Feature request - Points win/loss

[-_V_-]

(I don't think I'm the only one interested in that info).

Why ? Because I would play an impossible game to win , if I can see i would lose 5 points (or whatever number i judge ok).
Part of the reason why I slowed down playing is, because of my rating ,I got stacked against too much, like all the time at the end, and now I'm done with it.

But since I wanna play from time to time, with this info things can be easier to start a game. If I can spare myself the torture of the 30min bla bla for balance, BECAUSE I KNOW I WOULD LOSE ONLY A FEW POINTS, then that would be great.

[-_V_-]

It strikes me that V would need to play ranked games for this to be of any use to her.

Well, it seems to me, but i can be wrong, that even custom games are ranked, but it might be a glitch on my interface.

The rating is there to provide guidelines for balancing and it would do a much better job if people just listened to it rather than their misguided sense of who is better than who. I'm not saying it perfectly represents you, or that you play at the same skill level every game, but it does give a representative picture of your performance in the games you play. If you don't lay ranked it won't be representative...

Different opinion. I strongly believe that the "misguided sense of who is better than who" , when you know the players, is much more effective than the rating. Let's take the practical example of you being in the same game than me, so that means you're playing setons. It would be ridiculous to say that you versus me would be balanced, even though our rating are close in terms on points. Even though your rating is one of a quite good player (1800+) you would have to be balanced with a medium setons junkie. Obviously, in middle of unknowns, rating can be a good information.

Since your rating is effectively decided by how you play, and not in general by how other people play, what do we want a function that tells us how many points we will win or lose for? Just play as well as you can (or otherwise) and your rating will gradually arrive at your skill level. If you're unwilling to accept that you may on occassion lose points then thats not everyone elses problem and nor should it ever be a case of I won't play because my rating will go down- surely playing good games of supreme commander is the objective?

I am not sure, but in case this is directed to me, look at my rating, you will see that I had my share of losses . REfer to my post above, this indication of points would give the opportunity to play more, as I would play games I wouldn't normally play.

[rootbeer23]

why is this a debate? just put the number on the screen if there is the time to implement it. And please round the game quality number to the nearest integer.

[Softly]

The problem is this will take time to implement AND I don't think it would be a good thing anyway.

Well, it seems to me, but i can be wrong, that even custom games are ranked, but it might be a glitch on my interface.

The last 3 games I have played with you you have insisted on setting game speed to adjustable or you would not play. aka, unranked. If you are so afraid of losing points in a rating balanced game, then you don't have the right rating. Stop talking about stacking because the only quantitative information other people have is your rating. Don't let your rating move, and peoples attitudes won't change.

Also we're not that similar on rating, which supports me when I said

Most people do not understand the rating system.

The figure that is shown is the value you are 99% likely to be better than. The best estimate of your rating is always above this value, the exact amount above determined by your deviation, or how well the system "knows" you. Mine will be closer to the displayed figure, as I have more games played on this account. You have less ranked games played on your account.

If you're playing just for your rating then I have no sympathy.

[-_V_-]

The last 3 games I have played with you you have insisted on setting game speed to adjustable or you would not play. aka, unranked. If you are so afraid of losing points in a rating balanced game, then you don't have the right rating. Stop talking about stacking because the only quantitative information other people have is your rating. Don't let your rating move, and peoples attitudes won't change.

Yep because they were not balanced at all and i foresaw impossible games to win, yet since I really wanted to play, I accepted to go with a sure loss if I knew my rating wouldn't be hurt by "funny" (as in games, most people wouldn't play) games. FYI, that's exactly what i said previously. Getting a game has become such a pain that, if points are put aside, or if the points to lose are very few (hence my request), then I could get to play more no matter how stacked it is

[/quote]
Also we're not that similar on rating, which supports me when I said

Most people do not understand the rating system.

Don't think that's super relevant, but you have 1950 points, I have 1965... Yesterday we were even closer, so...

If you're playing just for your rating then I have no sympathy.

I really don't care for your sympathy, like at all, as I told you already in game. BUT you misunderstood (maybe that misunderstanding will vanish now). I don't care throwing my points at risk when the game is filled with good players and relatively balanced. But since it's hardly achievable now (at last at the hours I can play), I'd rather play for the sake of it without having the certainty of losing points because of an impossible situation to overcome.
Clear ?

[Ze_PilOt]

What you don't understand, if the game is really that imbalance, your rating won't move if you lose.

Unless all players are under/over-rated. But they are because they disable rating on purpose.

So if everybody was playing the game, there wouldn't be any problem :-/

[Softly]

My displayed rating is 1960, but that is not representative of my average skill. Stop repeating yourself when you say we are similar, because we are not! You clearly do not understand the rating system- I have played many more ranked games so the system knows me better! My actual skill is closer to my displayed skill! You have played less ranked games so yours is further away V. http://www.faforever.com/mediawiki/inde ... ing_system

Tell me I'm wrong again feel free, but please learn what you're talking about first. If you knew how the system worked then you would also be able to make educated guesses as to exactly how many points you will win / lose.

As Zep says, the system takes into account the balancing of the teams when giving or taking points.

[Ghoti]

okay okay okay holy shit.
Is there a shorthand way we could get to indicate stack? If not point win and loss, then something.

[Ze_PilOt]

okay okay okay holy shit.
Is there a shorthand way we could get to indicate stack? If not point win and loss, then something.

That's the game quality you see in the lobby.

[-_V_-]

My displayed rating is 1960, but that is not representative of my average skill. Stop repeating yourself when you say we are similar, because we are not!

I think in your haste you misread what I wrote cause I never claimed we were close in terms of skills , just in rating.
I explicitly used this comparison between you and me, because YOU implied rating was the best way to balance a game, instead of the "good sense bla bla" (read again what YOU wrote).

You clearly do not understand the rating system- I have played many more ranked games so the system knows me better! My actual skill is closer to my displayed skill!

I do not know the specifics, for sure, more reason for me to request the feature we are supposed to talk about . I do know roughly the principles, but that's all. It doesn't invalidate at all what I said.

You have played less ranked games so yours is further away V.

Indeed it should be