Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-13T09:52:17+02:00

Zavior wrote:
I remember the comment field being just random abuse and nothing else. Completely nothing of value. PlayerTrack, even while the idea is good, was _not_ good for the community as a whole imo. The only thing I would support here would be personal comments, only visible to yourself. Blacklist would accomplish the same though.

This had been changed to some more standard choice in the reason for the DNP.

But overall I preferred the free comments.

Playing custom games e.g. 2v2 always ends in: I have to fight 2v1

If that makes you feel you better, it happens in 4v4 too , quite a lot . That's why I lost the last 8 games on my side . I guess the deal is to be strong enough to hold that alliance crap while the team wins, but it tends to be more and more annoying to be the sacrificed sheep

Apart from map choice, I would advise you find a regular gaming partner if possible.

NO poor dude. Do that and you will end up like me , being called a stacker ,and to "balance", the opponents will actually do the stacking i.e. be sure it can end with an alliance of players against one , since the others in the team can just be left alone anyway. Well never been as much disgusted by this game as lately, so my opinion may be very well biased.

Statistics: Posted by -_V_- — 13 Jun 2012, 09:52

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T19:32:40+02:00

I remember the comment field being just random abuse and nothing else. Completely nothing of value. PlayerTrack, even while the idea is good, was _not_ good for the community as a whole imo. The only thing I would support here would be personal comments, only visible to yourself. Blacklist would accomplish the same though.

Statistics: Posted by Zavior — 12 Jun 2012, 19:32

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T19:19:12+02:00

noobymcnoobcake wrote:
And this is the reason why Zep has said there will be no DNP thing for FAF because it WILL be abused. No question about it. I was rated as noob on PT with 66% winrate and 16% DNP for stuff like ACU bug or cheating ect... people get upset when they lose and try to make life hard for other people. DNP is a bad idea.

What would be a good idea is a personal blacklist that tells you in game lobby chat when the people on them join the games you are in. Also the ability to leave comments on each person but only visible to you. This blacklist is required because some people change there name every week but a computer could rely on the UID.

I totally agree with that, a blacklist and comments are a good idea. But abuse is not a problem (i have 12% DNP): 66% win rate means more than 16% DNP, the user does not have to believe everyting playertrack tells him. Mass/energy produced and kills tell more than any DNP rating if its a good player and this information is not available atm.

Maybe DNP can be a flag set by the user only visable to him additional to the commment field.

Statistics: Posted by infinity_pool — 12 Jun 2012, 19:19

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T19:13:36+02:00

Rating doesnt tell much even if the system thinks it is stable. It could be because he only playes setons 100% of time and fails at other maps, or only plays other types of games and fails at your setons =)

Statistics: Posted by Zavior — 12 Jun 2012, 19:13

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T12:42:59+02:00

I can sympathize; I mostly play with a friend on-line and we are of similar level and work okay as a team. On the occasions I have played with other people I find the map choice is critical, a map like Arctic Refuge plays out like two 1v1s so you are not so reliant on your team mate. A map like Desert Dual which is a personal favorite greatly relies on team play and you need to back each other up.

I have come a cropper on Isis where I have won the centre and continued to push through with initiative but my partner has decided to sit back and landscape his base, I then have to full back due to meeting two ACUs on the opponents half and the initiative is lost. Apart from map choice, I would advise you find a regular gaming partner if possible.

Although the following comment is broad (and there is bound to be expectations) my view is SC is an attacking game you cannot afford to sit back and turtle as you will lose map coverage, therefore good players (white 1500+ ratings) should be adopting an attacking stance. I would find it strange a white 1500+ rating player would get overrun against similar rated players, your recent games could be anomalies or you are playing a player who normally plays Thermo .

PS: Don’t play a Seatons if you don’t want to rely on team play.

Statistics: Posted by X-Peri-MENTAL — 12 Jun 2012, 12:42

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T12:37:10+02:00

It is already done. Right click on any player.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 12 Jun 2012, 12:37

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T12:34:05+02:00

The reason the rating doesn't seem to have much bearing on performance is that FAF shows you the lowest trueskill estimate for every player, it doesn't give you the best estimate. This means while it might show two players as having the same rating, there might actually be a several hundred point difference.

Now while I agree this should be the case for the global leaderboards (it doesn't make sense for someone with zero games to be put in the middle of the overall rankings), I think that the actual estimate of a players skill should be visible too. This would make balancing in game much easier, although I believe something is being developed to show this on a stats page for each player.

That said if we had the optimal team composition feature back that would be fantastic, I know I found it very helpful.

Statistics: Posted by Softly — 12 Jun 2012, 12:34

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-12T15:47:59+02:00

infinity_pool wrote:
Please give FAF something like playertrack.

Zep has said this will be implemented eventually, with as much detail as playertrack.

infinity_pool wrote:
Please leave constructive replys and not this sh** like : Poor guy, u r overrated. u need more practice.

this will not even happen. And this is the reason why Zep has said there will be no DNP thing for FAF because it WILL be abused. No question about it. I was rated as noob on PT with 66% winrate and 16% DNP for stuff like ACU bug or cheating ect... people get upset when they lose and try to make life hard for other people. DNP is a bad idea.

What would be a good idea is a personal blacklist that tells you in game lobby chat when the people on them join the games you are in. Also the ability to leave comments on each person but only visible to you. This blacklist is required because some people change there name every week but a computer could rely on the UID.

Statistics: Posted by noobymcnoobcake — 11 Jun 2012, 23:04

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-11T22:47:44+02:00

I remember a 3v3 last weekend where you left the game first, because you were losing a little fight, but nothing game deciding yet. You wrote something like "teammates suck" and left, while I have to say, they didnt suck especially more than anyone else in the game xD

but true is... i seldom play random games anymore. its no fun as you say. in 90% of the games with randoms a stupid idiot is in your team. sometimes it is yourself, but mostly its someone else xD

Statistics: Posted by Kryo — 11 Jun 2012, 22:47

Re: Player rating value significant?

2012-06-11T22:30:08+02:00

What is the colour of the rating when you are in the lobby? Is it black, gray or white?

The whiter it is, the more sense it makes. It's closely related to the number of games played. I played 8 rated games but I'm for sure a lot better than the rating of about (I can't recall for sure) 500.

Statistics: Posted by Plasma_Wolf — 11 Jun 2012, 22:30

Player rating value significant?

2012-06-11T21:35:26+02:00

Playing FAF isnt fun anymore: Playing custom games e.g. 2v2 always ends in:

I have to fight 2v1 and my mate looses because he gets overrun: Not enough units, bad def, no air... Teams are balanced otherwise i wouldnt join... I have this problem for about a week now. In my opinion it was from the beginning but its getting worse. So a good rating (1300-1500) doesnt mean you are a good (team-) player, neither played game are significant

Please give FAF something like playertrack where players can be rated (DNP! and connection drops) if they are not playing agressive enough to push forward with troops or to build good bases and eco. I hope im not the only one with this situation. Using playertrack was very helpful to find equal opponents.

Please leave constructive replys and not this sh** like : Poor guy, u r overrated. u need more practice.

Statistics: Posted by infinity_pool — 11 Jun 2012, 21:35