| Forum Index > BW General |
|
krsna
12 Posts
krsna and Kakaduhh eliminated the enemies early on by nice team play, but our third ally, kaiser[mb] went against and attacked us instead of finishing the game. I did not want to report another case, but I have heard from others that he has not done it the first time. He even wrote prior to starting the game that he would kill team mates regardless the warning that the bot provides on launch. | ||
|
Kaiser[MB]
1 Post
User was warned for this post | ||
tofucake
Hyrule19053 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10146 Posts
 Thanks tofucake. --- While it's clear that unallying and killing allies should never be allowed and should result in a ban, I believe that if it happens repeatedly to users like krsna then there must be some measure of causality at play. In other words, if they are talking shit and calling people "noob," repeatedly, they should similarly be banned. In effect, they are baiting people to break the rules. While bait does not justify the reaction (BSing), it is worthwhile to look at the net effect of leaving BM/baiting individuals like krsna in the system: his in-game comments will continue to tempt people into breaking the rules and getting banned, some of them seemingly better (and thus rarer) players, thereby negatively affecting the player base. This is obviously bad. TL;DR: Ban BMers like krsna too. | ||
|
D3AD-R3TARD
Poland301 Posts
On October 17 2020 18:09 Buckfast wrote: Hello, sometimes i get troubles to joini the game created by the bot (right now the EU2). Is there any way how to fix it/let the creator know to reset it perhaps? Hi, I'm aware of this issue. Bot restarts games if no one joins. The problem is that games become visible and then disappear, only to become visible again. I don't know if there is something I can do on my end. In regards to kaiser vs krsna game: I've watched it and it's hard to tell who unallied teammate first so I decided tot to ban anyone for this. On October 18 2020 09:19 Jealous wrote: TL;DR: Ban BMers like krsna too. There is not much BM in a replay. Pretty much no at all. I guess all the BM was direct messages. Now, I can't ban people for this as 1 I can't verify this 2 Players can just ignore direct messages with /ignore or /dnd commands BTW. I've changed Leaderboard view and class assign algorithm. Only players who played at least once in last 30 days appear on the Leaderboard. Also when assigning classes only those players are taken into account. Old MMRs are still in database so when a player decides play after long pause, old MMR will be used again. | ||
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2349 Posts
On October 19 2020 18:04 D3AD-R3TARD wrote: In regards to kaiser vs krsna game: I've watched it and it's hard to tell who unallied teammate first so I decided tot to ban anyone for this. If you look at the commands list, you can easily tell who unallied first. E.g. my repmastered.app site offers a complete list of all player commands. If you filter the commands by the text "Alliance", you'll immediately see who allied / unallied and when. I assume other replay analyzers offer this feature too (if not, you may check my offline screp tool). | ||
|
Piste
6177 Posts
| ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
I did not know about it. That is interesting information, thank you. Maybe, D3AD-R3TARD can look into that. From what I can see, kaiser[mb] admitted above the kill himself though even against multiple people, not just me ("CORRECT , I DID , VS YOU AND VS VLADOK"), and in not a very friendly way. I will not even mention too much about the 60apm claim as the bot says it is 111apm. This is not the main point, although it shows presenting incorrect information. I even got a worse personal message from him here on tl.net after my report. But as D3AD-R3TARD said, it is easy to ignore and/or report those, so I am okay with just reporting and/or ignoring it. Most people would not report team killers though like Kakaduhh in this case. So, I wonder if some automation could be brought in with the above tools. I have not looked into them. Should we have a different thread to report team killers not to bring negativity to this wonderful thread about the bot itself? | ||
|
Jealous
10146 Posts
| ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
What is the reason for initially gaining and losing more points? It seems that after about 100-150 games, the winning and losing points stabilise at 21.00 (previously 15.00?). I can see that some players are at the top with only a handful of games. It is because sometimes they only accept good matches as they know that initial games count a lot more. In other words, it is much easier to climb up or down initially than later. The impact is significantly higher initially, which some may consider unfair. Just to give you a bit awkward example: Someone with 5 wins and 0 losses has 3019 points. Another person with 5 wins and 1 loss has 1395 points. Whereas someone coming from MMR 1 point with 100-150 games, it would take more than 60 wins in a row to reach 1395 points (what to speak of 3019 or higher). It is probably not even the worst example to show the bottleneck of the calculating algorithm. I was thinking whether it would make sense to always give a +1 or -1 instead of the current system (it is not the same as personal win and loss because you can win despite personally "losing"), regardless how many games you played before. Another idea would be to do it similarly to the 1v1 ranked games taking the difference between the two teams into account when counting the scores. The other thought I was doing a mental play with is to maximise the counting score for a player when balancing (the real leaderboard scores could still be higher). I do not know whether it makes sense, but what I have often observed is one really high S-rank player getting two very low score allies against three B-D ranked players. It is simply because the S-rank person has higher scores than all three B-D scores together. Yet, it is unlikely that even a good player can beat 3 other B-D ranked players, potentially if the two other low scores fall off or do not much. No issues if it does not change like this, but it is still food for thought and some (hopefully useful) feedback. | ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
| ||
|
badbeatpete
25 Posts
That said, I noticed all the reports of team killing that are a result of people blaming their allies for losses. I've already encountered a very bm player who had the lowest mmr on our team calling my other ally a noob. People need to accept that their mmr is not low because of their allies. It is low because they themselves are not good. In fact, if you were actually good, you should expect your allies to be noobs and would see how illogical it is to bm someone for being a "noob". | ||
|
Jealous
10146 Posts
On October 19 2020 23:29 krsna wrote: I have had this thought in mind for a long time, so I thought I would just put it out there: What is the reason for initially gaining and losing more points? It seems that after about 100-150 games, the winning and losing points stabilise at 21.00 (previously 15.00?). I can see that some players are at the top with only a handful of games. It is because sometimes they only accept good matches as they know that initial games count a lot more. In other words, it is much easier to climb up or down initially than later. The impact is significantly higher initially, which some may consider unfair. Just to give you a bit awkward example: Someone with 5 wins and 0 losses has 3019 points. Another person with 5 wins and 1 loss has 1395 points. Whereas someone coming from MMR 1 point with 100-150 games, it would take more than 60 wins in a row to reach 1395 points (what to speak of 3019 or higher). It is probably not even the worst example to show the bottleneck of the calculating algorithm. I was thinking whether it would make sense to always give a +1 or -1 instead of the current system (it is not the same as personal win and loss because you can win despite personally "losing"), regardless how many games you played before. Another idea would be to do it similarly to the 1v1 ranked games taking the difference between the two teams into account when counting the scores. The other thought I was doing a mental play with is to maximise the counting score for a player when balancing (the real leaderboard scores could still be higher). I do not know whether it makes sense, but what I have often observed is one really high S-rank player getting two very low score allies against three B-D ranked players. It is simply because the S-rank person has higher scores than all three B-D scores together. Yet, it is unlikely that even a good player can beat 3 other B-D ranked players, potentially if the two other low scores fall off or do not much. No issues if it does not change like this, but it is still food for thought and some (hopefully useful) feedback. Being allowed to climb/drop faster at the start is a crucial part of any good modern rating system. It allows for more accurate placement for future matchmaking, by putting total noobs lower and great players higher, which helps the overall balancing of the environment. Doing static point gain/loss would be a big detriment to people who gravitate toward those extremes (and anyone paired with them) and provides no benefits to those in the middle. | ||
|
pebble444
Italy2497 Posts
my opinion on the last situation evolving in this thread is that all those involved in that game should let it go. LET IT GO. if things degenerate a second time, the there will be consequences prolly. of course i could say more if i say the game in question. bottom line, D3AD-R3TARD has spoken, trying his best to be neutral; he did the best he could edit: BGH fighting edit2: i used to play BGH all the time between 2013/2017 under the user sgs.waldo | ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
By the way, some people are really worked up about being called a noob when they have high scores. Let me be honest, if I create a new account with some experience, I can climb up much faster than with an old account, like much much faster. Even people with high scores can have a lot of time off from the game and come back later as noobs for a few games, etc. Or simply, they are just tired or had a bad day and therefore play noob a bit. Or just did not know the usual strategy of their opponent. Points are just one factor, it does matter a lot, but is not all is all I am trying to say. So, really, points do not mean that a high or middle score player cannot play noob in any game. But in any case, team killing is not the right course of action under any circumstances and currently, the bot currently only gives the team killing warning for ban when launching a game. It does not say you cannot genuinely think someone is playing noob in a particular game. | ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
A court does not have to make a simple decision though like here. Here, you just need to know if an ally unallies another. A court make a lot more complex decisions. This is what we have software for. In fact, the bot exists for this reason, to make balancing automated in the first place, which a human being could do as well, sometimes even more efficiently. But I admit that it may be overengineering at this point. | ||
|
krsna
12 Posts
| ||
|
badbeatpete
25 Posts
By the way, in my first post, I wasn't even referring to you. That was another bm D/E player who started berating his allies as soon as he felt like we were losing. Funny enough in both cases we went on to win because believe it or not, the higher mmr players that you call "noob" are often good enough to win 2v3 after you die. edit: The point I am trying to make is that I am sure you don't want to be called a noob every time a game doesn't go your way. All of the bmers like yourself are just causing the games to be less enjoyable overall. Don't allow your ego to delude yourself into thinking your allies are always the reason why you lost. You will not improve if you only focus on the mistakes of others and never on your own. | ||
|
wimpwimpwimp
168 Posts
If you are the highest ranked player in the game you are almost certain to get one or more "donkeys" on your team, and if you try to push them to play in a certain way you will just ruin the experience for everyone involved. So if you find yourself in this situation I suggest you rather try to a) accept that different people have wildly different reasons to play Brood War and that their skillsets and attitudes will vary accordlingly, and then b) with this acceptance as a point of departure try to adapt your approach to the game at hand to those of your team mates. | ||
HaN-
France1919 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
