Better Battle Nights

[Houdini]

While I’m sure plenty of people will remind me that Battle Nights are not the most important part of Forerunner Conflict and why winning should not be the primary factor in Battle Night participation, I still firmly believe that the staple of the community is the Battle Night.

My Perspective:
Every battle night I have participated in over the last several wars has been polluted by multiple blowouts where my team either wins by a huge margin or loses by a huge margin. Either way it isn’t fun.

Problem:
Blowouts aren’t fun for either team. Fix them.

Current Situation:
Currently, some magical force in the FC universe just matches teams up in the Google Doc. Sometimes the matches are fun and competitive (equally skilled). Most times the matches aren’t even close to fair (and usually there is a better alternative elsewhere on the rotation).

Solution:
Stop having battle nights magically arranged in rotations so everybody gets to play every other squad. Other than the fact that this type of structure is extremely easy to setup there are absolutely no benefits.

One of my favorite parts of FC is the squad/battalion/army practices. We play the same people over and over again and it is always fun because the teams are either picked by captains or carefully balanced by the leadership.

Playing every team once doesn’t make battle nights fun, playing good match ups makes battle nights fun even if it is the same team over and over again.

Instead of ranking teams in static tiers or randomly assigning match ups, each team should receive a rating as the night goes on.

Calculating Rating:
All teams start with 0 points so the first round of the battle night will have to be carefully setup to ensure (or at least try to get) optimal match ups. After the first round ratings will be determined by calculating a winning percentage and then adding a significant bonus for teams who won their most recent game.

Rating = Wins / (Wins + Losses) * 100 + Wins * 5 - Losses * 5

If the team won their last game add 75 points.

Easily put into an excel document as:
=ROUND(IF(W+ L> 0,W÷(W+L)× 100 + R× 75 + W× 5 − L× 5, 0),0)
where W = wins, L = losses, and R = 0 or 1 depending on if the team won the most recent match.

(Example Implemented in Google Docs)

Then rank all of the squads by ratings and match them up. If one army has more squads than the other army then select squads to exclude from the rankings until both armies have equal numbers.

The reason I weighted winning the most recent game so highly is to prevent teams from going on long losing streaks. This will effectively create two tiers of squads after each round: squads who won their last match and squads who lost their last match. Obviously the armies will have different amounts of squads in each tier, but the rating system could still be used to matchup squads between tiers since W ratios and win quantities are also factored in. In addition, ratings will reset after each battle night so squads performances in the week before don’t impact different players playing under the same name in the next week. Every battle night every squad will start fresh.

I know this will be a different from the “setup all of the rotations at the beginning of the night” approached we currently use, but setting up matches after “rounds” will also help resolve problems where squads field teams in the middle of battle nights or squads just get off in the middle of battle nights.

[Zeta Crossfire]

I like it, I enjoy how it resets after every BN as well, the only issue is its a tad on the complicated side but as long as you have Google docs or something opened in your tab whoever is doing this should be fine. Fall onto a WD during BN?

Also I like how this is a very concrete answer to the problems we are facing, to many people are using broad terms with no apparent specific fix. I like this

[Houdini]

I like it, I enjoy how it resets after every BN as well, the only issue is its a tad on the complicated side but as long as you have Google docs or something opened in your tab whoever is doing this should be fine. Fall onto a WD during BN?

If it really becomes complicated:
A) I can do it by hand (with a google doc)
B) I can write a program to do it where it just outputs team names and match ups.
C) It really isn't that complicated. We keep track of a lot more statistics that just wins and losses for each battle.

[Yehsus]

Not a terrible idea, I'm just worried about the wait times for squads that win all their games, and Armies with more squads than the other.

[Dos Eggys]

With the long peacetime ahead of us, we should have ample time to test it out and make a few tweaks if needed.

[Anarchy]

Actually a reasonable suggestion rather than specifically saying "Divinity ALWAYS plays bellator!", but there are still some flaws.

Stop having battle nights magically arranged in rotations so everybody gets to play every other squad.

The general way rotations are (supposed to be), is with everyone playing everyone once, then playing squads more towards their skill level a 2nd time. It's very difficult to tier groups, in any way, so long as there is/are 1/2 squad(s) that are just way above and beyond (VbD, sometimes Legacy with the right people). Because then, everyone is getting ran over by those people, and you're subjecting groups that are medium-high skilled to the fire in lieu of others, even though they're getting destroyed as well.

This system would do that less, but it would still be there.


At the end of the day, squads that do better will feel cheated because in doing better, they'll just get stuck playing the uber-units, and that's why I don't like this system: Getting better makes you worse off.




I still stand by, and can confirm that REDD will be making this so next war, simply making an active effort to normalize out the skill levels of each squad. The difference between FC now, and FC 3-4 years ago is NOT that we are more competitive, it's that the competitive people have began to congregate to the same corners of the universe. When I joined every squad had 3-4 heavy hitters (besides VbD, obviously), and though some squads normally did better than others, nobody was left without a good mix of players, in terms of skill. I know I pose it as some sort of perfect world, which it wasn't, but every unit really did have a few heavy hitters and a few casual people.

That changed a bit Rev3, REDD got their ass mopped by two god squads that formed, firestorm happened, lots of people left, and the skilled people who started caring less began congregating to the same groups together so they wouldn't have to care as much. It's been a similar tale sense. No offense to them, but look at legacy, that's exactly what has happened there.

If people want things to be "even", coming up with a weird system that still incentives God-Squads to overpower themselves, but doesn't incentive normal people to put in some effort, practice, recruit, and better their own unit isn't going to do anything but throw half of an army to the fire so that the other half doesn't have to take their bite of the shit sandwich. This does it in a less direct and more flexible way, but it still does that.

The real solution is not to regulate who plays who, but to just make the damn squads not so polarized. People in Legacy weren't always in this skilled unit together, and the excuse "We only play Halo 4 because of one another" doesn't really apply after this Sunday (I'm sorry guys), so some of them helping build or contribute to squads that need it would go in strides. The same should be equally, if not more true for those in VbD.

And yes, to a lesser extent, DarkSail and Zeke&Friends should contribute to that very same effort as well.

And that could, and should, also include some lower skilled unattached newer people in Marauder, Kelevra, Divinity, Animus, Bellator, being welcomed to replace those people in the higher skilled units for consistency.

Of course always volunteers. But we can't let the skilled people go to one side, and the non-skilled go to the other side.

[Guzzie]

I still stand by, and can confirm that REDD will be making this so next war, simply making an active effort to normalize out the skill levels of each squad. The difference between FC now, and FC 3-4 years ago is NOT that we are more competitive, it's that the competitive people have began to congregate to the same corners of the universe. When I joined every squad had 3-4 heavy hitters (besides VbD, obviously), and though some squads normally did better than others, nobody was left without a good mix of players, in terms of skill. I know I pose it as some sort of perfect world, which it wasn't, but every unit really did have a few heavy hitters and a few casual people.

False. FC has always had a “god squad” or a higher skilled squad, from even before you joined the community and even to the time you joined, until now. From the top of my head: Against Grain, Flatline, Ice, Beyond Reality, Zulu, 21st degree, VbD, etc. On the other end of the spectrum, there have also, always been weaker squads, as well as regular skill squads. It has always been the same and will always be the same. The reason is simple. People with similar interests tend to form cliques and tend to form relationships. They want to play together and so they do and so they should. Doing something other than that would be forcing people to play with people they don’t want to play with, or simply people they would not have as much fun playing with.

That changed a bit Rev3, REDD got their ass mopped by two god squads that formed, firestorm happened, lots of people left, and the skilled people who started caring less began congregating to the same groups together so they wouldn't have to care as much. It's been a similar tale sense. No offense to them, but look at legacy, that's exactly what has happened there.

Not sure I agree with anything in this paragraph. What you are saying is that people didn't care got together and created squads so that they couldn't care as together? And you are saying Legacy is one of those squads? when legacy was in blue, they had half of the High Command as well as many other high ranking officers of that time in their squad. How is that even close to not caring.

If people want things to be "even", coming up with a weird system that still incentives God-Squads to overpower themselves, but doesn't incentive normal people to put in some effort, practice, recruit, and better their own unit isn't going to do anything but throw half of an army to the fire so that the other half doesn't have to take their bite of the shit sandwich. This does it in a less direct and more flexible way, but it still does that.

The real solution is not to regulate who plays who, but to just make the damn squads not so polarized. People in Legacy weren't always in this skilled unit together, and the excuse "We only play Halo 4 because of one another" doesn't really apply after this Sunday (I'm sorry guys), so some of them helping build or contribute to squads that need it would go in strides. The same should be equally, if not more true for those in VbD. .

Why exactly does the “excuse” of people playing together because they are friends not a viable one after this Sunday? Not sure where you are going with this one. My members from VbD don’t even get on anymore, besides on Sundays. Part of the reason they don't get on is because of Halo 4 (I wont go there to avoid getting out of topic), but when they do, on Sundays, is simply to play a few games with people who we have been friends with since the very beginning of halo 3. VbD has kept the same members since its formation. The only person I have allowed to join has been Brahzerker, and the reason is because he has become a good friend, whom we have fun playing with. Other than that, the member base has been the same for years (we have even lost a few members that have gone un-replaced). I believe getting on just to play with friends is perfectly fine and perfectly acceptable/understandable.

Of course always volunteers. But we can't let the skilled people go to one side, and the non-skilled go to the other side.

Before this turns into yet another “lets get rid of the good squads because they win against the weaker squads” thread, (believe me, there have been plenty of them), I will reiterate. People play with their friends because they have more fun doing so, it really is as simple as that. People with similar interests tend to congregate and tend to play together, these people tend to be of similar skill. Separating these people would mean, in some ways, impeding squads like the old REDWATCH, squads with their own ideologies and ways of carrying themselves; though they were a part of red army in their prime, they truly had a unique thing going for them, something that a lot of people in FC respected, including myself. It would disrupt groups of friends or clans joining together with hopes of forming their own squad (wasn't this they way you joined and eventually created Sparta?). They would join only to find out they were being separated because we don't want to "polarize" squads. You would be eliminating the reason some community members get on Sunday after Sunday, to simply play with friends. FC and its WC will not separate you or disallow you to play with your friends, as you wish. It would go against its number one principle, "fun and respect", because at the end of the day, not being allowed to play with the people you have fun with would go against that fun part.

[Anarchy]

False. FC has always had a “god squad” or a higher skilled squad, from even before you joined the community and even to the time you joined, until now. From the top of my head: Against Grain, Flatline, Ice, Beyond Reality, Zulu, 21st degree, VbD, etc. On the other end of the spectrum, there have also, always been weaker squads, as well as regular skill squads. It has always been the same and will always be the same. The reason is simple. People with similar interests tend to form cliques and tend to form relationships. They want to play together and so they do and so they should. Doing something other than that would be forcing people to play with people they don’t want to play with, or simply people they would not have as much fun playing with.

Negative ghost-rider.

Yes there has always been one god squad. Yes there have always been weaker squads. But the polarization we see now is much worse.

http://fcwars.net/forums/showthread....01-22-12%29-02

(Only those in WC can see this link as it's in our archives. If anyone wants to see it, I'd be happy to show you if you PM/Skype me)

This was when REDD was losing really bad, Fuzzy was FM, and the main reason firestorm came to be. It was what we called imbalance in the past. But even with the army imbalance, games were much closer, through and through. I only count 4-5 games from that battle night a blow out, and 3 of those were with "Fox legion", which at the time had zero heavy hitters and zero decent/experienced players, very similar to modern day divinity.

I mean FFS, Dreadrogues, whose modern day equivalent is Marauder, only lost to VbD by 20-25 kills in a conflict game. To compare that, Divinity last Sunday lost to VbD in a conflict game by 168 kills. The polarization is real.

In the past, "lower skilled" squads have still had some heavy hitters, or at least decent players. Firesnakes had Pickle, Tgsy, Skinny, Unlucky. Dreadrouges had Sandal, hellbent. 2nd Assault had decent players in Ireland, Surrounded, Silverleek.

It would disrupt groups of friends or clans joining together with hopes of forming their own squad (wasn't this they way you joined and eventually created Sparta?). They would join only to find out they were being separated because we don't want to "polarize" squads.

In Sparta (or Zeke and Friends') case, we've accepted new members from lower skilled units all the time, such as Lloyd, Jew, James, Greycochea, Helljumper (before he became an MLG wanabe), etc. 251st also accepted outside members to their squad.


As I said in my post, no one would be forced to switch. Remember, this isn't meant to break up units and friends forcibly. But a conscious effort to normalize squad overall skill isn't something I'd think anyone would be so against.

If VbD wouldn't want to aid in that, that's fine, I assume that's why you're so controversial in this. The community can just continue to hate playing them and further drop community morale because of a refusal to play with new people in a community they've been in for 2+years, fine. Have it that way. Be "exempt" as you always are.

But at the end of the day, grouping "Skilled people over here!" and "Non-skilled over here!" is negatively impacting the community, and subconsciously we are doing that. A complicated system of matchups is pointless if we still have the same underlying problem.

And I think the community can get behind that a lot more than they can get behind what we have.

[Legendary Nova]

Off Topic

...which at the time had zero heavy hitters and zero decent/experienced players, very similar to modern day divinity

*cough* *cough* *sputter* *sputter*

You... Didn't... But... We're...

Divinity last Sunday lost to VbD in a conflict game by 168 kills.

Yeah... Ok. I'll shut up now...

[KazuhLLL]

That changed a bit Rev3, REDD got their ass mopped by two god squads that formed, firestorm happened, lots of people left, and the skilled people who started caring less began congregating to the same groups together so they wouldn't have to care as much. It's been a similar tale sense. No offense to them, but look at legacy, that's exactly what has happened there.

...

The real solution is not to regulate who plays who, but to just make the damn squads not so polarized. People in Legacy weren't always in this skilled unit together, and the excuse "We only play Halo 4 because of one another" doesn't really apply after this Sunday (I'm sorry guys), so some of them helping build or contribute to squads that need it would go in strides. The same should be equally, if not more true for those in VbD.

And yes, to a lesser extent, DarkSail and Zeke&Friends should contribute to that very same effort as well.

Agreed with most of what you said, but I really wish people would stop implying that Legacy is at some sort of unattainable god-squad level. If we are, then Z&F and (probably) Envious are as well. Legacy has a K/D of somewhere in the ballpark of 1.76, compared to Z&F's 1.71 and DarkSail's 1.49. Yes, Legacy's still the highest but that 1.76 is without including the currently inactive players such as Capone or Funk which would bring it down to an even more comparable level. (I know K/D isn't anywhere near a perfect indicator but I didn't want to potentially insult anyone with subjective evaluations.)

---

On-Topic:

Houdini, while I appreciate the thought you've put into this post, it boils down to essentially the same thing as many of the other threads like this. The two basic options for setting up Battles are a rotation system or a seeding system.

Rotation pros: Simpler, faster, more variety in match-ups
Rotation cons: Higher chance of blowout games

Seeding pros: Higher chance of close games
Seeding cons: Slower, more complicated, less variety in match-ups

Your system looks like it would be better than most of the other (seeding) suggestions as far as keeping variety, but it still has its flaws. Squads in the middle would get their closer matches, but likely at the cost of the extreme (high/low) squads getting consistent losing streaks. Whenever one army's highest/lowest-skilled squad is clearly better than the other's highest/lowest-skilled, there's gonna be somebody getting a massive helping of Anarchy's proverbial "shit sandwich". Add to that the longer wait times during BN's and the cons quickly start outweighing the pros, IMO.

Again, that's just a failing of the seeding system itself. I'd still be up for trying yours out in a Mock BN since I'm interested to see if how much different your dynamic system acts in practice than a typical static ranking system.