Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
Do what ... plz do anything!
In last Weeks i´ve lost 5! Games 5vs3 ... in other Team was 3 People who can play and Leavermoney made them much too strong. We´ve lost them all.
Today look at this! http://league.btanks.net/game.php?gameid=79
What the Fuck!? 3 Leaver in a Team! I dont want loose all time cause of those shit! I dont want farm -Points all Time cause of People who LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE!
That makes me sour and leaves me all enjoy the game.
Delete that Game plz ...
Posts: 1,019
Threads: 24
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
13
Criticism is always easy, but what about some suggestions?
Just "Do what ... plz do anything!" is not really helpful.
The big Problem: leavers can be both, an advantage but also a disadvantage. That's why we don't have the "universal" solution yet...
Posts: 209
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
I was thinking about this problem..
how about not count a game, where the other team has at least 2 more players?
example: 1v3, 2v4, 3v5 or 1v4 and so on.
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
yes! abort! and no one can loose points.
both teams can vote for an abort.
when 1 team (2vs5) the 2 player want abort the game ends ... all stayed player havnt -points and i need not bother about pointless waste of time.
leaver get only penalty points.
look at this - my 2nd game today! http://league.btanks.net/game.php?gameid=84 4 leaver again ...
Posts: 209
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
Ok, but those players wont join any BTanks-League-Game in the near future. Due to stay%.
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
1
and it's ABUSEABLE!!!
if you have a bad game and it's possible to abort it by leaving the most will use it to avoid -points.
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
aggi yes it must first ever two people leave the game so that both teams have the possibility to say .. ok but we want non leaver game and exit.
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
1
so tell my why the other team should agree? especially if they're winning? don't tust the mankind, the most won't be fair in this case.
my last game was a 3v5 too. one feeder whom we kicked (4 weaps, no hull, doing nothing) and one damn leaver: sweetpotatoo or whatever who left intentionally by this reason: i start to feed.. bye (with 7-9.. wtf?)
and left us in a sure loss we never deserved...
but what shall we do? the only way i think we could avoid this would be to referee the games or post them for delete. <-- impossible because noone has sooo much time to evaluate all those games!
the league isn't perfect and you have to live with it. it's a rank based system for individuums in a teamplay based game - interferences pregrogrammed.
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
the other team does not get the opportunity to agree! Each team can break the game for themselves. otherwise would have probably pointless or??? ^^
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
how will you win a game 2vs5? that does not work definitely. And will then be punished by a defeat with minus points, because their own team members have left the game just can not be the intention. This distorts the complete ranking.
it's the same the other way. 3vs5. at the player's team are three good people who know what to do and play really well. such a game you win it either. 5vs5 but maybe you had already won because the two leaver were much worse and that would not only gold went to 3.
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
1
to not count a game by own team based decision wont be fair to the other team! every single game would end like this. if there's a possibilty to avoid counting a game it'll be abused all games.. noone wants to loose.
btw: did you exactly red what i wrote above?  hock:
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
omg aggi. NO!
No, this not be in working order that you lose a game to break, but a match for which 2 or more players in a team is missing!
In a normal game there is this not work then. it should be technically possible to write the program so that the function then works to a team when two or more players missing in 1 team.
did you really understand what it does to me here?
Posts: 2,292
Threads: 181
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation:
2
It's quite bitter to be on the team with leavers especially with 2 or more leavers. Also when the league has been restarted, more leavers will occur in the beginning to sort out the bad players, but eventually the system will sort of leavers over time and you will get games with less leavers.
Well you get leaver gold from the leaver, but his experienced gained, his items and tank is lost. If you wanna discuss what advantages we should give a team with a leaver, you can come with ideas or suggestions in feedback/suggestions forum. But currently you get only 50% of his total value in items + tanks + his unspent gold divided by number of players.
Posts: 209
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
TKF Wrote:It's quite bitter to be on the team with leavers especially with 2 or more leavers. Also when the league has been restarted, more leavers will occur in the beginning to sort out the bad players, but eventually the system will sort of leavers over time and you will get games with less leavers.
Well you get leaver gold from the leaver, but his experienced gained, his items and tank is lost. If you wanna discuss what advantages we should give a team with a leaver, you can come with ideas or suggestions in feedback/suggestions forum. But currently you get only 50% of his total value in items + tanks + his unspent gold divided by number of players. To make it short: You CANT balance a game which is not even in playernumbers in teams. It is due to tank-skills and so on nearly impossible.
Take a look on my idea above, this can at least avoid totally unfair games. And for the leavergold: The currently system works very fine IMO.
Posts: 187
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation:
0
Agginator is right, you can't leave an honorable decision to be made in the hands of the enemy. It's a conflict of interest: Ethics vs Self-interest.
Chivalry is dead around here. Those disullusioned with the dishonor of the masses tend to deal with the problem by leaving league.
- Rob
Former Chieftain of Clan toaf on US EAST *Retired*
Just playing for the fun of it now.
Posts: 485
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation:
6
@schwarzkopf: honor honor honor blablabal .............. forget this qualtiy from the today population, it doenst exist in general (what is of course pretty sad and frustrating). but plz dont write about this in every comment... Mr.Gentelman :O
and for neppens explanation
the team who want to abord the match should only able to abord if: already 2 or more players (of this team) left the game,
and ONLY this team can vote, not the opponent.
well its really a bit unfair for the oppenent, maybe the other team should be able to vote too. With a minimum agree to abord this match by like 40% (2 from 5 players should vote -yes).
but what ever, u never can play a 100% balancd or noneleaver "public" game... and u guys should stop care a bit more about stats and ranks -.-´
Gustave Le Bon "... Die Einseitigkeit und Überschwänglichkeit der Gefühle der Massen bewahren sie vor Zweifel und Ungewissheit. Den Frauen gleich gehen sie sofort bis zum Äußersten. ...".
Posts: 187
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation:
0
LIoOoOoIL Wrote:@schwarzkopf: honor honor honor blablabal .............. forget this qualtiy from the today population, it doenst exist in general (what is of course pretty sad and frustrating). but plz dont write about this in every comment... Mr.Gentelman :O
and for neppens explanation
the team who want to abord the match should only able to abord if: already 2 or more players (of this team) left the game,
and ONLY this team can vote, not the opponent.
well its really a bit unfair for the oppenent, maybe the other team should be able to vote too. With a minimum agree to abord this match by like 40% (2 from 5 players should vote -yes).
but what ever, u never can play a 100% balancd or noneleaver "public" game... and u guys should stop care a bit more about stats and ranks -.-´
Honor and integrity exist in the private community, just not in public league games.
A good gaming experience includes choosing who you play with. This is not possible in league, making most games an excercise in futility and frustration.
The amount of assholes, stats whores, noobs, idiots and flamers in league is epidemic. Requesting bans on the forum is ineffective and too slow. There is still a revolving door of lunatics entering.
It's not the number of games being hosted, it's the quality that counts.
Anarchy reigned the moment we stopped hosting inhouse games and opted to play league. The whole idea of league was to bring a tank community together, but it has actually torn it apart by virtue of the reputation of league and player behavior.
In short, battle tank league has now become a lesser evolved form of public DoTA league. I quit DoTA for tanks to get away from people like that.
- Rob
Former Chieftain of Clan toaf on US EAST *Retired*
Just playing for the fun of it now.
Posts: 1,494
Threads: 32
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation:
5
I don't know what it's like on the us server, but on europe league is not played instead of inhouse games, rather instead of normal public games. Part of the reasoning for a league was to give people something in between normal publics and inhouse clangames. In fact league is a really good way for competitive players to get in contact with the bt-clans and a good way for clans to scout players easily. Good players not (completely) integrated in the community get to know each other by playing league, but obviously league is not the ultimate goal of playing btanks.
Posts: 187
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation:
0
On US East there are few players to begin with; so people tend to rush off to fill a league game. This makes putting together an inhouse more difficult.
Having a number of friends join the same league game can still be bad. It only takes 1 noob to ruin a game.
- Rob
Former Chieftain of Clan toaf on US EAST *Retired*
Just playing for the fun of it now.
Posts: 9
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation:
0
Hey there.
Arguably, leaver games brings a gaming condition that breaks the fun for everyone. Either you are in the 2 players army team position or in the -miraculously- full team party position, this is a very disappointing position to be in and it ruins the gaming experience just as well. I know some people would disagree since both situations are still playable and can still be advantageous : become uber with leaver gold or outnumber your enemy and map control it out.
But really, such irritance reminds me of an old story where an amazingly strong ogre has his whole kingdom screwed just because of a wooden thorn that got stucked under his foot  . With such an amazingly coded map [and god, thumbs up for the hard work!], wouldn't it be fair to add another trigger?
--> If the length between the amount of players from each team reaches 2 or more; or if a team reaches 2 players or less, the game will end.
Oh, and just to not spread posts around: I was wondering if [Velocity2 Paladin] you guys ever considered adding the level for each player's tank in the multiboard? Whether it is to know if my ennemy is going to stun me with a upper level spell, or just to secure my position within the whole bunch, I think it would be a great investment for the game to make this crucial information accessible in the glance of an eye.
Hum... I'll be looking for feedbacks, hopefully this will be helpfull.
Regards,
Aero
|
