Re-Organizing DSB

[Tembest]

I'll leave you hanging with bell flags accounting to 1/5 of the total score.
Think if there is something wrong with that.

I have to end this conversation now. I still need to finish a report before bed.

[falconeer]

Hm..

Well I don't tube, I actively play and try to break in. It's like I said if your team is losing badly. You won't be camping a tube for long. You act like tubes are impassable or something. I am really good at tubing and that's why I can tell you. They are not impassable. Many times it's 2 or 3 vs 1 in the east tube. There are two directions to attack from. There are ports, bombers, emps, repels. And there are even people as good at tube fighting as I am. So they can just dodge the bullets, and shoot in the tube, and repeat and get the better of me. You can't indefinitely hold rear east, so you can't have an 8 bell flag average. And If you are rear east holding a tube, your team is with you. So you won't get any better bell flags than they would. The argument you are making towards abuse doesn't really stand.

There are issues when people wall hide, and are not aggressive, not contributing to breaking in. But amount of kills matters too. 15 kills in a 20 minute game, won't rate you as much as 30 kills. So sure you can lose, and get 15-2 record, and never risk anything breaking in. But Ratio is not rated. You need to MATCH your previous performance. So the bot won't award you points when it knows you could have done better. So then we need three measures for rating skill. Vs the other team, Vs your own team, and Vs yourself. This will eliminate abuse.

[jim the chin]

As it's causing too much confusion, I'm willing to get rid of the kill-bonus altogether. We could make pracs like the current league where the only points come from bell flags and a set value for each kill. In this case, 120 would be too high and something closer to 80 would be needed. Also, this would make it much easier to adopt a system where the set kill value is different for each sector.

What about:

West: 60 (Temb, this might seem slightly high, but remember there are fewer kills in west)
South/East: 80
North: 100

Entropy, would you be able to put something like this into the bot... e.g.

If sector=north
killbase=100
If sector=east
killbase=80

and so on..? Then get rid of the killflagpoints (5*flagcount).

[Entr0py]

I'd like as much as anyone to have a rating system that relies only on a player's performance during a match, and not on the ratings of the other players. However, I'm at a loss to think of a fair way to do that. The problem is with the definition of a player's "performance". It's just not the case that all match outcomes of equal point margins are equal, because achieving those point margins may be much more difficult when playing against some teams than against others. The current rating system tries to take that into account as follows:

1) It uses the average ratings of the players on the teams to determine a % chance of victory as well as a predicted point margin.

2) It sees if your team won (affects winR) and if your team beat the predicted point margin (powR)(the predicted point margin can be negative, if it predicts you to lose!). It determines the total change in rating of the teams for both winR and powR. For winR, the number is entirely based on if the team wins, and what the avg. rating difference is between the two teams. For powR, the number is based on the difference between the predicted point margin and the actual point margin.

3) It divides the change in rating of both winR and powR among the players on each team based on their performances relative to each other, based on their "Team Rating" stat. Players with higher team ratings relative to their teammates get a better change in rating than players with lower team rating.

The details are more complicated, but that's the basic outline of how the system works.

[Entr0py]

As it's causing too much confusion, I'm willing to get rid of the kill-bonus altogether. We could make pracs like the current league where the only points come from bell flags and a set value for each kill. In this case, 120 would be too high and something closer to 80 would be needed. Also, this would make it much easier to adopt a system where the set kill value is different for each sector.

What about:

West: 60 (Temb, this might seem slightly high, but remember there are fewer kills in west)
South/East: 80
North: 100

Entropy, would you be able to put something like this into the bot... e.g.

If sector=north
killbase=100
If sector=east
killbase=80

and so on..? Then get rid of the killflagpoints (5*flagcount).

I think the current bot can handle that, by having different setting values for different arenas and then having a different sector in each arena.

[Tembest]

As it's causing too much confusion, I'm willing to get rid of the kill-bonus altogether. We could make pracs like the current league where the only points come from bell flags and a set value for each kill. In this case, 120 would be too high and something closer to 80 would be needed. Also, this would make it much easier to adopt a system where the set kill value is different for each sector.

What about:

West: 60 (Temb, this might seem slightly high, but remember there are fewer kills in west)
South/East: 80
North: 100

Entropy, would you be able to put something like this into the bot... e.g.

If sector=north
killbase=100
If sector=east
killbase=80

and so on..? Then get rid of the killflagpoints (5*flagcount).

I think the current bot can handle that, by having different setting values for different arenas and then having a different sector in each arena.

Sever's values are still a tad too high though. A kill should at most count for 2.5 flags hence:
50 west
100 north
75 east
75 east

are the maximum. But currently this would require different arenas for all sectors and I'm not a huge fan of that.

So I would be ready to compromise with the 80 overall for all arenas for now, until a new better system is created some day.
Then just remove the kill bonus and we have pracs that make sense even at some level.

Kills would be a little overvalued everywhere but north, but it's still a big improvement that can be done in 5 minutes from where we are now.

As soon as possible, however, I would like to change it to 2-2.5 bf's in each sector. So that the kill/bf relation would be the same throughout deathstar.

Ent, I take it there is no way to base it on the number of players in without creating multiple arenas?

I understand absolutely nothing about bots but can't you make some kind of a code that changes the killbase value after !start ? depending on which sector
we are playing?

Edit:
And besides.. perhaps a fixed 80 wouldn't be so bad anyway. At least it would always be the same, hence people know how much they get from a kill.
This would make the game different in different sectors, eg. west would focus much more on killing which could make it a little more fun?

Just switch it to 80 and get rid off the kill bonus for now.

[jim the chin]

I'd like as much as anyone to have a rating system that relies only on a player's performance during a match, and not on the ratings of the other players. However, I'm at a loss to think of a fair way to do that. The problem is with the definition of a player's "performance". It's just not the case that all match outcomes of equal point margins are equal, because achieving those point margins may be much more difficult when playing against some teams than against others. The current rating system tries to take that into account as follows:

1) It uses the average ratings of the players on the teams to determine a % chance of victory as well as a predicted point margin.

2) It sees if your team won (affects winR) and if your team beat the predicted point margin (powR)(the predicted point margin can be negative, if it predicts you to lose!). It determines the total change in rating of the teams for both winR and powR. For winR, the number is entirely based on if the team wins, and what the avg. rating difference is between the two teams. For powR, the number is based on the difference between the predicted point margin and the actual point margin.

3) It divides the change in rating of both winR and powR among the players on each team based on their performances relative to each other, based on their "Team Rating" stat. Players with higher team ratings relative to their teammates get a better change in rating than players with lower team rating.

The details are more complicated, but that's the basic outline of how the system works.

Don't worry about it. Your rating system works fine and most people like it. I don't think anyone agrees with Falc. He doesn't even play pracs.

[jim the chin]

Ent, I take it there is no way to base it on the number of players in without creating multiple arenas?

Same question, if no, then we might as well try this:

Just switch it to 80 and get rid off the kill bonus for now.

So Killbase=80 and killflagpoints = deleted.

[falconeer]

Sever you gotta let go of your personal problems.

Keep in mind I was banned for one year.

Otherwise I would have got on everyone's case a lot sooner.

Of course I play practices. Usually two a day. Is it the same as someone's ten a day? No. But I don't have the motivation to play many practices in a row. Because believe it or not I feel the zone should have more to offer than endless practicing. There should be events, duels, and by god even a decent pub to play in. Tembest doesn't practice at all to my knowledge right? Why not say the same about him as a basis for why you don't like his arguments? Again Sever it's because you are still a kid, whereas I've supported a lot of what you write when it makes sense. Also keep in mind, Entropy basically agreed with me, while offering an explanation of why his system works to achieve the goals I am looking for. SO provided people actually take some time to read what I write it does make some sense. Again I understand Entropy's problem of trying to bring an idea into practice. Coding requires more than just the knowledge of how to code, but a bit of ingenuity.

I have a question for everyone.

If kills are worth 75 east and South, why not 75 north and west? Because you assume there are more or less kills being made there? West can have just as many kills if not more than other sectors depending on how the game is being played out. At least in the standard 12 vs 12 league games, lock outs lead to people attaching to other players in core which means big battles in core. I am not sure people who played west have lower kills than those in east. Where is the comparable data between west practices and east practices?

So we are doing 1 kill is 2.5 flags.
Does that mean under Tembests points
West is worth 480 bell flag points at a ding (24 flags)
East is worth 600 bell flag points at a ding (20 flags)
South is worth 720 bell flag points at a ding (24 flags)
North is worth 1280 bell flag points at a ding (32 flags)

1 flag is worth 20 Points West
1 flag is worth 30 Points East
1 flag is worth 30 Points South
1 flag is worth 40 Points North

Shouldn't ALL sectors have the same bell flag point?! They should all be worth 30 points.

[Entr0py]

I'll need to look into it.

One thing to note - the points from f2 are not necessarily the same as those from the bot. The prac bot keeps track of points independently from f2, and bases those points on the settings inside the bot for the league and particular arena. So synching it up with f2 is not required, but more of a bonus.