EPTI love peepmode and play it daily
[A] Peepmode: New maps, new features, new video! - Page 23
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
ajizi
20 Posts
I love peepmode and play it daily | ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
On May 16 2012 11:19 Heh_ wrote: Okay, that's interesting. I always thought that if a player lags when there's 14, they'll still lag when there's only 1. If you go directly to the scorescreen after being booted, then I have no idea why that residual lag occurs... I know what you mean though, when there is lag, after booting people, I get that feeling that the lag persists, and I wonder why (same as you) and on a low-end computer like mine that already lags when the players' supply count starts to get large it can be quite sad  A lot of people say the action of voting to kick (even if nobody is kicked yet) causes lag for a few seconds as well, and this may hold some ground as a separate lag issues. Wish we could get them all sorted out haha. | ||
|
ajizi
20 Posts
| ||
|
IcculusLizard
265 Posts
| ||
|
ajizi
20 Posts
EDIT:pic1, pic2 I know its hard to see but you get the point. EDIT#2:pic3 | ||
|
Heh_
Singapore2712 Posts
On June 02 2012 02:50 ajizi wrote: In ladder games you can only stack 2 workers on one mineral patch in peep mode you can stack 3 without the third one moving to another one as it would do in ladder matches. I dont think a replay is necessary since its in every peep mode match. It happens even in ladder games. Sometimes, the AI is stupid enough that 16 workers per mineral field = 3 workers on a faraway patch, and 1 worker on some other patch. You're probably too busy with other tasks to notice it on the ladder. | ||
|
ajizi
20 Posts
On June 02 2012 03:32 Heh_ wrote: It happens even in ladder games. Sometimes, the AI is stupid enough that 16 workers per mineral field = 3 workers on a faraway patch, and 1 worker on some other patch. You're probably too busy with other tasks to notice it on the ladder. but it happens everytime on several mineral patches, which is weird. | ||
|
Zealos
United Kingdom3576 Posts
| ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On May 30 2012 02:42 CrUnKeD wrote: Is there a place or a way we can check our rating? Also is it possible to reset your rating? Thanks for creating such a great map. If he hasn't obfuscated it, you can open your bank file to see your rating. I'm sure it's verified though, so attempting to edit it would be futile. You can reset banked information by simply deleting the bank file. | ||
|
meursault
United States59 Posts
| ||
|
VB_WhiplashJC
Australia64 Posts
| ||
|
IcculusLizard
265 Posts
Its no longer on SEA due to virtually no one playing it. I suggest playing on NA. | ||
|
TheFridgeMaster
Australia13 Posts
Let me know :D Cheers, Fridge. | ||
|
IcculusLizard
265 Posts
| ||
|
D4V3Z02
Germany693 Posts
| ||
|
redruMBunny
74 Posts
1. Please change the betting system so you just get a percentage of your own bet / lose a percentage of your own bet. Suppose "A" and "B" each put 1400 credits on someone that's very likely to win. "C" (a troll) bets 18 credits on the other player. Now A and B's payouts are killed. Normally, they might make or lose 420 credits each. But now, they'll make 9 credits each if they win, and if they lose they lose everything. "C" might not even be a troll. Low betters rationalize low bets by saying "I have nothing to lose and everything to gain" (so who cares if I screw over other players' bets?) The current betting system encourages "gaming the system". -- 2. It would be nice to implement side game(s) of some sort. Some games are slow, leaving observers with little to do, so they quit to go find something more engaging. Side game(s) could include texas hold 'em, side bets on particular parts of the game (who will hit 200 supply first or kill 1000 resources worth of units first), or maybe Bejeweled or Tetris or some sort of side SC2 variant (like Left 2 Die or Starcraft Master or something). Let them earn credits on the side games, even if it's just a bit, to keep their interest. Most games really do tend to fall apart after a few matches, as the pool of available players drops. The side games could also pay off on a better scale over time (say they pay out an additional 2% with each additional match.) If you do implement a cut in the payout system (mentioned below), putting in side games could offset some of the protests. Players will figure "Oh, I don't make as much on bets, but now there's cool side games, this guy thought of everything!" (Or hopefully they will figure that.) -- On the idea of changing payouts so earlier bets pay out more - I'd say 30% / 20% / 10% is a pretty sharp payout cut. At the 10 second mark, you really don't have enough information to make a judgment on who might win other than on rating. This isn't "fair" because suppose one player is new (zero games played)? Such a player's rating and information can't be reflective of that player's skill, so observers can't have any accurate information on which to base their bet. So I'd request that the 30% payout at least be maintained until the 7 minute mark. Betters at the 1 minute mark still have the advantage of collecting on an early bet if the game ends before the 7 minute mark (zergling rush, photon cannons, etc.) Perhaps cut the payout to 25% then 20% for the 14 and 21 minute marks. 20% should probably be the minimum to which payouts should be reduced. As it is, cutting payouts discourages observers - 10% is pretty draconian. True, it's important to encourage players. But if observers don't have anything to do, then they might just leave - why stick around? (Another reason to perhaps implement side games.) -- Regarding players and credits - Perhaps allow players to receive a small percentage of the credits from those that bet against them, and from those that bet on them. Also perhaps allow fixed winning and losing payouts to increase by 10% each round, to encourage players to stay. (So first round winner gets 1000, loser 300. Next round 1100, loser 330. Then 1210 / 363. etc.) Regarding getting a percentage - So suppose a losing player was losing early, and suppose plenty of players bet against him/her. Then the player manages to pull out a reversal and wins. Maybe the player could be rewarded for that more exciting gameplay and for being able to pull out a reversal by getting 5% of the total bet against the player. On the other hand, suppose a winning player maintained dominance through the entire game. It's less exciting to watch, and less interesting to play. If a percentage of the bets on the player were given to the player, it should thus be lower, perhaps 1%. -- Why award a percentage at all? (Or change the current system?) As it is, match win/loss payouts are fixed, but observers get a percentage. The current system is fairly rewarding to players initially, but after a little time, it favors observers. So that means that for those going for credits (granted, a lot of players don't care much about such things, but some do), it makes sense to play at first, but then to observe. (Of course when players switch to observing, nobody plays and everything falls apart anyways). Suppose you win and/or lose, and amass 3000 credits. (Happens pretty fast). At that point, 30% of 3000 is 900, plus you get 100 credits for observing. So you will get 1000 credits for correctly betting all on a player, without pushing yourself to play and win. If you have more than 3000 credits, it makes even more sense to observe than to play. Changing the payouts for winners and losers will maintain the payout advantage for players relative to observers, and encourage continuous play. It shouldn't discourage earlier play either, because someone wanting to go for the maximum possible income will always want to play. -- Regarding playing multiple matches at one time - I think it is possible, although you would have to import multiple maps into a single large map, and have "zoom" on sections. Long post, thanks for reading! (If you don't like reading long posts, why did you make yourself read this one? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | ||
|
redruMBunny
74 Posts
Suppose you just made a big big bet on someone and lost all your credits. (oh noes!) There should hopefully be some way to establish a minimum of 1000 credits. Maybe if a player or observer has less than 1000 credits on a given round, that player's credits are set to 1000. (That way, players won't just want to quit and find another game so they have another 1000 credits to bet with.) | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
| ||
|
IcculusLizard
265 Posts
I feel bad about this but the reality of the situation is that until July 7 or so, I won't have any time to put toward PeepMode updates.I apologize for my absence but please be patient and know that in a few weeks I'll get to working on improving several features, especially the betting system. | ||
|
ajizi
20 Posts
| ||
| ||
