Login

**stibi-** · 2010-12-09, 21:59:16

i'm tired of being the only one in my team with positive stats & noobs claiming both lane to feed there
i'm tired of people like skiii with nearly 300 games 85 % stay & an average 14 kill / 18 death ratio (WTF?!)
or tained who got 300+ games - average 12 kill / 17 death ratio

i beg you (since i didnt see any priv games lately) - gimme back the 1500+ elo bot
i'd rather wait 10 min for a nice game than ending up with a high blood pressure Smile

**eSVau** · 2010-12-09, 23:26:32

Last time we had such a bot there were two games within a couple of weeks! We needed longer to make that bot than it actually has hosted games Tongue

xenocide85 · 2010-12-10, 05:46:42

I think the solution is much simpler. Implement a K:D ratio criteria for the last 10 games. If players average below a given ratio threshold, they have to play in Qualify until their K:D is high enough. I've already made a post on this.

The cutoff should probably be somewhere between 2:5 or 3:5 K:D.

**stibi-** · 2010-12-10, 10:58:37

xenocide85 Wrote:I think the solution is much simpler. Implement a K:D ratio criteria for the last 10 games. If players average below a given ratio threshold, they have to play in Qualify until their K:D is high enough. I've already made a post on this.

The cutoff should probably be somewhere between 2:5 or 3:5 K:D.

leagueisunfair has 1:9,3 - inde has 1:1,7,1
doubt that's the solution Smile

**Velocity2k** · 2010-12-10, 11:35:56

stibi- Wrote:leagueisunfair has 1:9,3 - inde has 1:1,7,1
doubt that's the solution

Very strange numbers, where do they come from?

LeagueIsUnfair got 1.95:1 K:D and Inde has got 1.73:1 K:D. Did you switch K and D? Wink

**stibi-** · 2010-12-11, 18:03:16

Velocity2k Wrote:
stibi- Wrote:leagueisunfair has 1:9,3 - inde has 1:1,7,1
doubt that's the solution
Very strange numbers, where do they come from?

LeagueIsUnfair got 1.95:1 K:D and Inde has got 1.73:1 K:D. Did you switch K and D?

yea i've been in a hurry ^^
1:9,3 should be 1,93:1 and 1:1,7,1 --> 1,7:1 ^^

**LIoOoOoIL** · 2011-03-12, 01:54:02

hey,

in reference of much more ppl about 1.500+ elo, then in the past, is it possible to start a second Ranked Bot for League Games again?
If it wouldnt be a prob, just give it a try. (also maybe just with 8 slots/4on4, if the game dont fill fast enough)

Althend · 2011-03-12, 03:40:41

Or a 1450 and + bot?

**LIoOoOoIL** · 2011-03-14, 11:00:24

some of the admins, helllooo?!^^
whats up with a second bot - possible (and usefull) or not?

i really would like to play 1520+ elo games ; /

FoelliX · 2011-03-14, 11:57:39

I guess the problem about the 1500+ bot is that all players with 1500+ elo CAN play on that bot. To make it work i would like if all players with more than 1500+ elo HAVE TO play on that bot.
But that way games wont start really fast. Therefore.. how about this: 50% of all players on 2nd bot need 1500+ elo. Other 50% need just 1450+.
If there are 5 players with 1450+ only 1500+ players can join the lobby.

**LIoOoOoIL** · 2011-03-14, 13:12:16

FoelliX Wrote:I guess the problem about the 1500+ bot is that all players with 1500+ elo CAN play on that bot

shouldnt it be able to setup the bot, to 1500+ elo and already played 10-20games on the other ranked bot? like atm with the qualify-ranked Bots.
Or just set the minimum elo to 1520.

**Velocity2k** · 2011-03-14, 14:00:39

We've had a second bot with elo/point requirements in the past and it didn't fill up. And i doubt it will fill up now.
Adding a second bot (even with same requirements) lowers the fill-rate extremely.

In my opinion the btanks community/the number of players willing to wait for good ranked games is too low.

**LIoOoOoIL** · 2011-03-14, 16:29:30

Hm and if u´ll close 2 slots/so 4on4, if games fill to slowly.
Its just, i know enouch btankers, which really would like to play on a bot without total beginner/noobs and more above-average players. (of course we can do privs, but that also takes "a while" o.O, u wouldnt believe how long sometimes ; /...)

But well, if it cost to much time/nervs/money/etc. to add a new Bot with a new setup, then i/we have to accept that.

greetings

**Velocity2k** · 2011-03-14, 16:45:39

LIoOoOoIL Wrote:Hm and if u´ll close 2 slots/so 4on4, if games fill to slowly.

I see two problems with this solution:
1. Are 4v4 games totally comparable to 5v5 games and can we have both in the "same" league?
2. Currently everything in the league is focused on 10 players. All checks in the bot are for 10 players and everything on the page is set to check/display 10 players. And the balance-function currently also requires 10 players. Maybe also changes in the map are necessary - i'm not totally sure about that.

We can test a second bot with requirements (but not 4v4). But i'm almost 100% sure there will be less ranked games in total when adding a second bot, because people tend to leave the lobby when it isn't filling up fast enough.

Althend · 2011-03-14, 17:04:39

The 4v4 can be justified that it requires a better teamplay between people.
currently a lot of game have leaveers, so it is never 5v5 ^__^

**eSVau** · 2011-03-14, 17:50:27

Althend Wrote:The 4v4 can be justified that it requires a better teamplay between people.
currently a lot of game have leaveers, so it is never 5v5 ^__^

generell statement: there are less leavers on ranked games than qualify or beta Confused

hock:

btw, i love u and ur mech Tongue

**stibi-** · 2011-03-14, 19:00:36

what if we send people who got less than 1400 (or even 1350) points (!) back to qualify games?

**Velocity2k** · 2011-03-14, 19:33:40

stibi- Wrote:what if we send people who got less than 1400 (or even 1350) points (!) back to qualify games?

And once again: On the qualify bot no stats are tracked. So people with less than 1400/1350 would be permanently banned from the ranked bot. And as it's shuffle on the qualify the stats wouldn't be very representative.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me