Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 61
  1. #11

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    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.)
    You're also not including Jew, James, IMASNOT, Wolfpack, and Warewing who are all active members of the squad and around 1.1 xD

    Legacy isn't as bad as VbD. But it is more "up there" than you think xD.



    Virtus Tentamine Gaudet
    FM For 6 wars spanning 3 generations

  2. #12

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    I can't speak for everyone so I will just speak for myself here. I thoroughly enjoy matchups where the game is neck and neck. It brings out the best in every player in the game, REDD and BLUE. Games where we are winning or losing by a dozen points seem like a chore in comparison.

    The least we can do is set aside a night or two during this peacetime and try it out before any prejudgments are made. Houdini, W3z4b1, and myself are currently working on simulations of the system.

    The system itself is hardly complicated to the user. All that needs to be done is to update Wins/Losses and the Last Win variable and the excel doc will handle the rest.
    Last edited by Dos Eggys; 08-29-2014 at 08:24 PM. Reason: Added third paragraph
    "You cannot judge me; I am Justice itself!
    We were meant for more than this, to protect the innocent!
    But if our precious laws bind you all to inaction, then I will no longer stand as your brother!"

    "Also, is English your first language? I want to be sure we're communication clearly here."

    "I want to be sure we're communication clearly here."

    "we're communication clearly here."

    - Jam Cliché


  3. #13

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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.
    What are you even saying lol. "Exempt" from what exactly.

    Also, using Halo 4 K/D isn't a very good way of comparing/measuring skill. There are many people who have high K/Ds and are in fact low skilled, and vice versa. Thus a weak point.
    "Let Them Hate, So Long As They Fear"







    -ZERO SHOTS MISSING-


    WH PS ICoH CM DS S EB VC IV

    "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups"

  4. #14

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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.
    I'm glad SOMEONE noticed that. Divinity had 32 members before the war. Now we are down to about 10-12. Sitting here and being ignorant to the problem is just wrong. It's not an easy problem to fix, but having a poor attitude or ignoring it is just gonna cause people to leave which I'm sure no one wants to see.
    "Gamers always believe that an epic win is possible and that it's always worth trying, and trying now."













  5. #15
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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.
    There is no system every that would not have people losing games. It just happens. This system isn't designed to prevent teams from losing games. It is designed to prevent teams who haven't won a game yet on battle night to play against teams who haven't lost a game yet. Everything else in between is just in between. The reason I weighted "Won Most Recent Game" so heavily is to prevent any squad who just suffered a defeat from being forced into a losing streak by another poor matchup. If you just lost a game, you should almost never have to play another squad who is going to crush you. The squads who lost should play the other squads that lost. The squads that won should play the other squads that won. Since their aren't going to be perpetual ties, factoring net win/loss records will fill in the gaps so when losing squads have to play against winning squads they are playing the worst of the winning squads vs. the best of the losing squads.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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 don't understand where you are getting this logic? Don't you think the squads who never win a game on battle night feel cheated that they had to play an Uber squad at all? Either way, factoring in "Most Recent Game Won" will prevent only one best squad from playing the other armies Uber-Tier squad. Effectively, once a squad loses against an uber-tier squad they will have an effective -75 rating point handicap almost assuring that they won't be playing a squad of that tier back-to-back. The only way one squad would be stuck in a loop playing the best squad of the other army over and over again would be if no squad in the entire army won a single match in a battle night round and all of the ratings where tied. Then theoretically the FM or whoever is put in charge of breaking the ties would be responsible for not having the same squads play each other over and over again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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.
    Isn't this what Firestorm was? As much as I would love to see this happen, it just doesn't work because there is a reason people congregate together. The best we can do is create some sort of weird system that does in fact just let everybody play at the level they want to play during a battle night. No matter what you do to normalize skill in one or even both armies some teams are going to be better than others. If we can at least handle this differences in skill in a more logical way than "everybody just play each other and hopefully some good games will come out" I would call the battle night a success.

  6. #16
    Pangolin Wrangler KazuhLLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    2,066
    Blog Posts
    1
    Livestreams
    View Channel: kazinsser

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    You're also not including Jew, James, IMASNOT, Wolfpack, and Warewing who are all active members of the squad and around 1.1 xD

    Legacy isn't as bad as VbD. But it is more "up there" than you think xD.
    I also didn't include Capone, Renegade, Munkie & Kratos which have a K/D of around 1.15. :P

    While they're not currently active, the extras we get usually fall around that same area (besides that one ill-considered night where VbD and Legacy merged).

  7. #17
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Guzzie View Post
    I believe getting on just to play with friends is perfectly fine and perfectly acceptable/understandable.

  8. #18
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    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.

    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.
    I don't like squad polarization anymore than you do, but usually there is a good reason why some squads have become so polarized. People of the same skill usually want to play together, and those squads are the majority of blue army right now. Some squads also don't like being polarized by skill. You can call my opinion bias, but look at what we have in DarkSail raiders. We have people with ranks of SR45 - SR 130, and as much as K/D isn't an indicator of skill, we have people playing together with a K/D difference of 1.65. That is not squad polarization by skill, we polarized by culture. Would you attempt to depolarize those types of squads too?

  9. #19
    Remember
    RedWatch

    DarkSail Raiders
    Apple Fanboy
    Houdini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    1,047

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    Quote Originally Posted by KazuhLLL View Post
    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".
    The reason I weighted the "Last Won Match" so heavily is to prevent a losing streak or a winning streak for any squad. Obviously some squads may be able to achieve a winning streak and other squads may have a losing streak. I have a sample battle night written out on paper that I'm trying to upload to the internet so I can show you guys how this fear of a losing streak is unfounded for any squad and no squad would be forced to play against a god-squad over and over again.

    Quote Originally Posted by KazuhLLL View Post
    Add to that the longer wait times during BN's and the cons quickly start outweighing the pros, IMO.
    Where do the longer weight times factor in? All of the ratings could be dynamically updated as the game results come in. We already have to record scores and gametypes once a game finishes, what more work would it be to update a simple toggle to "Won Last Game" or "Did Not Win Last Game"?

  10. #20

    Re: Better Battle Nights

    wait times would result in say instead of getting the next match set up from a pool of available squads, now you have to wait to set up a match from squads that have won and/or lost their last match, and setting them up by what you have proposed (a squad that won against a squad that won and a squad that lost vs their counterpart), thus limiting your options when setting up matches.
    "Let Them Hate, So Long As They Fear"







    -ZERO SHOTS MISSING-


    WH PS ICoH CM DS S EB VC IV

    "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Website maintained by Metkil5685 and Mythonian.