Forums

An interesting mod; since the developer doesn't have advanced modeling skills, he embraced that as the mod's identity, which I think is a very honest approach!

https://www.moddb.com/mods/derphammer

Maybe you need to learn the meaning of the word "if"?   Uh... I explained the algorithms, I didn't write down the formulas because you can check them even on Wikipedia, just go and have a look. They are a bit more complicated than your simple subtraction that completely messes up the zero-sum game representation Elo systems are based on... do you understand this? Or can you explain, in proper English this time, what is that you don't understand?   Yeah, mine too, since it includes decay… that was the whole point of the last paragraph of my previous post.

We were just talking in general and based on what the game already has set up.  Remember no need to change something in the game just to change it. Im aware greek cavalry didnt use shileds, even early on.  However, Han swords cav?  Seems like they always did.  So on one hand you have Athens sword cav and the other you have Han, seems like they were quite different.   With spears, its kinda hard to tell.  It sounds like most cavalry spear units did not use shields.  However, the game depicts a few that do.  So until I find other evidence im not going to change them.  And in a case like Han i've read that they had 1 hand spear cav no shields, 2 hand spear cav no shield, more of a lancer spear cav no shield but on some rare occasions a shorter spear cav unit that carried a shield. About 1/2 the civs don't really fall into the "Greek" Category correct? Brit, Gaul, German are more celtic?  Maybe even iber?  Maury, Han, Kush....  Rome seemed to be influenced by greek weapons and ideas early on but they evolved and took on weapons, armorm, styles of a lot of different cultures they fought with and their allies.   As far as the way the units evolve, I'm not quite ready to change that for 2 reasons.  1 it would be a lot of work, 2 everyone is so used to it. Forge techs/armor in the game don't always represent actual armor, its not a chance to block or chance to deflect the dmg, its just an absorption of the actual dmg... so armor + hp = survivability to some degree.  It's defintely something I had a hard time grasping, why do ranged infantry have a lot less health than melee infantry.  You would think 2 soldiers have the same "health" and then their armor differs... That would be a whole differnt route to go and could potentially confused people even more.  

i never written that. i clearly wrote that i wanted to stimulate active players to play 1v1, so their rating will be more accurate. losing rating of complete inactive is side effect not more, for example borg is 1st on ratings board, but he is not active, so move him from throne is not bad idea.. I wasn’t proposing a radical change to the rating system that many players are already used to. I suggested adding a small new feature alongside it.This isn’t a drastic change — it’s actually quite mild. In the first month, a player would lose only 4 Elo. I didnt catch ur arguments about some problem (whats the problem actually?). u operated with a lot of terms, but without solid idea, i understand only that my solution not matched with patterns u have ever seen. but it is not an argument. and btw my solution also kinda smooths out some of the unfair rating inflation from smurf accounts, where rating basically gets transferred between accs. the rating decay would partially offset points coming from accounts that just log in, dump rating, and then never play again just look how easily some high lvl smurf can get to 1700 elo. i can understand concerns about rating becoming too scarce, that’s why i said right away the formula is debatable. you could cap the max decay even lower than 300, like 150 elo for example. but obviously if a player hasn’t played for a month, their actual rating already isn’t the same as it was before