Boudica
-
Posts
301 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Everything posted by Boudica
-
You've just made an explicit assumption. I think it's been already mentioned that the purpose of the rating is to put players in a relative order by their averaged performance over many games and different conditions. These assumptions are correct if you use this definition. Who made this assumption? Also, I'll bet you $1000 that the weakest team won't win a single game against the top rated teams. I'm not saying that my prediction was easy to make but still. Thanks, but this has already been addressed too. Have you read the thread, or are you just trying to argue with a straw man here? I mean, it's not bad to list these as a warning, but as @PhyZik said, the 0 A.D. community is a bunch of nerds. We aren't dumb. Yes, good observation, these really are some questions we've been discussing above. Do you have any arguments to add? Because I've played a few games and I quite know this community. No one watches a pro playing a noob. No one likes to play in an inferior team.
-
Sorry, @Stockfish, I don't understand what you you're saying. Who can't be saying what seriously? What message? In reaction to @borg-, the purpose of this is mostly to ensure that the games are fun. If we "don't take this seriously", I could as well "have fun" winning battles with an inferior army by dodging all the projectiles. I don't really see any good reason in belittling my fight for a fair game. Especially if this only came as a reaction to someone promoting unfair tactics. And @Dakara, your suggestion sure is good. The main problem I see is that it's written in French. Other than that, it's much easier to say why not "just reduce the accuracy" than "just reducing it", especially in a way that works well. Unfortunately, the solution isn't made simple by the fact you see it as such.
-
I think we could see that people already started to use tactics while forming the teams instead of focusing on helping fine-tune the rules. Maybe that fine-tuning phase should have been explicitly separated.
-
I don't want to take any credit from @MarcusAureliu#s for his work with organizing the event. There was more to do than make teams. It was a bit unfortunate that I only joined the discussion later. Anyway, I believe that it wasn't already too late. The tier system wasn't yet finalized, so I thought that the suggested teams would have to be subject to further discussion (rather than letting someone grab the best teammates based on one person's opinion about player abilities). I felt that my suggestions were ignored when the first round was announced, but provided it was only intended as a test week, it wouldn't change much. It unfortunately made some so-far suggested teams commit to the suggestion. So in retrospect, starting the test week was probably the only wrong move. The announcement came late and our opponents didn't even show up, but the negative side effects persisted. My opinion is that we could really benefit more from balancing well, even if it required taking away some freedom of choice. I saw several people compare our situation with professional sport leagues, but I think this doesn't fit our situation at all. There are just too few really good players, which is the opposite you see in football leagues. Also, there is no custom of some kind of clans present in the community. Perhaps because the community is rather small. I don't really think that many players would cancel their participation just because they wanted to be with someone else. Meanwhile we already know that we have multiple players that can't play a good game (or any game) unless we change something.
-
Based on the games I saw yesterday, I'd need to increase my rating of @Issh. I considered that initially and only decided not to because he likes to embrace nubness, but I doubt he will do that in the tournament. Just for the record, yesterday he could get double the pop of a player rated almost two points higher. Now that the point difference among teams is increasing, it might be a good time to ask the lower ranked teams if they are OK to play like that. I think that @go2die has now put quite a lot of time into it. It might have little purpose if we do nothing with the data we got out of it. And since I'm a part of the lower ranked team, I personally vote for a rebalance.
-
Do you mean you won't engage any further provided you get the last word? Because your "reasonable opinion" might not be recognized as such by others. What exactly is "quality of life" in this context? I guess my life could be of a higher quality if I could just win every game without any skills. Anyway, even this final opinion of yours wasn't what we were starting with. At first it was like "any mod should be allowed because they are available to anyone", etc. I don't want to extend on this particular topic here either. I mostly only gave it as an example of how you take your opinion as the reasonable one and say you'd like to avoid drama. What if I told you that the rules were made to avoid any drama? Aren't you causing the drama now? I think that by suggesting to remove a rule that is accepted by most of the hosts and adding that "people cry too much", you are actually causing the drama.
-
Thanks for pointing that out. I realized I was doing that, but I was a bit tired from the lengthy discussion of yesterday, where even solid arguments didn't seem to help. That's why I decided not go my usual way anymore. Another reason is that there isn't really too much space for objective arguments in this case. The game will be a competition of skills in either way, we just have the right to decide what kind of skills it should test. I think that most people consider it to be unwanted when a key skill of the whole set is dancing, rather than team cooperation, picking good battles etc. You see I wasn't wrong with the "other people do it" quote. You are using this argument again here. So I understand that you wish to see a competition of automation mods and spam clicking. I just have different expectations and that's all. On the other hand, I feel very confident about my dancing skills, so I am not strictly against. I could probably be instantly rated higher too.
-
Wait, did that guy just dance off a melee attack? What a hacker!
-
Not a surprise that this is coming from someone who tried to advocate the use of cheating mods because "everyone can do it". Allowing dancing is such a bad idea that I'd almost agree to make it happen just to show how bad of an idea it is. There is a clear distinction between retreat dancing and spam clicking a unit in front of your army. Also I don't think it's fair to say that ValihrAnt might have problems with this rule. He knows better than that.
-
I think that @Dakara did an unexpectedly good rating job. If his rating is not copyrighted, I'd just say copy it and count it as mine. I first considered changing the rating of two or three players, but I realized that it's the stability of their play that matters. Some can grow really fast but won't fight great, some perform worse when rushed or with a less played civilizations, some play great but have little sense of the team, and others the opposite. I think that for example esu might become better pretty soon. He was a good teammate IIRC, only lacking some specific skills.
-
I really hoped that there would be some more strategy talk before the league starts. There have been a few more players that wanted to join and we could get more fun out of it if we made more and better teams first.
-
Sid Meiers Civilization VI Free for a Week
Boudica replied to Boudica's topic in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
I've just tried playing a game of Civilization VI and I've never been so bored. -
Hello guys, In case you missed the news, you can now get Civilization VI from Epic Games for free (till May 28). Go see this link and thank me later (or don't, I don't mind): https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/product/sid-meiers-civilization-vi/home Sincerely, Boudica
-
The main prize is a free lifetime subscription of 0 A.D. Online.
-
Maybe you could be our fourth player instead of Solooyo, who hasn't yet stated his preferences. I might prefer you because we play together more often. So we could be @Havran, @Boudica, @Unknown_Player and @go2die. Let's see, maybe we'll need to switch someone anyway for a better balance later.
-
Well, the suggestions have been constantly changing. As per the latest suggestion, @Havran, @Boudica, @Unknown_Player and @soloooy0 sounds possible to me.
-
Wait, the last information I got was that chrstgtr is gonna join the Spanish team. I haven't noticed anyone splitting Havran from me and I'd like us to be together. We sure could use one more good player though, so I'd like @Unknown_Player to join us if possible. Then we'd have one more slot, which might be taken by Vincentesk as suggested before. Anyway, I'm not sure if we still aren't too weak like that but we might be fine.
-
We played quite a few interesting games recently. It all started with some GG's with Chetnik that I wanted to upload. And then there was a nice collection of various troll strategies, @Issh even made a super cool animation out of one of the games. All those games have one thing in common though, which is that I haven't uploaded their replays here. Going back to look for all the fun games can be pretty hard. That's why I thought it could be a better idea to start from the most recent games and perhaps go back later. This particular game had quite a lot to offer. There were some raids, some big fights and later even several CC destructions. Definitely worth checking if you are a @ValihrAnt that just ran out of materials to use for his videos. BTW, it was fun watching one of the latest videos where ValihrAnt also recorded the observer chat. Sometimes the stuff we say isn't even that unfunny. I wish I had more of the chat history preserved. 2020-05-20_0001.zip
-
That doesn't sound like a bad idea to make the balance better unless chrstgtr is sad that you want to replace him. Also I'm not sure how good Vincentesk is to be able to tell about the balance. What do you mean, Vincentesk, I played all the evening yesterday.
-
To get back to the topic, our team suggestion of today was Boudica, chrstgtr, Havran, Rauls (alphabetical order). Not sure if all of the players really committed to this idea, but we'll see if anyone disagrees. The team name is yet something to be thought of.
-
I can't see how my comment could be interpreted as snarky, badosu. I understand that, with the rules as they were given, you just did was a good strategic decision. I just wanted to suggest that we better try to find a better system for making the teams first. I only used your team suggestion as an example of why it could be needed. There just aren't enough good players to make multiple teams with a similar strength. Your team has two players that are among the currently best in 1-vs.-1 games. Also when you look at the last league results, Unknown_Player is far from Tear 3 in team games at least. And you don't really compensate because your level isn't any lower.
-
And did you respect the granularity while forming your team? Because then the granularity must really have been wrong. Points could be a nice helper for the balancers when discussing the right teams. It might be a hard task to suggest well-balanced teams from a larger list of players, but it's for sure easier to do when we have the complete list of all available players. The tier rules can then be chosen so that we can let the greatest number of players join while keeping the balance good. I agree that it would be easier to to discuss some rating points assigned to each of the players. The final team creation could actually be automated. We could make a script that suggests teams that will have the most similar total player rating. If the generated teams won't seem OK, we could discuss if someone's rating needs an adjustment. I'll offer to help with the other part if we get to agree on the whole plan.
-
Actually, sorry for diverting from the rules now, but I am afraid we aren't getting far like this. How about just collecting the players interested in playing first, and later we can let an experienced balancer like PhyZic suggest good teams and discuss the balance. I mean, when I see the "eae am" team signing up like that, what is even the point in trying to include some lower tier players in the game? It could be better to wait and see how many players of each tier we'll have. Otherwise I can barely imagine how we could put together more like one or two teams that will be able to compete. It's like when we made the 2-vs.-2 league and ValihrAnt signed up with Feldfeld. The tier idea is an improvement for sure, but it's not really enough if you take a T1+++ together with two T2++ and one fake T3.
-
I'm sorry, I haven't yet read what this thread is about, but if you are asking whether I'd like to join the tournament, then my answer is a confident yes. Please someone take me in your team, thanks.
-
YES! Great idea, thanks for this thread! Haha, if these are the teams others agree with, then I'm all in! I mean, the suggestion doesn't seem very bad, but I'd tend to rate @faction02, @PhyZik and (if you excuse me) myself (like what, did you forget the last team league results?) better than several of you suggested. Of course, the results would show, but I prefer to say it here now, so that I can be all smart about it later (or delete it if I am wrong). Yes, please, put me with my favorite team players. And don't forget @Issh please, one of the best out there too IMHO.
