Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
Noobs ruin everything in btanks. I'm not opposed to players learned how to play and graduating to join games on the ranked bot, but noobs should be FORCED to ONLY PLAY on the qualify bot. I was really excited about the league bots and I'm glad the map owners, devs, etc. have launched them, but something has to be done. More than 50% of my games are ruined - and I mean totally fucking ruined - by noobs. They are either aggressive and feed, or they have no hp, or they don't know how to defend. They ALWAYS screw the team by empowering the other team with money and causing your team to lose CPs.
Noobs make a bigger difference in games than pros. Period.
2 noobs on one team will cause any team with 0-1 noobs to win regardless of the other circumstances.
I propose the entry requirements for the ranked bot have another check in addition to % stay:
Option 1: If a player has been kicked out of x number of their last 20 games, they cannot join the ranked bot. Many noobs don't always get kicked bc the game ends too quickly, if there are more than one they refuse to vote each other off, etc. So I propose x = 3-4.
Option 2 (Best): check for K:D of last 20 games. If it's below a threshold, don't allow the play to join ranked bots. good players almost always have > 1:1 ratios and noobs almost always have drastically worst ratios, like 0-10 or 4-12. If a player gets better over time, their last 20 games will show this and they can graduate to ranked.
Please fix this. It's seriously not fun to play.
Posts: 1,019
Threads: 24
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
13
xenocide85 Wrote:Option 1: If a player has been kicked out of x number of their last 20 games, they cannot join the ranked bot. Many noobs don't always get kicked bc the game ends too quickly, if there are more than one they refuse to vote each other off, etc. So I propose x = 3-4. We don't have the information who has been kicked in which game.
xenocide85 Wrote:Option 2 (Best): check for K:D of last 20 games. If it's below a threshold, don't allow the play to join ranked bots. good players almost always have > 1:1 ratios and noobs almost always have drastically worst ratios, like 0-10 or 4-12. If a player gets better over time, their last 20 games will show this and they can graduate to ranked. And we don't have gamestats of the qualify games.
Posts: 558
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
4
how about having 1450 points to join the ranked bot?
Posts: 593
Threads: 110
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation:
13
I don't have that strong feeling for the noobs in the ranked bot like xenocide85. (No offence, maybe because the EU players have average higher skills than US?)
Generally I don't often feel desperate because there are noobs in my team. I've played like 20 games after the ladder was reset. And only 1 out of 20 games I had absolutely no chance to win because my team was too bad. For the other games, even if I lost, I feel it was because I didn't play good enough. Otherwise my team can still get a chance to win.
I used to suggest to have multiple level bots, like the 1500+ point bot. It would be straghtforward to use the points for the entry to the high level bot, because the pointing system is designed to rank good players.
But, the 1500+ bot was there and not enough player entered it for a game (people leave quickly cuz they wait for too long to start a game). Probably because the btanks community is still not big enough to support a high competition level in the league. And at the end, the BT team removed the 1500+ bot.
So I want to say even if the BT-team implements the K:D system, it might end up in the same situation, that less players join the bot, and games starting slow.
Suggest xenocide85 to find more intern games when you want to play it seriously and play for fun in the league.
Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
@Velocity
If it's possible to track the average of % stay on the last 20 games, why can't you guys track the average K:D on the last 20 games, or create a new variable to track # of times kicked. I realize it would involve some extra coding, but it can't be that above and beyond what you already have in place.
@olivercammel
I've never played the EU bot but I wondering be surprised by that at all - us American's are really stupid on average. It is really bad though, play the NA bot more and see for yourself. I totally agree with the idea of having tiered bots when the player base is larger - you're absolutely right that it won't work atm. The good thing, however, is that the number of extreme noobs is a small slice of the current active player base - my guess is around 10%, so games should still fill up quickly even if noobs are forced to stay on qualify.
@both
On a complete side note, I think you guys should consider the option for players sitting on the game bot (before launch) to initiate a vote to launch a game of 4v4, 3v3, etc. You can even let it forfeit the rank stats, or keep them. But on late nights when things are slow, it would really help.
Thoughts?
General_Pwn
Posts: 1,019
Threads: 24
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
13
xenocide85 Wrote:@Velocity
If it's possible to track the average of % stay on the last 20 games, why can't you guys track the average K:D on the last 20 games, or create a new variable to track # of times kicked. I realize it would involve some extra coding, but it can't be that above and beyond what you already have in place. For the stay % we can use data already stored in the default bot database. Only a change in the query was necessary. In order to track kills, deaths and kicks a communication between the map and the bot is necessary. And we would need that for the qualify too. Another point are the queries of the database. We would have to check both databases on EVERY joining player. This would double the queries on joining players.
It is possible but it's much more than a little work and the dadabase queries should be as low as possible.
Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
@Velocity I don't mean to imply it's a small undertaking, and I think I speak for the whole community when I say we appreicate all the hard work you guys have put in so far. I just mean to suggest that it's possible and it would greatly improve the quality of game play for everyone. If it's possible, I think the entire community would appreciate the change =).
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
1
i guess the disadvantages would prevail the advantages, except for the hard work it would take.
Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
you mean the disadvantages "wouldn't" prevail over the advantages, right? =)
Posts: 605
Threads: 8
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
1
or like that^^ i'm not that english pro i could be xD
but damn.. im not sure which one is correct.. a bit confusing..  hock: :lol:
Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
Hey Velocity,
Any updates around tracking K:D for last 20 games? I haven't seen any updates in a while and just wanted to check-in and see what's on your mind.
Thanks,
General_Pwn
Posts: 1,019
Threads: 24
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation:
13
xenocide85 Wrote:Hey Velocity,
Any updates around tracking K:D for last 20 games? I haven't seen any updates in a while and just wanted to check-in and see what's on your mind.
Thanks,
General_Pwn If you are talking about tracking K:D in qualifygames the answer is no. There is no update.
Posts: 137
Threads: 14
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
1
I completely disagree with xenocide85.
Since anyone can merely Killsteal to get a good K:D score. "Assists" don't really count as stats, nor does dying to try save someone.... this filter will just snuff out all the team players and leave the killstealers... how "pro".
I would hate to be penalized for the billions of times I have died trying to save someone in my team
Posts: 104
Threads: 24
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
you wouldn't be penalized unless you're really bad, in which case you only have the illusion that you're a useful "support" player - while you actually just bring the team down.
considering your ELO is 1356 and your overall K:D is 341:707 (.41:1), you're almost certainly just a bad player and belong in qualify.
Posts: 137
Threads: 14
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
1
Then maybe implement this in beta, it has assists after all and you cannot be delusional of that stat. So a good K+A:D ratio
On a side note I must say I really love playing beta. It's so much better then the previous version
Posts: 187
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation:
0
Yes, Assists is key here.
The requirement MUST have Assists accounted for.
In fact ASSISTS must be accounted for also in the abilty to kick a player. I've been kicked twice since the kick system changed.
The reason was I incorporate long-term saving as a strategy and don't make alot of kills or farming while saving for Teir 3. This should not get me kicked by a some asshole who thinks if they can kick anyone 'kickable' they will somehow get ahead.
- Rob
Former Chieftain of Clan toaf on US EAST *Retired*
Just playing for the fun of it now.
Posts: 42
Threads: 8
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation:
0
"Noob" is a relative term, and so the QQ'ing of players about noobs is short-sighted. If I lane against someone with 1650 ELO, I will probably feed. If I am the best player on my team, then I will probably not get much support from them either. So depending on the match-up I could go 0-5 early. Meanwhile I might consider that a success against an opponent that's so good I've seen them go 8-0 much earlier and take the tower and CP.
Also many times I am doing well early, like 4-1 or something, but my ally is getting beat by the opponent's pro player in lane, and that ally is 0-4. So I switch. Then, playing at a disadvantage I hold the lane and go to 5-4. This hurts my overall KDR in league, but if I don't do it then we lose the game. I'm okay with that. But I always sigh at how stupid players are that cry cry cry because someone with my ELO (usually over 1500) can have negative KDR. It's because players like you are so bad at team play you don't know how to bail out an ally.
There will always be better players, and every lane will have a winner and a loser. To call the loser in a lane "noob" is really just childish and short-sighted. To define it by KDR is to ignore lane match-ups and play style. Tracking assists will now be a big help with that.
How about this: instead of using the vague word "noob", you say exactly what you think is game-breaking. And make sure it's not something that is found in every game.
Posts: 187
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation:
0
I find the word 'noob' offensive. It's the "N" word in my books.
Former Chieftain of Clan toaf on US EAST *Retired*
Just playing for the fun of it now.
Posts: 325
Threads: 39
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation:
8
I think the league point system needs an overhaul completely since while players in league are ranked on an individual basis their points are determined by if their team wins or loses. For instance, sometimes i'll play a very shitty game but since my team played so well i'll end up with a win and gain points anyway. Conversely I can play a great game, but if my team feeds and plays poorly I will lose points regardless. I feel that since points are determined on an individual basis I should get more points for the losing game I played well than the winning game i played poorly, not the other way around. You shouldn't keep "noobs" out of league simply simply because "pros" say they shouldn't be allowed to play. Just tell the beginners what to do and what they are doing wrong and how to fix it, don't resort straight to the kick method simply because they're dying a lot. The only bad "noob" is the one that refuses to listen.
Posts: 42
Threads: 8
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation:
0
I would like to point out that KDR is a zero-sum statistic in a stable pool of players. If the very top 1% of players were able to get a 5:1 KDR, then that must be reflected in a 1:5 KDR elsewhere in that same pool of players. Furthermore, while it is true that some feeders suicide unnecessarily, some players legitimately do play tanking or support roles.
The only way to implement KDR requirements is to constantly be shrinking the pool. Eventually there will be 10 players left and the very last league game ever will be played, then the worst survivor of those ten will get banned.
You can't have everyone above average, and you can't define bannable players by relative performance, because there will always be bottom players in any pool.
Cheers,
roargasm
|
