Community - Player ratings

[Neo]

You'd need to store them away from players, as someone could easily snoop someone else's ID.

[Stof]

You'd need to store them away from players, as someone could easily snoop someone else's ID.

The UT way is that you need both the correct name ( ID in that case then ) and the correct password to modify the stats of a player.

[Norfenstein]

Trust me guys, I've seen a similar ranking system work and it worked very well.

How can a ranking system ever be accurate if people don't always play at their actual skill level? If it's not accurate what use is it? Even if it were accurate, how many people will tolerate not having a choice between teams (because why bother at all if it's not forcing teams)? And what similar ranking system are you thinking of?

Setting aside the serious and numerous implementation issues, I don't see this being at all useful except in strictly competitive games that don't involve organized teams (i.e. clans).

[SLAVE|Mietz]

Trust me guys, I've seen a similar ranking system work and it worked very well.

How can a ranking system ever be accurate if people don't always play at their actual skill level? If it's not accurate what use is it? Even if it were accurate, how many people will tolerate not having a choice between teams (because why bother at all if it's not forcing teams)? And what similar ranking system are you thinking of?

Setting aside the serious and numerous implementation issues, I don't see this being at all useful except in strictly competitive games that don't involve organized teams (i.e. clans).

True words!

[next_ghost]

How can a ranking system ever be accurate if people don't always play at their actual skill level? If it's not accurate what use is it?

Ranking system is supposed to show how the player plays, not how he can play if he wants to. If some 1337 player decides to play like noob, his skill counter will reflect his choice. If he decides to play as well as he can, again, his skill counter will reflect it.

Even if it were accurate, how many people will tolerate not having a choice between teams (because why bother at all if it's not forcing teams)?

You don't have to force teams by skill in order to make the ranking system useful. Seeing someone's skill rank should give you general idea how he can or can't (doesn't want to) play. Without seeing his skill rank, you have to spend hours playing with and against him to get the idea.

And what similar ranking system are you thinking of?

You'd have found it here if you read this topic carefully.

Setting aside the serious and numerous implementation issues, I don't see this being at all useful except in strictly competitive games that don't involve organized teams (i.e. clans).

I do. Mainly because I saw something similar work and be useful.

[DeathWish[BE]]

Why not make the frags HP based!

Example:
Human dies = -100%
Human kills dretch = +20%
Human kills a Dragoon = +200%
-----------------------------------
Human Fragrate = +120%

As the game already records who does the most damage, i guess you can get the percentage of damage you did for a kill.

Next to fragrate (killing) there should be a buildrate too ...
(not sure about the HP points!)

Human succesfully build a turret = +(160/2)% = +80%
Human decon a turret = -(160/2)% = -80%
Human destroys an acid tube = +(120/2)% = +60%
------------------------------------------------------------
Human buildrate = +60%

[Ksempac]

Human succesfully build a turret = +(160/2)% = +80%
Human decon a turret = -(160/2)% = -80%
Human destroys an acid tube = +(120/2)% = +60%
------------------------------------------------------------
Human buildrate = +60%

Good builder decons a turret the noob builder put in a bad location
Good builder wait till the decon time ends.
Noob builder notices there are some points available.
Noob builder build a new turret in a bad location.
etc...
----------------------------------------------------------------
Good player gets screwed...

Human dies = -100%
Human kills dretch = +20%
Human kills a Dragoon = +200%
-----------------------------------
Human Fragrate = +120%

Jetpackers with mass driver and campers 1 or 2 m away from their turrets will love this...

[DeathWish[BE]]

I agree on the noob builders, but thats why communication is important. If i am going to decon a bad placed turret, i do not only decon it, i EXPLAIN why and SHOW how it should be done. That way, you both got someting out of it. The noob learns, step by step, and you won't be frustrated anymore because of his lack of sence ...

The campers, well, there's nothing you can do about that. If they kills a dragoon which is hurt for 80% by turrets and 20% by the camper, they deserve the 20%, no?

[Stof]

Human succesfully build a turret = +(160/2)% = +80%
Human decon a turret = -(160/2)% = -80%
Human destroys an acid tube = +(120/2)% = +60%
------------------------------------------------------------
Human buildrate = +60%

Good builder decons a turret the noob builder put in a bad location
Good builder wait till the decon time ends.
Noob builder notices there are some points available.
Noob builder build a new turret in a bad location.
etc...
----------------------------------------------------------------
Good player gets screwed...

Even worse :

Good builder deconstructs turret : -80
Good builder builds new turret, probably in new base : +80

Now we have 2 good players, one removing the old base, and the other building the new one and one of them gets all the negative points.

[next_ghost]

Even worse :

Good builder deconstructs turret : -80
Good builder builds new turret, probably in new base : +80

Now we have 2 good players, one removing the old base, and the other building the new one and one of them gets all the negative points.

That's exactly why the skill system I have described earlier reduces skill for long lack of necessary building or its destruction by enemy. Not just for deconstructing it.

[BabyAlien]

Even worse :

Good builder deconstructs turret : -80
Good builder builds new turret, probably in new base : +80

Now we have 2 good players, one removing the old base, and the other building the new one and one of them gets all the negative points.

That's exactly why the skill system I have described earlier reduces skill for long lack of necessary building or its destruction by enemy. Not just for deconstructing it.

I don't think you can measure the 'goodness' of a builder based on what is built, how long it survives or anything like that.  For example a good builder for aliens will have a new base up and going very quickly after the old one is blown up, anticipating the need.  Or they will be able to keep the team alive when humans sweep in and wipe out everything.

A good builder communicates, anticipates, builds in ways that keep the enemy on thier toes, may build 'disposable' buildings, can build faster than others, masters different locations on all the maps, knows how to use all the buildings the best way etc etc etc.  

Ultimately a builder can probably only be rated by his teammates.

[next_ghost]

I don't think you can measure the 'goodness' of a builder based on what is built, how long it survives or anything like that.

You can't measure good builder just by counting how long his buildings survive. But you can measure bad builder by this because his buildings ussually go down very quickly. Read the skill ranking system description carefully. You don't get anything just for the time your buildings survive. You lose points for buildings you built that got destroyed. And every builder will slowly start losing points if some necessary building is not available for long time.

For example a good builder for aliens will have a new base up and going very quickly after the old one is blown up, anticipating the need.  Or they will be able to keep the team alive when humans sweep in and wipe out everything.

A good builder communicates, anticipates, builds in ways that keep the enemy on thier toes, may build 'disposable' buildings, can build faster than others, masters different locations on all the maps, knows how to use all the buildings the best way etc etc etc.

Ultimately a builder can probably only be rated by his teammates.

And he WILL be rated by his teammates. Every single teammate that uses some building (ie. spawns from telenode/egg, buys ammo/weapons/armor/items, heals, gets poison from booster etc.) will create skill points for the builder. If some stupid builder builds booster deep inside alien base, he'll get nothing. If some good builder builds good forward base with booster, he can earn a lot of skill points.

[[HUN]N.M.I.]

Plus, you have to rate girlz and normal players differently.

[[db@]Megabite]

But you can measure bad builder by this because his buildings ussually go down very quickly. Read the skill ranking system description carefully. You don't get anything just for the time your buildings survive. You lose points for buildings you built that got destroyed. And every builder will slowly start losing points if some necessary building is not available for long time.

Your base is under attack, aliens destroy front row turrets all the time, you rebuild them as fast as possible only to have them destroyed moments later again.
Stop building and you lose, continue building and be rated as a bad builder?

Not quite an abstract setup, is it? I see it almost every round I play...

Danny

[next_ghost]

Megabite"]Your base is under attack, aliens destroy front row turrets all the time, you rebuild them as fast as possible only to have them destroyed moments later again.
Stop building and you lose, continue building and be rated as a bad builder?

Not quite an abstract setup, is it? I see it almost every round I play...

Danny

If aliens get enough kills and evo points to bite through human defenses, humans suck and skill balance will minimize loss of skill for builders. If humans don't suck, they'll finnish aliens wounded by turret fire and builders will get slightly more from turret skill claims than they lose for destroyed turrets. And don't forget spawning and buying. Once humans start getting slaughtered, builders start getting much more skill points because the entire team heavily depends on its base. It's only a matter of calculation balance.

[Neo]

Any alien that tries to rush past turrets would be a bad alien lol. The standard tactic is just to wipte out turrets, so the base is defenceless and then rush in.

Turrets would be a huge drain on builder score. I should know i've been an adv goon plenty of times, and its so easy to snipe buildings with your 3 barbs.

[next_ghost]

Any alien that tries to rush past turrets would be a bad alien lol. The standard tactic is just to wipte out turrets, so the base is defenceless and then rush in.

Works for goons, not for maras :wink:

Turrets would be a huge drain on builder score. I should know i've been an adv goon plenty of times, and its so easy to snipe buildings with your 3 barbs.

Turrets are the first targets and are not usable by players so they should cost the builder only a few skill points after destruction compared to what they protect. Look at this list:

Reactor - lots of lost skill points for its destruction, lots of lost skill points for no active reactor
Telenodes
Armory
Medistation
Defense computer - moderate skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active DC but much skill lost for every inactive tesla
Tesla - little skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active teslas
Turret - even less skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active turrets
Repeater - no skill lost for destruction, lots of skill lost for every building powered down

[PHREAK]

It's extremly easy to destroy turres with maras and even easier with adv. mara. All you have to do is circle around them. In oeder for turrets do defend corretcly, thay have to be able to defend each other as well. A turret wall can be destroyed by one good mara without too much hassle. That's why I want to shoot anyone making these large clusters of turrets that dont do anything and get killed in a minute or so.

[next_ghost]

It's extremly easy to destroy turres with maras and even easier with adv. mara. All you have to do is circle around them. In oeder for turrets do defend corretcly, thay have to be able to defend each other as well. A turret wall can be destroyed by one good mara without too much hassle. That's why I want to shoot anyone making these large clusters of turrets that dont do anything and get killed in a minute or so.

One lonely turret is annoying, not dangerous. But 3 turrets will give you hell before you take them all down with mara (especially if some builder has nothing better to do than repeair them all the time and you can't kill him). You can't move around them and they can kill you in a second. It's better to simply ignore them and go inside human base to wreak some havoc.

[BabyAlien]

Wait a sec.  I just want to get this clear.  If you are a really good builder and build an awesome base but you lose, it sounds like this automated system would have you lose goodness points or get the same points as a lousy builder who has a lousy base and you lose.

[PHREAK]

It's extremly easy to destroy turres with maras and even easier with adv. mara. All you have to do is circle around them. In oeder for turrets do defend corretcly, thay have to be able to defend each other as well. A turret wall can be destroyed by one good mara without too much hassle. That's why I want to shoot anyone making these large clusters of turrets that dont do anything and get killed in a minute or so.

One lonely turret is annoying, not dangerous. But 3 turrets will give you hell before you take them all down with mara (especially if some builder has nothing better to do than repeair them all the time and you can't kill him). You can't move around them and they can kill you in a second. It's better to simply ignore them and go inside human base to wreak some havoc.

Depends on the position of the turrets. if it's a non skilled builder, he'll build a cluster. Since all the turrets move in the same dirrection you circle and take them all out. I do agree about rushing the base but I like to have a goon help out. If 3 turrets are blocking the passage, we will get killed much faster them me and wont be able to take out even one of them.
I've done this many many times, turrest have become easy for me as mara since I perfected this. However, a good builder wont build a cluster so there is not much one can do there but ignore them.

[Stof]

All that talk about giving good and bad points in the game are moot. All that matter is to know who won the game. Remember, if it's stupid but works, then it isn't stupid !

[next_ghost]

Wait a sec.  I just want to get this clear.  If you are a really good builder and build an awesome base but you lose, it sounds like this automated system would have you lose goodness points or get the same points as a lousy builder who has a lousy base and you lose.

If you build an awesome base, you'll gain lots of skill points during the game (lots of turret skill claims, few buildings lost and lots of use points during the game) and lose very little when aliens smash it. If you build lousy base, you won't gain as much during the game and possibly lose much more on turrets and other buildings (few turret skill claims, lots of turrets lost, lots of base structures lost during the game).

[Catalyc]

Your whole thoery for good and bad builders is broken. In a lousy base a single Marauder can jump in and kill teles, armoury,  and even reactor without having to kill a single turret. So bassically a bad builder will score just as much as a good builder, if not more since aliens don't have to destroy any defensive structures, while dretches will most likely get killed by them. And for alien builders... have you ever seen a lumberjack run? in s1 you can pretty much take care of OM and eggs in a single run if you've got team support.

I agree with norf, theres really no possible way to 'rate' a good tremulous player, the game is just too complex for that. And a big time fragger doesn't make a good trem player anyways.

[SLAVE|Mietz]

Your whole thoery for good and bad builders is broken. In a lousy base a single Marauder can jump in and kill teles, armoury,  and even reactor without having to kill a single turret. So bassically a bad builder will score just as much as a good builder, if not more since aliens don't have to destroy any defensive structures, while dretches will most likely get killed by them. And for alien builders... have you ever seen a lumberjack run? in s1 you can pretty much take care of OM and eggs in a single run if you've got team support.

I agree with norf, theres really no possible way to 'rate' a good tremulous player, the game is just too complex for that. And a big time fragger doesn't make a good trem player anyways.

My talk all the time! (just had to say that^^)

[Stof]

In fact, all rating systems used to rate players between them work best when the players have no choice on the matter. As soon as they can do things like chose their fights, switch teams etc ... the rating systems fails and can be manipulated.

Myself, I'm against any kind of flawed rating system ( which probaly means against all rating systems unless someone finds a good idea ). A flawed rating system will only cause most players to play for the rating and not for the current game which is a bad thing. We'll see things like people switching to the winning team, people refusing to complete a losing team ( heck, it happens already ! ), people disconnecting when they feel like they'll lose the game ( with the small trem comunity, you just need to see the rooster to get a good idea of which team has a good chance to win ) etc ...

So, death to all flawed rating systems !

[next_ghost]

Your whole thoery for good and bad builders is broken. In a lousy base a single Marauder can jump in and kill teles, armoury,  and even reactor without having to kill a single turret. So bassically a bad builder will score just as much as a good builder, if not more since aliens don't have to destroy any defensive structures, while dretches will most likely get killed by them. And for alien builders... have you ever seen a lumberjack run? in s1 you can pretty much take care of OM and eggs in a single run if you've got team support.

Once again, you didnt even bother to read all I said about rating builders. So here's the list of skill lost for destroyed buildings again:

Reactor - lots of lost skill points for its destruction, lots of lost skill points for no active reactor
Telenodes
Armory
Medistation
Defense computer - moderate skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active DC but much skill lost for every inactive tesla
Tesla - little skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active teslas
Turret - even less skill lost for destruction, no skill lost for no active turrets
Repeater - no skill lost for destruction, lots of skill lost for every building powered down

Lost turret? No problem. Lost telenode? There goes your 1337 skill, learn to build bases first.

I agree with norf, theres really no possible way to 'rate' a good tremulous player, the game is just too complex for that. And a big time fragger doesn't make a good trem player anyways.

That's exactly why my idea is NOT based on frags.

Ans Stof, joining the losing team might also mean you get 5 times the skill for full kill claim than in the winning team. I'm really sure some people would fight each other just to get into the losing team :wink:

[Stof]

By all means do it ! If it is so easy for you to detect the losing team like that at anypoint in the game, I'm sure you can also instantly give a correct rating for each player as soon as they join the game

Note that giving bonus points for playing with the losing team is so abusable it isn't funny. I mean, with that you can have probably bad players that get better scores than good players because with whatever bonus you give to him he ends up with more points even losing !

[next_ghost]

By all means do it ! If it is so easy for you to detect the losing team like that at anypoint in the game, I'm sure you can also instantly give a correct rating for each player as soon as they join the game

Note that giving bonus points for playing with the losing team is so abusable it isn't funny. I mean, with that you can have probably bad players that get better scores than good players because with whatever bonus you give to him he ends up with more points even losing !

The easiest way to find the losing team is simple average team skill comparison. And no, bad player can hardly get above good player only due to skill balance bonus. As he gets closer, the bonus is lower and lower so he'll eventually reach a point at which his skill is accurate, because he neither loses nor gains skill compared to other players.

[d00by]

I think a system similar to how America's Army would be nice. You get points for achieving goals (in this case killing structures) and for gettingf frags. You lose points if you tk. When you get a certain ammount of points, you move up to the next honor. Users start at honor 10, and the max is 100.  That would work for attackers, and there could be a seperate point system for builders. Then before each game starts, the players with the highest honor could pick teams, which would make the teams slightly more even. Instead of having a forced team thing, do old style pick teams, that way, if a player did really good the previous round, but doesnt have a high ranking, he won't confuse the system and be counted as a bad player during the picks.