Leaderboard

You have to use NSIS version >= 3.0.

I am not really playing on this one but it will help people installing awesome mods!

I have many things to say to this but for now I'll just mention a few points: Whatever you mean by "Good" - as in good player - is unlikely a one dimensional property of a player (if at all) and thus can't be expressed with a number. What can be expressed with a number is the frequency of a player winning games in the past. But that's not telling much about a players likelihood of winning a game in the future! That's because games - their settings and the participating players - are differing for most games and thus don't produce independent and identically distributed random variables. You also need massive amount of data points (1000 is sometimes considered the lower limit) to come to useful conclusions. Persons react to ratings. This means even if assuming the outcomes of games where randomly distributed over all games (which might by OK) and we have enough data you will break a precondition of statistics by generating them and using them for the purpose stated here - helping PPL to host fair (Guessing here it's meant all teams have an equal chance of winning the game hosted according to the analyzed data) games. Since one doesn't want to get the likelihood of any player to win the game (which should be 0.5 if nothing is broken ;p) but of a specific player that means one can only use the data of past games he participated in. Since this holds true for all players participating in the particular game you can only use data of games with the exact same players. That makes the "masses of data" requirement quite hard to be fulfilled. As far as I'm concerned "troll" and "smurf" is an insult (Definitely out of the scopes of statistics BTW ;p). So please be careful with those! EDIT: Some rating systems (like ELO) are designed to give a relative score to each player of a (stable - over many games) group of players assuming that games are played one player vs. one player (simplifying things - but that's not true for 0 A.D.) and players always want to win (likely true for competitive communities like a chess league - not so much for mixed communities like that of 0 A.D.). And so on and so forth...

Vexillum (suggested by @Enrique) sounds good. Flag, banner Heralding a new age for 0 A.D. gameplay hopefully.

That would be a way. But the issue would then be the passability of the gate.

Even though i don't have an especially good level in statistics or mathematics, i'll try to answer this considering the idea of causative ... first thing i want to clarify is that (if i understood well) is that a "win" or a "loss" is not the actual outcome of the multiplayer game, but a comparison of arbitrary selected statistics of the game (with good weight for killed units). This sole fact means that anyway the goal was from beggining to give an estimation and not predict a probability of winning a multiplayer game. So i think that causative explained his system better that i would have done with my english ... so what's measured is actually a serie of 1v1s in a multiplayer games. If you play a 4v4 game you actually play 3 games, between your allies. As this was not criticized i wanted to make sure it's clarified... 1. So as i said i am not good in statistics but from how i see it : supposing the arbitrary selected score of a game used to compare players are good (though we know it's not the case), then this "multiplayer" rating is similar to the current 1v1 rating of the game : if statistics laws applies to multiplayer rating, it also applies to the 1v1 rating system of this game, so that would mean the 1v1 official system is as bad as this multiplayer system. So knowing that, the issue of this multiplayer system is how score describe a multiplayer game which we, i think, all acknowledge is not 100% accurate, score for example doesn't measure how good a strategy is unless it rewards more kills etc... 2. Already talked about that in a post in the thread, even if i don't speak well, but still, how i see it : indeed, games are supposed to be balanced, but since it's not the outcome (win/loss) of the entire multiplayer game that is measured, i think that we should take other conclusions of this. We have players of different strength in a team. It is supposed to be balanced at the start : that mean players already use more or less relative estimations of a player's strength, in a way that better players play with weaker players. If the game's score agreed with the human estimation of a player's strength, it simply gives a human help to multiplayer rating estimation. 3. i still think another conclusion should be taken. You emphasized the fact that players in a multiplayer games may play in different conditions each game (and i think it is more about fighting a player in the opposing team who is stronger than the one your ally fights) but i would say that with more and more games this fact tends to disappear. 4. Well, for the "smurf" term i guess everyone has its own meaning, though for the troll one : the guy hannibal called a troll was actually the guy who caused a huge disruption, who was the cause of closing registrations. I don't think this term will be used again anytime soon. EDIT : by the way Feldfeld = Attila2 well, i play chess and in chess too we see upsets : i already beat a player rated 400 over me and drew one rated 450 over me. It doesn't need 1000 games to be accurate. In 0a.d., if a player doesn't want to win i think the it will be seen in the score. But generally as far as i'm concerned in multiplayer games players try to win. And yes, it seems elo system doesn't work in 0a.d. since causative noticed that fide rating doesn't work here for reasons described in first post.

Though its better then nothing

Today, I tested the latest SVN19536, using NSIS to compile the 0ad.nsi file, an error occurred: Invalid command: Unicode Error in script "D:\trunk\source\tools\dist\0ad.nsi" on line 17 -- aborting creation process

The point I was making was about the way the Athenians wrote it, which was distinct. The undercase alphas in this inscription come from a different direction. Looking at other ones from Athens, this does not seem to be the only case.

Good to know!

@av93 Those are all intended to be used for the Athenians The one in the middle in the first screenshot was already omitted because of inaccurate details The ones in the top of the second screenshot are my renditions based on motifs found on archaeological materials The ones on the bottom of the second screenshot are based on the current shield designs for the Athenians in the game

Sounds reasonnable. In the meantime, if you need any helmet for your models, or your school project, I'll be glad to assist.

Preview - Athenian basic rank hoplite shield textures .PNG files are uploaded on the first post in this topic.

I stand of my suggestion of Virtus and I'll add the following suggestions: (sorry all Latin) -Venustas : loveliness, charm, attractiveness, beauty -Verus : true, real, proper, right -Vexillum : flag, banner, standard / troop, company, small unit. -Vigor : vigor, liveliness. -Vivificus : live-giving, life-restoring