Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-10T17:13:13+02:00

So, what problem prompted this radical change? I wasn't aware that there was a real problem. Sure, I'd *HEARD* about smurfing, but I don't think I've ever encountered one.

I think the rating system was fun, and was a good at motivating people to improve.

Will we at least have a record? Wins/Losses?

For what it's worth, and since Zep is kind of a dictator here, that's probably not much...I wish the ratings system would remain the same.

Like others here though, I do appreciate that FAF exists and I can live with a benevolent dictator since the good far outweighs the bad.

*Edited for punctuation.

Statistics: Posted by Flipper — 10 Feb 2014, 17:13

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-10T13:58:34+02:00

Ze_PilOt wrote:
I think that showing an updated rating only every 10 or so games, or every sunday, is not a bad idea at all.

That would make rating more precise. So why not. But I thought that we agreed that rating should not be interpreted as that precise anyway?

Statistics: Posted by ax0lotl — 10 Feb 2014, 13:58

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T19:33:41+02:00

Updating the ratings periodically (e.g. weekly) would de-emphasize the ratings, but still give us the information we need to balance games.

Alternatively, to try and be constructive - if you do decide to hide the rating, would it be possible to have an 'auto balance teams' button?

The button would use the hidden, but still existing, rating to try and balance the game?

If you think this feature would be a good addition to the lobby, I volunteer to code a method that would:

- take in N players, their ratings, and try produce the most balanced teams (possibly with some map specific heuristics, so that, e.g. on setons, the highest rated players would be defaulted to air; and so that in general it'd try match players by rating). (There's a bit of an optimisation problem there, but I've a CS background.)

Statistics: Posted by Iljalat — 09 Feb 2014, 19:33

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T12:39:32+02:00

Apofenas wrote:
Ze_PilOt wrote:If you think rating doesn't mean anything, then you shouldn't worry about playing rated games.

I think that changing current rating system is pointless. The ladder rating is usefull; but the custom one isn't.

It was usefull. But mostly biased by unranked game.
Either way, if you think it's wrong, losing or gaining custom rating shouldn't worry you.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 09 Feb 2014, 12:39

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T12:38:23+02:00

https://forums.uberent.com/threads/elo- ... ost-868394

That post, while widly wrong about the technique, make a interesting point.

I think that showing an updated rating only every 10 or so games, or every sunday, is not a bad idea at all.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 09 Feb 2014, 12:38

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T12:34:53+02:00

Ze_PilOt wrote:
If you think rating doesn't mean anything, then you shouldn't worry about playing rated games.

I think that changing current rating system is pointless. The ladder rating is usefull; but the custom one isn't.

Statistics: Posted by Apofenas — 09 Feb 2014, 12:34

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T12:13:20+02:00

Apofenas wrote:
I never liked an idea of a custom rating: you can gain it by doing nothing, because your team mates win their opponents; you can farm it on well known map or in stacked games; you can be good in team games, but be really bad in 1v1s. I completly disrespect this rating. Thats why i do like to play unranked team games. But even in that case i don't mind playing at least some custom games that are really balanced. At the opposite i do respect a ladder rating. Thats why i'd like it to be a main one. And thats why i did expect a 2v2 ladder. The old system worked and did that very well.

Now about upcoming rating changes. In fact these changes do not solve anything.

Rating system abuse: People will not stop farming rating(now rank) or making it worse, so they could face noobs.

Unranked games: As i saw already, nothing changed.

Balance: Most of the time people do a really good balance for team games(85-99%), now the system will do that itself.

Teams: As i understood, the host will have and autobalance button. If some friends want to play as a team, that button will not be used at all. Such teams know each other's true skill, so they will rotate players, see, who makes disbalance, kick those and wait for someone else or unrank a game.

If you think rating doesn't mean anything, then you shouldn't worry about playing rated games.

Statistics: Posted by Ze_PilOt — 09 Feb 2014, 12:13

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T10:54:29+02:00

QuickFix - All ranked and keep rating so you can still compete with friends, whiners will adapt like they do to youtube updates. Might take some time but will be just fine.

Statistics: Posted by D4E_Omit — 09 Feb 2014, 10:54

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T08:18:56+02:00

I never liked an idea of a custom rating: you can gain it by doing nothing, because your team mates win their opponents; you can farm it on well known map or in stacked games; you can be good in team games, but be really bad in 1v1s. I completly disrespect this rating. Thats why i do like to play unranked team games. But even in that case i don't mind playing at least some custom games that are really balanced. At the opposite i do respect a ladder rating. Thats why i'd like it to be a main one. And thats why i did expect a 2v2 ladder. The old system worked and did that very well.

Now about upcoming rating changes. In fact these changes do not solve anything.

Rating system abuse: People will not stop farming rating(now rank) or making it worse, so they could face noobs.

Unranked games: As i saw already, nothing changed.

Balance: Most of the time people do a really good balance for team games(85-99%), now the system will do that itself.

Teams: As i understood, the host will have and autobalance button. If some friends want to play as a team, that button will not be used at all. Such teams know each other's true skill, so they will rotate players, see, who makes disbalance, kick those and wait for someone else or unrank a game.

Statistics: Posted by Apofenas — 09 Feb 2014, 08:18

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T07:57:07+02:00

we had the initial drama with the engi mod at first, but people got used to it.
same with this, people will complain. but I trust Zep's decision to change things. The guy knows what hes doing !
also the poll has swung in its favour, as people start to adapt

Statistics: Posted by FireMessiah — 09 Feb 2014, 07:57

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-09T03:03:41+02:00

I have voted to retain the current system, and want to explain my vote.

I play a lot of team games in the ~1200 range.

The rating system allows me to play games that are relatively balanced.

The rating system (trueskill) is imperfect. It does not model map proficiency. It does not model certain things that affect balance (e.g. the top two players being on one team; the position of players on the map.) But it is a very good signal. The trueskill rating provides a good proxy to a players actual skill.

If you remove it, this will make it harder for me and the players I play with to balance games.
(I don't have IRL friends that play FAF; but I see the same players again and again, and we generally try balance games)

FAF is at its best when I play a fairly balanced game, that I have to struggle to win, and win about half the time.
FAF is least fun when teams are 'stacked' (either for me or against me).

I think most of the players I happen to play with also believe this.
Yes, occasionally some players try manipulate the system, to play 'stacked' games.
The rating system allows us quickly recognise those players, and 'keeps them honest' or, at worst, costs them time they spend artificially decreasing their rating.

Most hosts make an effort to balance the game, the rating system providing a great asset.

Removing rating information is going to make it harder for the average player to find a balanced game.
I believe this will be bad for the FAF user experience.

Statistics: Posted by Iljalat — 09 Feb 2014, 03:03

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-08T18:39:05+02:00

I'm not against the withdraw of the global rating, however i think this list of 8300 players was showing to new comers the strength of FAF.

Statistics: Posted by Lu_Xun_17 — 08 Feb 2014, 18:39

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-08T15:01:01+02:00

ColonelSheppard wrote:
Mad`Mozart wrote:So... what's it for?

"Poll about the new rating system"

What do you think it's for?

I've hosted hunderds of games and I find the rating system to be a highly accurate tool for balancing. Most of the time the rating corrolates well with the players skill. It's not a 1:1 relation. Sometimes players play above their expected skill level, sometimes below, but that's not the norm.

Just stating my experience here. IMHO it would be a shame to throw away a really good balance tool for the sake of some whiners and people who read to much into it.

Luckily the game quality indicator will stay in the current plans. The problem is; that the indicator doesn't take into account which player is playing vs which player. When trying to balance a game this is crucial information.

Also people just love to get a reward for winning. So as I understand they will get a medal as a reward, but what's the point? Now there will be balanced by medals and not by rating. The same problems will return.

Sorry for giving feedback you didn't ask for and thanks for all the hard work you've done on FAF.

Statistics: Posted by H-master — 08 Feb 2014, 15:01

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-08T13:30:56+02:00

Ze_PilOt wrote:
There is no complete summary, and most of the time, I find better ideas while implementing them, that's why it's vague

Sweet

Statistics: Posted by errorblankfield — 08 Feb 2014, 13:30

Re: Poll about the new rating system

2014-02-08T13:12:25+02:00

Hawkei wrote:
I agree with the issues which have been highlighted. The ranking system is broken. There is also the most fundamental of contradictions that games are rank limited - and yet are not ranked.

That would still make perfect sense just as long as unranked games are a small percentage of the games one actually plays. If you have people with 400 rank that play Thermo / PhantomX / "Netlag adjust" [does it do anything? ] all day every day and are actually of 1500 skill level... then it's a problem.

Just yesterday I played my 2nd PhantomX game. The Paladin [~800 rank] actually teamed up with the remaining Phantom [~500 rank] and both were pushed over by two innocents [ one being ~1900 rank, the other ~900(?) and not living to end]....

In a game with people more of equal skill, such a thing would basicly never happen.

Statistics: Posted by E8400-CV — 08 Feb 2014, 13:12