|
|
On January 04 2022 02:44 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2022 00:48 Optimate wrote:
In my opinion, if you have a random ally you should get twice the points as a team stacker. I don't think it is fun to log in and get bashed by team stackers. Plus, amazing players allying worse players means more people can learn that way. The design, which is not yet fully realized, is that arranged teams (parties) will have a matchmaking handicap applied according to their proven advantage expressed as a function of win percentage over random teams. For example, if the parsed data from actual SB games shows that arranged teams beat same-rated random teams 55% of the time, and a 55/45 matchup equates to a 40 MMR gap, then when the 1500-rated arranged team searches for a match, they will be searching +40 MMR higher than their current rating (and therefore are less likely to match against 1500-rated random teams). Now that we have thousands of matches' worth of data, I can start searching for that inflection point, but it's not ready yet. I'm hesitant at this juncture to award any extra points directly for random teams beating arranged teams because in theory the matchmaking handicap should resolve that problem by itself, but I'll keep an eye on whether that's necessary.
Injecting extra points into the system seems like it would cause more problems than placating someone's feelings is worth IMO.
|
United States12247 Posts
On January 04 2022 03:26 Jealous wrote:
Injecting extra points into the system seems like it would cause more problems than placating someone's feelings is worth IMO.
The aim of the ladder system is to keep match outcomes zero-sum, so that means no "bonus" points of any kind. There are numerous advantages to handling things this way, the most valuable of which is that it's just simpler. So that remains a core principle in this iteration of the ladder.
Having said that, we know that arranged teams have some advantage over random teams, the question is how much? And that is calculable based on recorded results, as many ranking systems in other games have shown. I've seen this applied two ways. The first is as I described before, by simply moving the initial search MMR up according to the advantage, and the second is to use that modified MMR in the actual rating update calculation (in this latter case, if your adjusted MMR as an arranged team were 1540, then actually score the game as if you were 1540 rather than 1500). The second case is simply a further nudge in that direction. My assumption is that it may not be necessary because your even matches are assumed to be against 1540s anyway, so if that holds true then you will simply rise up to 1540 through natural outcomes.
|
On January 04 2022 08:44 Excalibur_Z wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2022 03:26 Jealous wrote:
Injecting extra points into the system seems like it would cause more problems than placating someone's feelings is worth IMO. The aim of the ladder system is to keep match outcomes zero-sum, so that means no "bonus" points of any kind. There are numerous advantages to handling things this way, the most valuable of which is that it's just simpler. So that remains a core principle in this iteration of the ladder. Having said that, we know that arranged teams have some advantage over random teams, the question is how much? And that is calculable based on recorded results, as many ranking systems in other games have shown. I've seen this applied two ways. The first is as I described before, by simply moving the initial search MMR up according to the advantage, and the second is to use that modified MMR in the actual rating update calculation (in this latter case, if your adjusted MMR as an arranged team were 1540, then actually score the game as if you were 1540 rather than 1500). The second case is simply a further nudge in that direction. My assumption is that it may not be necessary because your even matches are assumed to be against 1540s anyway, so if that holds true then you will simply rise up to 1540 through natural outcomes.
Yea I might have not expressed myself clearly, but I was basically agreeing with your proposal over the one that you were responding to. I think it makes sense.
|
I think it makes more sense to give a bonus to players that use a random ally. That way it encourages people not to be team stackers like the majority of 2v2 players are. You might also give them less points of a loss if they have a really bad ally.
|
I think X and you should do Y! Great job tec team SB!
|
Brood war is a really old game.People usually play 2v2 with people they know.That is proly the most fun part about it. It is also frustrating to play with someone that is way worse than you. Like it happened to me that my ally was attacking my units. >.< . Tec already said he is super busy right now to optimize the MM. In the future and if there is enough population maybe pairing should have some priority to match full team vs full team and randoms vs randoms to make it more casual. But we are very far from this I feel.
|
Germany1307 Posts
On December 26 2021 21:54 v1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2021 20:39 Chosi wrote:On December 18 2021 22:58 oxKnu wrote:Support for ShieldBattery:https://www.patreon.com/tec27For anyone willing to support the main developer and the SB team, that's the way. I'm sure there will be more than a couple people enjoying the new SB developments as the holiday season is coming along. Reposting this for this page and new people. Is there a paypal (or similar) for one time donations just because this is awesome? https://ko-fi.com/tec27
Thank you, donated!
|
On January 04 2022 22:03 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
Brood war is a really old game.People usually play 2v2 with people they know.That is proly the most fun part about it. It is also frustrating to play with someone that is way worse than you. Like it happened to me that my ally was attacking my units. >.< . Tec already said he is super busy right now to optimize the MM. In the future and if there is enough population maybe pairing should have some priority to match full team vs full team and randoms vs randoms to make it more casual. But we are very far from this I feel.
Hopefully eventually can have both... I know it splits the play base, but still what is the point of having 2 of the most skilled players, picking Terran and Zerg on a set team vs a random team who is potentially playing with a non zerg ally. The probability of other team winning is literally in the 0.0001% up to 30% (and the 30% would only be if they were against opponents of equal skill and they worked decently together).
Sure, I get that it's a ladder.... but it's a 22+ year old game, must we still be squeaking out every advantage? I mean if others truly find that fun, than there point is just as valid as mine. I understand that, just don't understand how it can be fun queuing into a lot of games where your average net chance of losing is like 3%(if not even less).
|
speaking of losing and shit, why are so many 2v2 players so fucking disrespectful? name calling, trolling, throwing the game because i didn't make miracles happen... seriously? i'm sure we're all grown ass adults here, right? why do so many people on shieldbattery think it's acceptable to straight up be a terrible person? this is seriously how you guys treat people?
it's not SB itself that's the issue, this same problem was on iccup and it's even worse on bnet. if you're reading this and you bad manner your teammates, please grow the fuck up.
|
On January 17 2022 21:21 lost dedicated wrote:
speaking of losing and shit, why are so many 2v2 players so fucking disrespectful? name calling, trolling, throwing the game because i didn't make miracles happen... seriously? i'm sure we're all grown ass adults here, right? why do so many people on shieldbattery think it's acceptable to straight up be a terrible person? this is seriously how you guys treat people?
it's not SB itself that's the issue, this same problem was on iccup and it's even worse on bnet. if you're reading this and you bad manner your teammates, please grow the fuck up.
That's literally the experience you get in any online multiplayer game in existence.
Sure, you could argue that the average age in the SC community is higher, but that doesn't make a difference online.
|
Norway28797 Posts
Might seem like a new development because many have mostly played 1v1 in bw. If you play team games with strangers as your partners it requires a pretty calm and cool personality to not be affected by your partner sucking.
|
On January 18 2022 02:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Might seem like a new development because many have mostly played 1v1 in bw. If you play team games with strangers as your partners it requires a pretty calm and cool personality to not be affected by your partner sucking.
Or the dreaded sucking + shit talking partner. So shit at the game that they are oblivious to how hard they are being carried.
Played a 2v2 with some absolute dickhead recently. Before the game even started, he was already involved in some spat with the host team.
Game starts and he wants me to sac my Zealots into the Lings/Sunken so he can run by with Vults and harass Zerg eco. Great plan! Unfortunately he just runs in and dies without attempting to get inside the base.
He continues making 100% vultures and laying mines for the next 5 minutes which isn't bad I guess. Didn't get punished for it. We gain a pretty significant lead mostly because I bust the Terran and defend my 3rd. He sends some Vultures in support but he keeps throwing them, like 10 lost to Sunks with no kills, 8 lost to Tanks/Hydra, etc. The enemy realizes that he has made no Tanks all game and attacks him. He has like 1 Tank and no army because he threw away all his Vultures. Enemy has mines and Lurkers out at this point.
I checked the replay. My mans is floating 5000 minerals on a 40 SCV eco, 5 Factories but 4 are idle, 230 APM doing nothing at all. Starts screaming at me to make army and save him. My army was not enough to win 2v1 against the Lurkers, Tanks, and mines camped in his natural. "MAKE ZEALOTS" he says. I'm waiting on the obs + a round of Goons. "NOOB" he DMs me. While floating 5000 minerals and producing 2 Vultures.
I was tempted to just leave right then and there. Fuck this guy. But, I manage to practically single-handedly win the remainder of the game because I was so far ahead of the crippled Terran I had busted and the Zerg who was on fewer bases than me.
Imagine having that fuck as your ally 50% of the time and keeping a model code of behavior in pub 2v2s. It's almost impossible.
However, I do agree that flagrant shit talkers who just spam the main chat should just be chatbanned. There are too many on SB.
|
On January 18 2022 04:41 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2022 02:46 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Might seem like a new development because many have mostly played 1v1 in bw. If you play team games with strangers as your partners it requires a pretty calm and cool personality to not be affected by your partner sucking. Or the dreaded sucking + shit talking partner. So shit at the game that they are oblivious to how hard they are being carried. Played a 2v2 with some absolute dickhead recently. Before the game even started, he was already involved in some spat with the host team. Game starts and he wants me to sac my Zealots into the Lings/Sunken so he can run by with Vults and harass Zerg eco. Great plan! Unfortunately he just runs in and dies without attempting to get inside the base. He continues making 100% vultures and laying mines for the next 5 minutes which isn't bad I guess. Didn't get punished for it. We gain a pretty significant lead mostly because I bust the Terran and defend my 3rd. He sends some Vultures in support but he keeps throwing them, like 10 lost to Sunks with no kills, 8 lost to Tanks/Hydra, etc. The enemy realizes that he has made no Tanks all game and attacks him. He has like 1 Tank and no army because he threw away all his Vultures. Enemy has mines and Lurkers out at this point. I checked the replay. My mans is floating 5000 minerals on a 40 SCV eco, 5 Factories but 4 are idle, 230 APM doing nothing at all. Starts screaming at me to make army and save him. My army was not enough to win 2v1 against the Lurkers, Tanks, and mines camped in his natural. "MAKE ZEALOTS" he says. I'm waiting on the obs + a round of Goons. "NOOB" he DMs me. While floating 5000 minerals and producing 2 Vultures. I was tempted to just leave right then and there. Fuck this guy. But, I manage to practically single-handedly win the remainder of the game because I was so far ahead of the crippled Terran I had busted and the Zerg who was on fewer bases than me. Imagine having that fuck as your ally 50% of the time and keeping a model code of behavior in pub 2v2s. It's almost impossible. However, I do agree that flagrant shit talkers who just spam the main chat should just be chatbanned. There are too many on SB.
what is your skill level like using old iccup ranks?
|
|
|
Yeah sometimes I see my opponent trash talking his ally. From my perspective it looks funny but I remember being in that situation 10 years ago and a top 2v2 player did the same to me. I was down bad lmao.
|
On January 18 2022 20:17 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
I was down bad lmao.
being down bad means being really horny... just thought you should know
|
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/5woy4Zq.png)
New update is out!
We've put a ton of work into the netcode for this release, so would love your feedback on that front. We've also fixed the observer desync bug that has cropped up quite a bit in both foreign and Korean tournaments (I'll make a separate thread about that so people can avoid causing it on bnet if they're not playing with our fixes).
|
my pogchamp can only get so poggy
really though, this is awesome!!
|
Hell ya netcode buffs.
Hope to see more 1v1s.
Thank you tec and co.
|
OP but...where can iwatch the 2v2 sbtourney last december? can't seem to find it on the twitch channel posted. TIA
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
