Evener still broken

[cxc]

Was now just messing around in a 2 vs 1 fg, trying to get one started.

 

Got a third person to join and evener insisted on making it 3 vs 1.

 

Everyone had over 10k exp, team with 1 person had 14.6k exp, other team had person with more, one the same and one less.

 

 

 

Please fix it so evener does not stop flag games from getting started.

[cxc]

What is the evener logic?

 

Evener f up again today.

 

was 3 vs 4 fg, new person came in and evener made it 3 vs 5.

 

had no1 tried to hop to make it 4 vs 4 but evener would not let him.

 

How is 3 vs 5 ever even? expecially when unix and no1 are on the same team are on team w/ 5.

[cxc]

I think i know what the evener's problem is, I think it is counting turrets as people.

 

Spider, can you check the code and see if there is a bug where the evener thinks a turret is a person?

[spittnacid]

I think i know what the evener's problem is, I think it is counting turrets as people.

 

Spider, can you check the code and see if there is a bug where the evener thinks a turret is a person?

 

turrets are more helpful than some ppl in the zone lol but seriously i think turrets and ship type should play a part, the problem is recalculating ship changes making it impossible to keep up with unless ship changing were restricted. like once you ?flag freq you have to stay with that ship until you leave flag freq.

[Samapico]

...unless ship changing were restricted. like once you ?flag freq you have to stay with that ship until you leave flag freq.

Which would be incredibly annoying and dumb

[spittnacid]

...unless ship changing were restricted. like once you ?flag freq you have to stay with that ship until you leave flag freq.

Which would be incredibly annoying and dumb

what's annoying is having someone youve been attaching to suddenly changs ships and you gotta either change too or find someone else your able to attach to. completely disrupting. dont tell me that i need ad either unless you want to buy it for me.

[cxc]

...unless ship changing were restricted. like once you ?flag freq you have to stay with that ship until you leave flag freq.

Which would be incredibly annoying and dumb

what's annoying is having someone youve been attaching to suddenly changs ships and you gotta either change too or find someone else your able to attach to. completely disrupting. dont tell me that i need ad either unless you want to buy it for me.

 

There is a ?lancs command, it will show you all lancasters on the team. It used to show all evokers as well, but that part got broken some how.

[Samapico]

Yeah... evokers should definitely be shown again on that list

 

And any worthy team should call the lancs/evoks as they change

[»D1st0rt]

It used to show summoners, if that's what you mean. It's pretty straightforward and could probably be tweaked if somebody wanted to.

[spidernl]

Did that before, never committed changes. Making it show evokers again requires a ?putfile, pretty much.

[Samapico]

DOO EET

[Unix]

Was wondering if it would actually be possible to have an interactive player decided evener.

 

Players can rank/rate players on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the most impactful. Essentially /?rank 5

 

The module would then take the average of the player and they would have a value between 1-10. This would prevent a team of 10 and 10 being against a team of 1 and 1 even though the "exp" requirement is fulfilled to allow it. Then you could have a +/- 2 player situation where no matter what so that way teams do not get too out of whack.

 

This would be based on how a player feels and can change how you feel accordingly.

[Cheese]

yeah then idiots like unix can keep their team with the same players every fg

[Unix]

Any rating would need to be staff approved, to prevent attempted manipulation of this module. Any staffer, probably keep it mod and above or something.

[Dr Brain]

Are you serious? You want the people that are so lazy they can't host events to even the teams too?

[Unix]

Not even the teams manually, just ?approve or ?disapprove. Could also grant access to specific players who are trustworthy enough for this, but not give them any other form of power.

[spidernl]

If mods have to approve or disapprove, you might as well just give them exclusive rights to ?rate players. Either way, it's not the solution. A good way to just 'calculate' how good a player (approximately) is would be a far neater solution. I personally think "Savage 2" does a pretty good job at this. Depending on how you perform in the game, you get a certain rating. That rating is then used to balance teams.

 

The issue is figuring out which things to measure for this rating (and how much they 'weigh'). Coding it would likely not be that hard at all.

[cxc]

High weight to players who kill the lanc.

[Samapico]

Would have to consider:

-Number of times attached to (for lancs / evokers)

-Flags captured (flags dropped by the enemy that you pick up, bonus points for capturing flags while enemy has all 12 flags, and bonus bonus points if they have all 12 dropped)

-Kills, of course (as cxc says, extra weight for killing an anchor)

-Flag game wins vs losses

hmm

[Unix]

Too many intangibles that cant be represented statistically.

[noldec]

Money spent

[Unix]

Money spent is definitely not a good indicator. There are a few players I can think of, both past and present who have bought a lot and been close to if not dead weight.

 

If you can ?rate players, you can determine how the zone feels about the value of that player. You can see if they actually are useful or not in the eyes of others, which is what creates stacking actually. If you see a team that you value as dead weight or no chance of winning, you're going to wait and see to get on the other team. Being able to ?rate players will at least disperse the dead weight around and make sure that games are a bit more even normally.

 

The more players that ?rate, the better the evener becomes. If you feel that staff are too lazy to approve of ratings, just allow players who you deem somewhat trustworthy to handle this responsibility. Of course you cannot rank yourself and you can see your own rating. This might actually get people to try to improve their rating if anything now that they see how bad or good people see them.

[Cheese]

your terrible ideas arent going to happen, unix

[cxc]

Hoping simple fixes:

 

When the evener puts somone on a flag freq have a zone announcement ex:

cxc -> flag freq 90 is now 1 vs 0

Cheese! -> flag freq 91 is now 1 vs 1

 

When user types ?flag reply to the user:

you will be placed on a flag freq in 10 seconds.

then 10 seconds later actually issue the ?flag command which will do what it does today.

extra credit: Only 1 ?flag request at a time. if somone typed ?flag and is in their 10 second waiting period prevent others from typing ?flag

 

 

Harder fixes:

when a player leaves a flag freq (changes freq, quits, specs, laggs out) make an announcement ex

cxc - has left freq 90 is now 0 vs 1

 

 

When user types ?flag they are put into a queue. then every 10 seconds the evener picks a new team member.

Edited November 16, 2012 by cxc

[spittnacid]

what about simply balancing the teams by taking kills/deaths ratio(min 500 kills) and points(not exp because points are reset and show who plays and who just sits in spec). The kill/death ratio shows kinda how good someone is. Base the player rating on these 2 factors and who is and isnt dead weight will be obvious.