am - 2 pm in europe.
one more thing @Const. Calling helo stack right now is not a good thing to do, given that helo ranks are so out of whack. A game can be 200 vs 300 in terms of helo and comms after the game will still agree that teams were rather even. This happened to me. When you have KGJV who is a (5), spidey who is a (14) and a guy who played for 3 months but plays during alleg dead hours like the games Eagle posted screens from in his second post, and he is 21, than you can see how helo means nothing right now, or at least not much of what it is meant to mean.
Eagle, your screens do not touch me. I have a particular attitude towards early afternoon in europe games, and that is why you won't see me participating that much in them anymore. I know the guys who play in them, I would play in them myself, and I know the weird things that happen than, and blaming it all on the vets and sounding the alarm is plainly silly. When I see a game 3 vs 3 launch, and I really want to play, I'm pretty much happy if I can fly around in a scout or a pattie. This is what these games are about to me. Or solo bombing and other stupid @#(!. These screens have no weight with me.
Nonetheless, it is true that in your earlier post you completely misunderstood the screen that you posted. Const did the right thing, he asked a question to understand a concept that was not familiar to him, just like galvs, or mini3, which are names/abbreviations particular to this game and this community. You decided to be vocal about your concerns and you will find many people here who will agree with you and take your side. I won't. You might even be right saying that these games from your 2nd post were imbalanced, but it seems that you are after an argument to prove taht stack exists more than anything else. And there is much more to those early games than only players stacking. I can bet that the comm on the newbie team grabbed comm and was one of the guys you mutiny when faced with a vet comm, or let him learn his lesson. When a newbie grabbs comms and won't give it up no matter what, and is not often to discussion, such things happen. So be very careful in blaming only one side.
DW
-
DreamWalker
- Posts: 183
- Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:00 am
greator, who did you speak to in your post?
In my post on AB I pretty much outlined what I think should be done for AB to work and expressed my willingness to go with using AB.
Are you stuck in pro-AB bashing mode /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":o" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />. Also, saying that people stack less cause they fear AB is saying that the world is evil and plotting against all the righteous ones.
If you were speaking to me than reread my post. I agree with ksero on AB and helo. I will be the first one to promote AB if games without AB off won't count. Otherwise, it doesn't make to me any ANY statistical sense at all. I will hold my opinion unless someone can convince me otherwise, but I presume that ksero will agree with me on that. As long as not ABed games count, the possibilites of using helo as a balancing mechanism are very limited.
DW
In my post on AB I pretty much outlined what I think should be done for AB to work and expressed my willingness to go with using AB.
Are you stuck in pro-AB bashing mode /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":o" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />. Also, saying that people stack less cause they fear AB is saying that the world is evil and plotting against all the righteous ones.
If you were speaking to me than reread my post. I agree with ksero on AB and helo. I will be the first one to promote AB if games without AB off won't count. Otherwise, it doesn't make to me any ANY statistical sense at all. I will hold my opinion unless someone can convince me otherwise, but I presume that ksero will agree with me on that. As long as not ABed games count, the possibilites of using helo as a balancing mechanism are very limited.
DW
Last edited by DreamWalker on Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Greator_SST
- Posts: 277
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 7:00 am
-
blackeagle0001
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:30 am
- Location: South Australia