I am sick of it

[Cadillac]

We've been trying to change the attitude for years (I'll be qualified to say that in June /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />). It's not working. We hae one massive bitch thread every few months and everyone says "oh dear, this really is terrible chaps, lets do something about our attitude" and you know where the problem lies with? The people who DONT post in that thread. Or at least the ones who dont say anything about changing the attitude.

If we cant change the attitude and the game still sucks, then what other solution do we have?

It's sad, but if you really, really, really want to get rid of stacking. Then that is the only sure way to do it, because trusting the community to just "be nicer" just isnt working my friend.

[Lykourgos]

ksero;

i think we have meeting of minds.

by "create a small stack", though, i just meant that with such a lumpy pilot skill distribution even god couldn't create even teams most of the time, and in practice that means that weedman is usually going to make teams unbalanced just by joining one team himself.

then of course there is your point, which is that in the real real world jormagund and company, the stacking voobs, latch on to weedman like vultures and make antistacking even more difficult (and likely unrewarding) than it was before.

jormagund;

ksero is considerably more competent than you are, buddy. and when you say things like "people who suck too much to stack" you give the community the impression that people like me, who are trying to be reasonable and avoid completely enforced autobalance, think stupid @#(! like that. this will result in Bad Things Happening.

[Semarin]

Say we implemented AB.....
According to Ksero, everyone will win ~50% of their games because AB will make the teams even. Assuming thats correct (and its definately not), everyone's Helo's will even out to within a couple ranks of each other in time. At which point the AB system will have no way to judge pilot skill at all. The point is that the AB system will have no way to judge how to make even teams. That is glaring flaw number 1.

[Pook]

Semarin,

It's a wave. If everyone's ranks started to even out, eventually they'd get too close and start to spread apart again. Then, as they get farther apart, AB would be able to judge them better, and they'd come back in.

Boing!

[Ksero]

QUOTE (Semarin @ Apr 19 2007, 01:05 AM) According to Ksero, everyone will win ~50% of their games because AB will make the teams even.

If all games were perfectly even, then everyone would win about 50 % of their games. Our current auto-balance system might fall short of this. But if we try it, we can over time find its flaws, intelligently (re)design the system and improve it.
QUOTE Assuming thats correct (and its definately not), everyone's Helo's will even out to within a couple ranks of each other in time. At which point the AB system will have no way to judge pilot skill at all. The point is that the AB system will have no way to judge how to make even teams. That is glaring flaw number 1.[/quote]
No. Skilled pilots would be able to win when playing with weaker teams. Therefore, they would still have higher ranks.

[Semarin]

QUOTE (Pook @ Apr 18 2007, 07:16 PM) Semarin,

It's a wave. If everyone's ranks started to even out, eventually they'd get too close and start to spread apart again. Then, as they get farther apart, AB would be able to judge them better, and they'd come back in.

Boing!

I see how that could work, I don;t think its worht giving up the freedoms we currently have. But I can see that.

[mcwarren4]

Guys... Why do you keep talking about losing freedoms and not being able to choose which team to fly for? Its not like the 'randomize' button where you are assigned to a team. It is just a system that prevents an already launched game from becoming so overweighted to one side that the game is unwinnable. If you can't join the team you want to join because you just showed up OR you wanted to see how the sides turn out before joining then you have to wait until it is possible to join the team you want, or go start a new game. This isn't any different than the current system in that respect. The side that is down in HELO that nobody wants to join is the same team that is down one pilot under the non-autobalanced system. The only difference is that the team with the better skill per pilot ratio won't be able to win as easily as they used to because the lower skill per pilot team will be able to have more pilots. I would think most people would JUMP at the chance to go whoring on lesser skilled pilots. Sometimes I wonder if its just the introduction of the *chance* of losing that makes this such a taboo subject for some.

I agree with spidey. Autobalance probably won't work well for smaller games, certainly not ones with less than 10 per side. It could work very well for games of more than 10 per side if the 'bug' is fixed and we got rid of that threshold caviat.

[hockey1015]

QUOTE (mcwarren4 @ Apr 18 2007, 07:51 PM) Sometimes I wonder if its just the introduction of the *chance* of losing that makes this such a taboo subject for some.

I agree with spidey. Autobalance probably won't work well for smaller games, certainly not ones with less than 10 per side. It could work very well for games of more than 10 per side if the 'bug' is fixed and we got rid of that threshold caviat.

I think your right mcw, the chance of losing might make the sun suddenly rise in the west and set in the east /blink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":o" border="0" alt="blink.gif" />

Seriously, "even" games are almost always more fun for EVERYBODY involved. These are the thrillers where one wrong move can sway the game in the other teams favor, which makes EVERY pilot be on top of their game at all times. This leads to everybody becoming better, therefore supposedly bringing DW's solution to the surface. It is the job of the VETS to come up with a solution to this problem, not the newbies, not pornstar sally, and not stud shawn. Whether we give autobalance a HARDCORE weeklong test to get results, or if we all make a point to not purposely worsen a stack (there are a handful of pilots whom are exempt based on the community accepting they are good enough to turn a game almost singlehandedly), something has to happen to make this game more enjoyable for the community at large, not our own selves.

[Jormagund]

QUOTE (Lykourgos @ Apr 18 2007, 05:57 PM) ksero;

i think we have meeting of minds.

by "create a small stack", though, i just meant that with such a lumpy pilot skill distribution even god couldn't create even teams most of the time, and in practice that means that weedman is usually going to make teams unbalanced just by joining one team himself.

then of course there is your point, which is that in the real real world jormagund and company, the stacking voobs, latch on to weedman like vultures and make antistacking even more difficult (and likely unrewarding) than it was before.

jormagund;

ksero is considerably more competent than you are, buddy. and when you say things like "people who suck too much to stack" you give the community the impression that people like me, who are trying to be reasonable and avoid completely enforced autobalance, think stupid @#(! like that. this will result in Bad Things Happening.

Lyk, you are really one to talk. I don't even know Weedman's hiders so I would have a hard time clinging to him like a vulture and your own antistacking is something I aspire to. It is truly a magnificent feat to antistack on the stacked team. Also, I didn't know the community took my sarcasm as seriously as you. I have no clue about Ksero's skill cause he doesn't stick in my mind. I could care less if he is as uber as Aarm, you have to be competent to stack and if we were all competent there would be no stack. Stack occurs bc some ppl cannot compete and they stick out like sore thumbs.

QUOTE No. Skilled pilots would be able to win when playing with weaker teams. Therefore, they would still have higher ranks.[/quote]

So, random player X is good enough to win with A, B, and C handicapped tards against T, U, V, and W. X's ability is going to steadily inflate A, B and C while he carries the load and as their ranks go up and T, U, V and W go down due to X's play one day AB will switch it up and mix A, B, with U and T but wait that means they will be up against C, V, W, and X. now since A, B, and C were weak and T, U weren't enough to over come X now they are with a falsely inflated team against a legitimately better team. AB, as we have all SO $#@!ING OFTEN observed just created a stack. You can't have your statistical cake and eat it to. Either skill has no effect and 1:1 is an accurate evaluation of the norm or in reality you can contribute to your team and increase its chance of success.


You all have expanded stacking from being an extreme case wherein all the capable pilots somehow manage to get on one side (damn a @#(!load of noobs sure came from nowhere) to any *perceived* imbalance in a game. There is no such thing as a "small stack" hence my placement of this statement within quotes. Because the entire concept is sheer stupidity. It's like saying the Tudors had a small stack in the war of the roses. You show me one example of a perfectly balanced conflict in history and I will show you a man who knows nothing about what he is speaking of. If one team happens to have a slight edge in ability than that is part of any game/conflict/life. AB will never produce your 1:1 ratio of non-stacking if for no other reason than the appearance of noobs who aren't completely clueless.

An "even" game is one in which team skill levels are comparable, not a coin toss. A stacked game is one in which the about-to-lose team cannot overcome the skills of the other team. These games generally last less than half an hour and if a game exceeds 45 minutes it was obviously not stacked. However, let us all pretend that RL has no bearing and statistics can tell the future, since it is human nature to fit neatly into mathematical formulas and intelligence/skill/ability evalutions so well. Am I right? It's not like it takes many Ph.D.s many years of research to design imperfect methods of evaluation. Even if human nature is deviant from this utopian coin toss of skill and ability we can just ignore it and let play over time sort it out. I mean ignoring human nature worked for communism right? right?

The argument that anyone better than a 1:1 ratio is a stacker holds about as much water as your moms roast beef sandwich.

[batman]

QUOTE (DreamWalker @ Apr 18 2007, 01:07 PM) ...I have never come across any post that would lay it out to me like that and I had to listen to what ksero brought up to understand it myself.

All there was on the boards was whining, whining, and some more whining. And claiming that for helo to work it has to represent individual skills....

OK - Ksero says it better, but it took a thread or two or three or four this time to get it in a rationale form for folks to see that it MIGHT work.

QUOTE (DreamWalker @ Apr 18 2007, 01:07 PM) ...Right now I think I understand a bit better the premises of helo, though I might be wrong, and probably I'm still in the dark when it comes to certain aspects of it.

Saying turn on AB mixed with whining and complaining, bitching, flaming, coming often from people seeing ghost stack or focusing on the games that exists on the outskirts of alleg (5 vs 5, hihiger, 1.25, 1.35, one team nix, the other IC), doesn't convince me.

Thanks for your post ksero, and I'm happy we see somewhat eye to eye greator.

It really is not the winning and the losing so much, it is the getting ground into dust that gets to be annoying, DW. I have told you before -- I repsect your opinion and knowledge and I am glad you are seeing that there is a rationale behind my whining.

So you and greator seeing eye to eye -- next -- worlds collide. After that -- who knows -- we may actually find a way to use Auto Balance on a regular basis. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />