vinme

@Feldfeld i mean ppl clearly overplay the stronger civs and are generally highly unimaginative in their gameplay which makes sense because they cant afford to do otherwise as they are weak/incompetent in one way or another.I suppose that applies to pretty much everything even life itself.Humans rarely pop out high quality enough to be able to gain maximum results by being highly open minded .Wherever you look,wherever you go anyone doing anything even someone you admire has cut corners in a magnificent manner to compromise for their own incompetence.Briliance and perfection isnt real isnt admired isnt valued in human minds its not even an ideal image a dream a measure point for the philosophical final destination its so far away that the weakness that embodies a human or more percisely humans are the vessles of weakness themselves it resents even the theoretical possibility of Brilliance and perfection hates it more than all else and uses every vile trick to potray it as less than.It makes sure that humans dont even believe in its existence,give its name to accomplishments that are slightly less pathetic than most and that too purely by chance.Humans dont want briliance they wanna die in peace human greatest desire is to never be so darned* and unfortunate as to have to face the horrors of the potential and the theoretical.

hah! u read it also i thought putting this part separately in general with an accurate title would be better as some ppl might wanna read on this subject while not being interested in reading my reaction to valis video.

Anyone who thinks when seeing obvious stupid mistakes from someone that the player wasn’t intelligent enough to have thought of the issue should know that 99.9% of the time its just confusion from brain overload that causes the mistake. 0ad is a very intense,demanding game so it’s wouldn't be surprising that some days you could be much worse at playing than others. Even "good" players make insanely simple mistakes because of simple exaustion or low stamina(at that time)/brain juice. Maybe they feel tired that day(week’s ,month’s) or are feeling off and that’s an easy skill drop cause. It’s true that top 3-5 players are insanely competent physiologically in sustaining proper functioning for long periods of time in a stable manner but don’t think that everyone is like that. everyone doesn’t have same capabilities ,weaknesses or potential. For those stable ones their gameplay in several matches skill wise is extremely similar they can’t really play much better or much worse than their average skill level although even they can get really weakened significantly from getting sick or in any other way suffer anything that weakens you physically. These types off people are the best at reaching the top of 0ad. number one issue stopping people from improving in 0ad is physiology. yes it’s fun to think about 0ad strategies and other non-simple matters but what really matters for being a good player and nearly completely decides your skill is: physiology. Stamina 45%-self explanatory it just means endurance multitasking efficiency 22.5%-extremely low cost in stamina to be aware constantly, of many extremely simple variables. micro22.5%-reflexes in fighting and micromanaging basically anything that requires lots of clicks, timing or reflexes. then comes probably the (areal)awareness 5%- real time awareness of your future potential and theoretical plans: strategic building placement, enemy unit(s) theoretical position awareness based on units speed and last seen position, knowing all likely enemy’s future plan(s)(for example if they didn’t scout and they are a competent high rated player you know they won’t risk attacking a point that as far as they are concerned will be highly secure), mineral(s)/woodline(s) position awareness ect. key point awareness. (areal)awareness5% also includes the skills of "trapping" unit(s) with same speed units or slower, map control, woodline/working men positioning, attack planning, scouting, outposts, targeting enemy awareness(targeting enemy scouts/outposts). the % of relevant stats for a player might be mildly confusing but I think I wrote it quite clearly and it should be understandable .Of course not all pros are just good at those specific proportions for example Valihrant is highly reduced multitasking(10%+?) but insane micro his endurance is huge but slightly less than feld and borgs I’d guess 5%- less(5% of the borg/feld total stamina) although right now I’m sure his stamina is even larger than those 2s stamina as those 2 don’t play much recently. He is unmatched in micromanaging things and sustaining this insane micro use with much less stamina cost than anyone else in 0ad. Although you could argue that maybe he is just incorrectly using his stamina by exhausting himself with extremely costly micro abuse. In that case maybe his stamina is 50% larger than borg or felds and he’s just not using it wisely but I don’t think that’s the case people usually naturally intuitively lean in the most efficient direction as they progress and improve over time. You can tell while he plays he occasionally forgets houses ect. and during a game randomly keeps quickly turning to random usually multitasking tasks as if they were an enemy attack. An extremely high level multitasking player wouldn’t forget simple variables ever even in the most exhausted state as a high level multitasking player has such low multitasking stamina cost. An extremely high level multitasking player wouldn’t need to with such high speed/intensity manage his eco or adjust it as it would all come to him naturally. You can see in the way he thinks in commentary his style is really not about saving as much energy as possible with minimal micro/improvisation/high intensity and expending stamina in a calculated manner. Stuff like being aggressive, constant high intensity high harass often with small amount of cav exchanging your stamina for enemy’s stamina with the one with superior micro suffering far less in stamina loss but this has no other ulterior motive like a clear strategic plan towards victory) ect. The few cav often highly outnumbered by enemy woodline forces stands no chance of directly attacking the enemy or scaring enemy off the woodline making him lose position thru simple proportion of strength its simply human error exploitation based play not error of something relating to intelligence but of something simpler, micro. This isn’t multitasking as the tasks that are often optional but are still preferred by the micro type player. The tasks are too complex and frequent this is all conscious all on the surface of the mind at once functioning in conscious clarity aka micro. More like fighting or playing basketball 1 one 1 or a simple FPS? than lets say umm what preserves alot of capacity for a calculated use? a caveman hunter gatherer? I’m getting off point... There’s a strategy style of defense : defend ,progress with perfect security and look for an opening, an advantage to expend your saved capacity through and there’s a strategy style of offence : keep attacking and exhausting the opponent wait for HIM to make a mistake you can take advantage of to secure the victory offensive style. Of course most players fall in the middle.

ty for reading @Feldfeld this helps me pretend this wasnt a waste of time.i always do stupid @#$% when sleep deprived for example after i wrote this i went and on no nights sleep while carrying 10kg(measured later) of noteably raw chicken breast,prosciutto,vienna sausages and bunch of other groceries walked around 10-12 km uphill on a mountain with at first it being extremely hot and sunny and after that it being extremely cold and my throat hurts a bit rn.All this instead of taking the taxi after which i was very tired and went to sleep.I know i took thoes from the supermarket at around 10-11 am but idk when i came back home probably around 3-4am so 4-6 hours total of no refrigeration for thoes produce.i put the chicken breast in the freezer immediately uppon arival i am currently eating a prociutto sandwich with tomato and mayo tastes fine so far.my biggest concern is the chicken breast and sausages possibly being expired costing me around 16$ in damages.I remain hopeful that its fine and that covered sealed enviornment ina bag all together of 5kg per bag allowed the produce to retain a lower temprature for a larger epriod of time and therefore nothing has spoiled but im still too scared to check the freezer.

.

link to valis video: Final version. This was supposed to be a random rant turned too long by me but it changed into something different. I spent some time to clean it up well grammatically and in terms of coherence. This should very easy to understand i removed 99% of all of the grammatical errors and all the incoherent or hard to understand parts have been removed or fixed. I also separated the sentences or groups of sentences by either general theme or just for simply making the parts maybe difficult to some to grasp have separations per sentence so you can think about and see each sentence more easily. DISCLAIMER!: I understand that just because you don’t follow these things doesn’t mean you don’t know them I know 0ad is mainly a sport about mental endurance ,multitasking, reflexes/micro and stability 0ad skill is very mildly related to the intellectual capabilities of a player. mentions not scouting (mortal ,stupid easily game ending ,irresponsible)mistake <3 mentions wood food balance fix basic idea (send units to lacking res from floating res) mentions too many units on wood line <3 don’t overload wood line to reduce units wasting time from bumping into each other and also the eventual walk/idle time caused by moving to the other woodline with so many units. depending on woodline size start a new one based on woodline size/men on that line. I guess that needs intuition. Here’s an easy to remember general rule of thumb: small woodline : get new storehouse placed on a different woodline for future woodcutters to walk to when spawned when unit count on that patch=20-25 med/large=25-30 and try to keep units on a single woodline for as long as possible. Do that so they don’t waste eco while walking to new one. Of course in extreme cases u might want to only keep 10-15 on woodline or even up to 45 but place 2 separate storehouses for the huge woodline u got 45 men on. prevent issues by following the heuristic above. mentions wood tech for nubz try your best to get the wood tech when you have between 20-25 units on wood. for experienced players from what I recall do your best to time getting the tech so that when its ready around 23 units are on wood. for food 6 farms for nubz and for experienced around when your going to have 6 farms or later. later is fine just get before placing the 7th farm) mentions "ego p2-ing" <3 which means p2-ing just to tell yourself that you p2-d at 100-120 pop and thinking like this is a very nub idea. pretty much almost literally only reason you p2 in the first place is that at around 100-110 pop or something approximating that spending the insane cost of 1000 food/wood to unlock the costly but very important p2 15% eco techs for food and wood is necessary for optimal eco development. you should be able to instantly get all techs you spent 1k for the simple privilege to unlock upon reaching p2. otherwise extremely wasteful to p2. if you messed up and can’t afford to do what’s mentioned above: balance out food/wood as fast as possible to p2 while keeping some wood/food to keep barrack(s)/cc active. Its wasteful to keep production buildings empty. In a standard build you need to float 550 wood and 200 metal so that upon reaching p2 you can get the food/wood upgrades asap. There are exceptions to this for example it’s often not worth getting food upgrade when pto because 25 food costing men so you need less farms. Less farms means less advantage gained from % increase of total unit productivity which makes it not worth it as since 200 wood 50 metal is worth it for 30 women on farms 300 wood 150 metal isn’t worth it for the same amount and you very likely won’t get more than 6 farms with your main solider unit costing half the food. Logically you’ll probably use a bit more than half the farms you’d normally use with the bit more being used for women and more food costing units you train in minor numbers. this is a relevant general rule of thumb everything is situational and can change based on various unique factors that occur during every match. Other important reasons to p2 exist, mainly if you are going to do a large rush it’s great to match phasing up to engaging the enemy as the 20%+ hp advantage added with unlocking the techs, more territory and more unlocked buildings can be a huge motivator which can easily allow you to p2 even at as insane pops as 60,70. mentions barrack overload one of the ways to balance eco when you already nubbed overdoing wood/stone is by slightly overdoing barracks but of course not good to be in that spot but it’s a good improvisation option (jc and wendy overdid too much though even with gauls needing to get more barracks for optimal eco because cheaper than normal barracks both build time and cost wise) mentions rotating buildings for efficiency (important should be auto in your mind) repeatedly cries about wood walk time reducing efficiency of like 20-30 units by 2x/3x XD talks about mine storehouse count there’s a square collision point on metal and stone in relation to the animation orientation that you can memorize if you are insane. Pay attention to that by looking at the shape of the collision line of your units mining and use that for placing the second and the third storehouse. if necessary I’d say eventual 2 per mineral is a must or 2-3 total if some storehouses are used by both metal and stone miners.do this for max efficiency especially if getting p3 techs for the minerals. Potentially you could place up to even 4 storehouses per mineral maybe this is viable when you are p3 with all wood techs with wood being cheap and want to maximize mine efficiency with this insane fashion in this case each storehouse would accommodate 8 units with virtually no bumping into each other issue. If you do the 4 storehouse strategy get 1 woman per 7 men so 1 woman in each of the 4 batches of 8 to perfect the mine rate. mentions proper fort positioning relevant AsF easy rule to follow is if your placing on risky spot get 1-3 towers like a defensive frame way ahead of fort placement spot first so you secure it. If you get on medium risk spot you can get outpost with vision upfront or put few units way ahead to just patrol around where enemy might come from to deny your fort. these units can be ranged infantry not necessarily cav. Place outposts that have vision tech at the obvious potential enemy attack line spots. Scouting literally all the time throughout the game so you can tell how many forts enemy has, the weak spots the enemy has ect. so you can predict enemy actions like a siege attack you can counter with prepped anti ram. This is extremely underrated. underdoing late game barracks also exposes you to significant risks from small attacks. You could’ve dealt with these attacks with extreme ease had you have had 7 or even more barracks at that time with 7 barracks you can make 14 cav in like 20 sec enough to counter several rams assuming they are alone or other siege guaranteed while with having 3 barracks you will never be in time. That’s assuming you had outposts and saw them coming. mentions wounded unit retreat to heal. Nice! I have "O" set pretty low like below 40% like 33% so you can select really wounded units without overdoing it. cata area dmg is insanely op. Cata cost per dps vs mass of units if an infantryman rate is "x" cata rate could be 10x or even 15x especially vs ranged inf and you can target ranged inf behind mele because you have to micro each attack with shift click anyway with cat as cat target buildings automatically. Catapults are far more op than bolts which would probably be 5x-8x or something but bolts are faster in movement and unload of course. You can also snipe ele/heroes to neutralize heroes early on during a fight or take out enemy crush dmg unit significantly crippling enemy capacity and removal of elephants allows for easier use of units weak to crush damage which deal crush damage as elephants are extremely resilient vs crush damage and deal a lot of crush damage. Anyone who thinks when seeing obvious stupid mistakes from someone that the player wasn’t intelligent enough to have thought of the issue should know that 99.9% of the time its just confusion from brain overload that causes the mistake. 0ad is a very intense game so it’s not surprising that some days you are much worse at playing than others. Even "good" players make insane mistakes because of simply low stamina(at that time)/brain juice. Maybe they feel tired that day(week’s ,month’s) or are feeling off and that’s an easy to cause skill drop cause. It’s true that top 3-5 players are insanely stable and competent physiologically in sustaining proper functioning for long periods of time in a stable manner but don’t think that everyone is like that. It’s a big mistake to assume that everyone functions in the same way you do. It is also extremely self centered and arrogant to think so. everyone doesn’t have same capacities ,weaknesses or potential. For those stable ones their gameplay in several matches skill wise is extremely similar they can’t really play much better or much worse than their average skill level although even they can get really weakened significantly from getting sick or in any other way suffer anything that weakens you physically. These types off people are the best at reaching the top of 0ad. number one issue stopping people from improving in 0ad is physiology. yes it’s fun to think of 0ad strategies and non-simple matters but what really matters for being a good player and nearly practically completely decides your skill is: physiology. Stamina 45%-self explanatory multitasking efficiency 22.5%-extremely low cost in stamina to be aware constantly, of many extremely simple variables. micro22.5%-reflexes in fighting and micromanaging basically anything that requires lots of clicks, timing or reflexes. then comes probably the (areal)awareness 5%- real time awareness of your future potential and theoretical plans: strategic building placement, enemy unit(s) theoretical position awareness based on units speed and last seen position, knowing all likely enemy’s future plan(s)(for example if they didn’t scout and they are a competent high rated player you know they won’t risk attacking a point that as far as they are concerned will be highly secure), mineral(s)/woodline(s) position awareness ect. key point awareness. (areal)awareness5% also includes the skills of "trapping" unit(s) with same speed units or slower, map control, woodline/working men positioning, attack planning, scouting, outposts, targeting enemy awareness(targeting enemy scouts/outposts). the % of relevant stats for a player might be mildly confusing but I think I wrote it quite clearly and it should be understandable .Of course not all pros are just good at those specific proportions for example Valihrant is highly reduced multitasking(10%+?) but insane micro his endurance is huge but slightly less than feld and borgs I’d guess 5%- less(5% of the borg/feld total stamina) although right now I’m sure his stamina is even larger than those 2s stamina as those 2 don’t play much recently. He is unmatched in micromanaging things and sustaining this insane micro use with much less stamina cost than anyone else in 0ad. Although you could argue that maybe he is just incorrectly using his stamina by exhausting himself with extremely costly micro abuse. In that case maybe his stamina is 50% larger than borg or felds and he’s just not using it wisely but I don’t think that’s the case people usually naturally intuitively lean in the most efficient direction as they progress and improve over time. You can tell while he plays he occasionally forgets houses ect. and during a game randomly keeps quickly turning to random usually multitasking tasks as if they were an enemy attack. An extremely high level multitasking player wouldn’t forget simple variables ever even in the most exhausted state as a high level multitasking player has such low multitasking stamina cost. An extremely high level multitasking player wouldn’t need to with such high speed/intensity manage his eco or adjust it as it would all come to him naturally. You can see in the way he thinks in commentary his style is really not about saving as much energy as possible with minimal micro/improvisation/high intensity and expending stamina in a calculated manner. Stuff like being aggressive, constant high intensity high harass often with small amount of cav exchanging your stamina for enemy’s stamina with the one with superior micro suffering far less in stamina loss but this has no other ulterior motive like a clear strategic plan towards victory) ect. The few cav often highly outnumbered by enemy woodline forces stands no chance of directly attacking the enemy or scaring enemy off the woodline making him lose position thru simple proportion of strength its simply human error based play not error of something relating to intelligence but of something simpler, micro. This isn’t multitasking as the tasks that are often optional but are still preferred. The tasks are too complex and frequent this is all conscious all on the surface of the mind at once functioning in conscious clarity aka micro. More like fighting or playing basketball 1 one 1 or a primitive FPS? than lets say umm what preserves alot of capacity for a calculated use? a caveman hunter gatherer? I’m getting off point... There’s a strategy style of defense : defend ,progress with perfect security and look for an opening, an advantage to expend your saved capacity through and there’s a strategy style of offence : keep attacking and exhausting the opponent wait for HIM to make a mistake you can take advantage of to secure the victory offensive style. Of course most players fall in the middle. If i get a total of 5$ worth donated here i'll write a 500 words of content relating to something interesting in 0ad in same or superior quality to this essay. For any requests also PM me here on forums. When you send an amount send a wierdly specific amount > pm me the amount and suggest a topic which i might pick based on donated amount and the subject suggested. Monero - 84iSSAx1H6mWG7z49sgcBe7ZWfLHoQp4TCMcpnq94KZpGPKqRehMZ8LeKMpADRaiCEMSJKmcueLU1HLtPTqu6nDQRQDNU9o Bitcoin - bc1qtgl8mr6f6fcdgj5x92vd37jhvceft7e4j06g3d

that is all

what rating clacifies a player for a "medal"? im gonna say 2200(actual rating)+ for gold theres huge difference between 1700,1800,1900 but for some reason im guessing anyone above 1700 would be considered silver? or is it 1600?

pto players enlighten me on this.how am i wrong on this? i dont play pto but from what i know free buildings give advantage in eco but maybe that isnt that relevant. my best guess here is im underestimating free building advanatage.otherwise virtually identical. id prefer selucids tbh from just looking at it for 2 min.@superposition colony spam mapcontroll strat should work way better with selucids right? its pretty obvious for seleucids structure tree that the colony spam mapcontroll strat is a must with getting merc upgrade and spamming pike cav and some jav cav,getting hero and 20% cav hp at p3. never seen anyone do this tho.

i might try it but then again it took me like 10 days to set up the pc at the new place..i didnt even have anything to do just walking around looking at the sky..lyingdown of sofas ..i wouldnt bet on it but seems great tho!

yes

we(good players) can give a much better ballpark rn for rank win/loss amounts idk what its based on but still its wrong rn :p. i suggest making it so that beating a below 250-275 rated than you would give 0 points and to balance winning as 250-275 less rated would give zero or near zero points as well to balance the cost/profit for higher ranked party.also i suggest rising the rating you get when you win vs someone who is same rated as you so cost/profit wise by which i mean playing higher rated is a cost(disadvantage) and lower rated is profit(advantage) (then balanced out by higher/lower rating win/loss) basically incentivize less rated games with large rating difference betwen players so a player will be incentivized to not play higher rated player or lower rated player rated becasue there will be minimal rating exchange and players will be incentivized to play their own level players which will make game more fun for everyone,remove the fake rating farming possibility period and generally balance out the ratings. what do YOU think?

every1 who doesnt hate black ppl already knows this thoes who do im sure wont care for the message. what is saying "black lives matter" supposed to accomplish?

i mean accuracy ect. i remember i asked about production rates,tower ranges a lot of misinformation in the game so was wondering where i can see the actual info not only for units but for any other stuff i or anyone also curious who reads this thread might wanna read?

win/loss would be irrelevant only rating would matter. list of opponents wise i try to play vs as high rated opponents as possible im 99% sure i have always refused playing anyone below 150 rated than me. rn i try not to play any1 less than 100 ratings lower than me. also i play too many times when i wasnt feeling good ect so that adds to the number of total games and the number of total losses.

still nothing compared to @borg- s 1153 total rated games but 500 still above average.ironically if i played far less rated games like 300-400 id be much higher rated XD.

@Marcus Aurelius im not participating as ive said b4. ive stopped following the whole thing tbh. good luck tho hope it goes well.

1v1 can properly show a players actual SKILL in 0ad as it shows how good a player is at 0ad period .eco military endurance and every other vital but irrelevant in in of itself stat perfectly balanced out by this magical formula that we call actually playing the fucing game and seeing results. it does not show the players efficiency on factors that only come in team games such as but not limited to: 1.being a team player(giving res for various reasons,communicating,coordinating attacks ect) 2.the map being different in team games the edge players are much closer for example in tgs(played mainland normal) compared to standard mainland played small(or other maps that r becoming more mainstream for 1v1 like wrench,cross gr8 maps btw)that have similar distances to small mainland and the inside players being i guess even further from closest enemies than a med size mainland 1v1) 3.the game mechanic completely changes in a TG as you cannot as successfully counter a rush by making towers,making more men as enemy can just leave and attack your adjacent ally leaving you wasting a lot of res your and your teams only option is to counterattack that enemy roughly speaking.since edge players are close lower distance= higher incentive for early on aggression. 4.cav have a lot more value in tgs as mobility= you can move to target and change targets much quicker).cavrushes have more power in tgs as you can change targets if one spends enough on prevention. making a "tg elo" is very difficult because stats don't necessarily correlate with anything.someone might have 1/5KD but it only happened because ally was taking all the beating.this obvious issues are very well understood by all of the players.i think i read some thread where someone made a tg elo it took bunch of tgs and used some formula i cant recall. i suppose averaging out tg wins/losses and also taking into account total team power based on something like my formula can somehow show someones tg skill as you need another factor(actual rating being a great one) to in relation to it show tg skill. either way we shouldn't wanna balance teams based on a tg skill taken into account as that's what we want the competition to be in i'm hoping.the whole point of this is to just make sure no op teams are formed by the factor of just brute skill and to encourage anything that affects team skill to lead to success.if we take into account tg skill when balancing then we are punishing the tg skilled players.yes we want even(er) matches but we also want a goal for all the teams to strive for and for a winner to have VALUE as they have accomplished something that isn't arbitrary this something being their superior skill in team playing(not in pure 0ad skill which i'm trying to eliminate with these methods i'm proposing) you are not seeing the full picture or even the point of what i'm trying to do. btw tell me why my concept is wrong. id wanna take out actual 0ad skill out of the equation to make this a "team tournament" that rewards best "teams" in team skill.

i was thinking 1000 is a good level to cut of from the rating as anyone below 1000 doesn't even know how the game works.but maybe we should go even lower i think there isn't enough difference in points tho maybe for 1000-1200 compared to each other so 2 1100 would easily beat a 1200 i'm assuming so maybe we should cut off a bit less so like 800 so that way does this work? so lets compare same(in this case an 1100=3 points 1200=4) i'm very unfamiliar with lower rated player levels in relation to each other especially does 4 1100 = 3 1200 ? i think it does i guess i'm guessing most optimal level is 800-1000 cutoff best. if we don't cut off anything at all then there's an obvious problem like stockfish doesn't=2 1000 s def later on points represent the actual relevant ratings i was thinking maybe we add a flat point so every player starts with 1 point and then they get added based on original 1000type points system.for example borg(i'm guessing Vrating will be 2300) would get 14 points(out of 24 as TPA will rise by 4 if this is added) as 1+ (2300-1000)=14 this would fix the issue with ratings just being nonlinear at the very least at the beggining and fix the graph. def questionable if 1900 = 1300 for example id bet on the 1900 and with this system 1300s are worth more. so maybe you get 1 point (or more) flat at start and every 100 ratings after a certain high level point like 1800= 2 or something

i'm thinking lets make it mandatory for every participant to get a Vrating and then just set up the balance based on that. if we subtract 1000 from the players rating (example 1600-1000=600) and divide that by 100 (600/100=6) we can get the points worth for the player. cant get negative scores so anyone below 1000 will be a 0 point player the issues though are the following: 1:what would you want to be the average rating of all players per team? 2:the ratings aren't necessarily linearly balanced. do for example 2 1500's = 1 2000 ? 2 1100= 1 1200 ? 3 1300= 1 1900 ? tbh it often works good enough now that i look at it. main factors to consider are: 1:what to subtract from the base Vrating to make ratings linearly balanced and if its not possible to do this although i'm guessing it is then we should use some other formula. like for example 1000-1300 each 100 ratings = 2 points and 1600-2500 each 100 rating= 2 points .something like this might work. 2: what do you want an average rating of a tournament team to be? 1500? 1400? 1300? i'm guessing its best to have something average even low enough so many "good" players cant get together so that everyone can more easily get included so that teams will have to have some weaker players as well. if you think this is a horrible idea as then tournament will be filled with unskilled players and good players will be then id highly recommend setting the average to 1500-1700. as you can see math can be done.it'll be simple math.everything seems to fit together decently after we decide.for example if we want a team average of a 1500 and we have decided that the ratings are linearly balanced then we can multiply 4 by the number of points that 1500 converts to(lets say -1000 was accurate as well) so (1500-1000)/100=5 and 5*4=20 this gives us the total points per team. for 3v3s and 2v2s we will have to divide total points in half or multiply by 3/4 to get the 2v2 and 3v3 TPA 15 and 10 respectively.

thats true @MarcusAureliu#s smaller the time bracket less people will play! that is what you said and you are 100% correct but consider THIS.for the EXACT same reason that less ppl will play in bracket matches..for the exact same reason you will have shitton of issues with your matchups. you cant eat the cake and have it too. if you make 2 tournaments or more you can get all of the market as ive mentioned in my long comment. do polar opposites and then arrange a 1v1(but lets not even consider that as then both tournaments need equal players and that wont be likely) with the champs if you want. brackets have more reasons other than only letting players who are free then play.in option 1 they also only let players who have enough time so to agree to a matchup play.very important as well. edit:polar opposite example 12 am-6pm 12pm-6am

i'm genuinely trying to help.badosu pls read my post XD i was so sleep deprived took me hour and a half to put together itll take 5 min to read.looks long cuz quotes and skipped lines

i mean any just taped together design will work but if you want max outreach dont try to take everything at once. pick a time bracket from most popular 0ad playing stats (idk if thoes exist if not ask around when are most ppl around) and do option 1 on it. solves all the problems. im assuming you didnt read my thing because you thought it was too long but i mention there that even 1v1s have significant issues with matchups and such especially in no restrictions/conditions tournaments let alone teamgames even 2v2 increases that problem 4 FUCVVING times because first 1 player has to agree to another then third has to agree to these 2 and then fourth has to agree to these 3. like if 1v1 working without any restrictions average chance was lets say 60-70% then 60/4= 15% it wont work. please consider adding restrictions.

trust me on this you dont wanna rely on players good will. a large amount of games will get messed up and youll have alot of stuff to deal with. really really bad idea. its been done b4. ive explained alternatives.making someone from japan play someone from USA is a really bad idea. it causes all sorts of issues . you NEED time brackets now choosing option 1 i wrote about or option 2 is the question tbh. i recommend option 1 its faster

@Marcus Aurelius check out my post in the Vrating . as for making the proper balanced tier list we can use the same method i used in my Vrating. a vote anyone can give their idea on the new thread you should make (since you had the original idea) just make ppl write their opinions based on the 18(was 12)total points for 4v4 system make them do it based on ranks like 1300-1500 example. id write my example too.it wont be too complicated to make everything balanced its pretty clear to most people how player levels relate to each other i raised to 18 to make it easier to do. as we def dont want 2 of the gold tier guys to be in the same team.but also if in 2v2 where point levels are 9 total in this case it means if lets say feld and 3 others were in a team and then 2 left and feld and 1 other person had to play then they might not fit because of the imbalance with the points issue(lets say feld is 8 but def should be 9) id say its fair tho to let feld play alone vs lets say 2 1400s or something or whatever makes up 9 points.with 0 point payer feld could have an ally even. worst case some will go under it but this will be an even more fun thing to add as now team leaders have to find proper level players for every scenario to max their chances so instead of 8/9 they use 9/9 there should be 0 point rateds too tho below 1200 or something if you allow that level.