vinme

From today on ill start this thread for helping out people who set up tournaments or for anyone else who needs accurate description of players ratings rating. here are the rules: to become a judge you must meet the following requirements: must have an in game rating of over 1300 must be a consistent player who is aware of at least some of the players current skill. 1300+ players vote counts as 1 1500+vote counts as 2 1800+vote counts as 3 2000+ vote counts as 5 if you wanna be a judge write "i want to be a judge" in the comments if your reply gets more sad replies than happy reacts you are not a judge if it has more happy reacts you are a judge. you need at least 1 happy react even id give that if i see it you cant give it to yourself. to request a Vrating vote for yourself or anyone else these rules must be met: the requested player must be at least 1300+ as most 1300+ players who are the judges cant be aware of any ones skill who is below 1300 as they don't play together often. type in "i believe x players true rating is y" and give it a thumbs up wait for reactions to your comment.anyone can vote and anyone in need of this data can analyze it as they wish but Vrating will be only decided by the judges. to vote if you agree with one of the statement react with "thumbs up" do not react with thumbs up to more than one statement. if you disagree with the statement make a reply stating "no x players true rating is z" and give it a thumbs up. Please keep this thread clean of anything but what i have written you are allowed to write and if you want to post anything relating to this make a separate thread. judges in game rating will be overruled if they get a superior or inferior Vrating at least 10 points must be earned by a statement for it to be considered true.if 2 statements are evenly rated then that player will be rated x-y for example 1700-1800. if total reactions to a players rating amount to 10 then average of those statements and gets rounded down to the lower rating as 1400 is considered anyone between 1400-1499 average is calculated in relation to each statements thumbs up for example 6 thumbs up to 1500 and 4 thumb up to 1400 would be rounded down to 1400. if the majority voted statement reaches 10 or more thumbs up then it is absolute and any other statement will be irrelevant. judges cannot vote for their own ratings. ill try to keep up and list all the judges here(but if i miss some you can still see from their applications and reactions below) to become a judge judges:

ok im @#$% ed up rn ill be fine eventually i guess but not today rn im barely absorbing information so bear with me pweasu i missed some stuff forsure. i think its a great idea to do team tournaments, option of choosing different tgs (2v2 3v3) if some player is absent(which will happen several times for sure) seems like it adds more wiggle room before the @#$% hits the fan but it does fuc over the players who wont get to play becuz of this worthy sacrifice tho atleat the tournament goes on.do different total point allowance per tg type so if 4v4 total 10 points allowed per team then 2v2 total 5 id say thats an ez solution. the core part of your idea with the rating system to make the teams evenly matched for more challenging interesting matches is really really good.if not 4v4 make team pick their players for that round AFTER civs are banned so doenst seem unfair to kick random players but more based on who plays avalible civs best with rome iber and tier 1 civs(from valis video) being chosen most often (altho wont be many options usually id assume with the points system ud just wanna fill it up).perhaps raise banned civs up to 3 to make things even more interesting altho maybe not. lets not waste random players times and lets not allow them (possibly another) job that they dont get paid for.(communism is evil,it breeds corruption as it deservedly should(stupid commies get what they fucing deserve),absolute authority or anything that gives any advantage in power/status to people based on some rough sketch that the general population would find appealing without detailed reasoning on as many things as possible attracts parasites with inferiority complexes charity is fundamentally immoral insofar as you are ignoring the laws of human nature and ignoring reality is delusion delusion causes sickest awful things. just saying its an immoral way to think).its not necessary to have ppl rated by @PhyZik either ->_-> or is it @PhyZic. anyway dictatorship with phyzix is not good at all (altho arguably a dictatorial society is the theoretically only perfect one but solely dependent on who is the dictator so dont think im dissing dictatorships).im getting off point..ill make a thread with a system in place that feeds upon itself for electing judges and judging players to give them "their V(inme)rating aka true rating.i require no acceptance right now for it as when i do it you will see its design and all come on board .phyzir's extreme accuracy system is unnecessarily wierdly designed (im not even gonna mention the players balance in there -_-) see my plan on forum when i upload it ill call it "Vrating true player rating revealing system" or something with "Vrating" in it itll be classifying players based on actual rating(example 1300,1400 ect) not some wierd new language then you can decide what to do with that it should be really useful for these things since rating can often but not usually be inaccurately depicting players skill level. VERY IMPORTANT: its good to be using an universal(or any specified) time that you already set but i still recommend really putting in effort into this part.most important thing you must do is make sure to minimize issues getting in the way of the matches being completed every round. by 19:00 what do you mean? specifically then everyone has to play or agree otherwise so an excuse to ban both teams if they cant agree as ull say "well u shouldve played at 19:00? thats not a good way to do it as thats a completely worthless thing to mention as its 1 specific time that id guess most(like 90% maybe even) teams wont even be compatible with and players will be signing up in hopes of setting their own time then players will have to be dealing with the same old issue of arranging the games thats already a supreme @#$% show with 1v1 tournaments as time zones(sleep), work ect(even with corona many have stuff to do) most players have less than 6-8 hours of optional play time available a day and theres a great chance that those times dont overlap for plenty of players IN 1V1's let alone in tgs where if you were to go with your plan you'd create a logistics @#$% show imagine at least 4 players have to agree on a same time now not 2 so its 6 times as hard as hard for 2v2 as it is for a 1v1 let alone more.1 week WILL NOT be enough for this idk what will anyway bad idea period. im assuming most teams wont be able to do any 4v4s or 3v3s maybe some 2v2s might work but tournament would be ruined youd just be rewarding teams with players with more free time and better time zones as they can get more points(0ad tournament? more like tournament for most free time and thats why as i wrote on stockfishes rant "i blame stockfish" altho im assuming highly incoherently(sry) from what i recall and i might not remember well (my past self prob knew better so trust that source over this(correction..i re read my rant and i dont think i wrote even half of what i remember wanting to write in there and rest was very incoherent)). TLDR: you have 2 options to manage this from what i recall option 1: set a time bracket 6 hours or less(yes many wont make it but make another one opposite from this one so others can play). preferably based on a timezone out of where most 0ad players are from and add several requirements for application for the tournament that i will list below.lets say you do 6 hour open time bracket tournament say 2pm-8pm window. now this is a great method because it also reduces the total amount of days you need per round.you wont need 1 whole week to complete the rounds. how id set the conditions as an example: condition :THE TEAM must have free available time of at least 3 hours per day and at least 12 hours total sum of time in the 3 days within this time bracket. for example some team might have 2-5pm for 2 days and 2-8pm for 1 day total 12 at least 3 per day. you will match up teams based on their time availability.very unlikely that there will be teams you cant match up if there is 2 players you cant match up then you can improvise by asking people on forums for flexibility with time(ofc more you raise the conditions less likely it is for some teams to not get matched up)but extremely unlikely with my conditions above.also i just realized since the teams are evened out by your great points idea you dont even have to match them up yourself! this is great you can just let teams find opponents to match up with this way no work for you they will find their opponents till everyone available goes away.yes it wont be perfect with ppl having preferences to fight their nemesis..es and many players with a lot of available time who shouldve matched with someone who only has time they can match up with(very unlikely this happens like 1% maybe) will choose some other team. but heres where the improvising comes in if this happens youll have to manually figure out a way to fit them in maybe change matchups if that helps ask for teams if they have some extra time available but since even amount of teams will have no opponent(prob 2) consider disqualifying them if they cant arrange a game.(yes its unfair because its based on luck but its extraordinarily unlikely that they first get left out and then cant find a matchup even outside their stated hours for 6 total days as youll give them an option to find time to matchup even during round 2 as long as the winner can matchup with the second round available unmatched enemys hours on the last day enemy has privliges tho and his hours have to be used or the other team is disqualified ofc enemy can be polite and try to be more flexible. 1 day matchup/rest day after every round btw. if the team later on refuses to play within the time bracket they have offered they lose the round automatically ofc if both teams wanna play on different times of both of their avalible time for some wierd reason you flip a coin for them. you repeat this for every round. this option is good for quick tournaments but has mild flaws and risks that it makes up for with simplicity and fast paced system. option 2:set a time bracket 12 hours or so and then make teams have like 2 hours free time within 14 hours each day(dont make them specify on the bracket like 6-8 or somehthing jsut tell them that the amount has to be within the bracket) with total of average 3 hours per day for 2 weeks or something like that so you know they have free timeand over 8 hours a day wont count lets say altho im assuming most matchups wont happen with times overlaping . then have a long @#$% matchup time maybe week and a half where everyone agrees on a matchup of round 1 and all other theoretical rounds so no one is left behind.in this option everyone must agree with every future opponent. easier with your evening out system as with 1v1 it wouldnt be fair to allow players to choose each other as many good players can choose weaker players to advance more easily ect with 1v1 i would allow players who couldnt agree even after trying hard to reenter the random shuffle given enough others are in it for randomness so they roll someone else.but with your system it works tho. so if team 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 are in a tournament with 1 2 matched up 3 4 matched up 5 6 matched up and 8 7 matched up for round 1 they all have to agree with 1 other matched up pair and set a time and same with every other future round as well so lets say 3 4 guys agree with 5 6 guys with 3 agreeing with 5 ,6 and so on so literally all rounds 4 for 16 teams 3 for 8 teams ect will be filled in so there is literally no way in this method for things to go wrong after the tournament begins. things go wrong by ppl never agreeing fully as there is so much to plan and many will have not alot of time but eventually within week and a half hopefully it completely maps out solid and everything will be set. option 2 gives advantage in making larger time bracket flexibility you can even remove mandatory time availability per day but i dont recommend,total time needed to gather players and then start is much harder here because of lax rules but with guaranteed map of everything it wont have any issues whatsoever when it starts. much slower but much more secure and a lot more players can get in it as there arent as many conditions as in option 1.maybe good for huge tournaments with 64+ players as more room for error in those and you wont wanna resort to pausing the tournament for players to catch up ect. also if you have lets say odd number of teams in finals like you dont wanna do a factor of 2 amount of games you can figure stuff out with odd final numbers you get like with 20,26 ect where you might get 3,5 players just make everyone play 2 other players(or teams).for example with 5 teams draw is extremely unlikely with everyone getting 1 point.if it happens just repeat again. more likely is only 1 getting 2 points or 2 getting 2 points.either it ends in 1 round or you make the 2 2 pointers play eachother.if this is confusing draw a circle and put 5 dots on it then put arrows connecting adjacent dots so you see who plays who. then put 1 2 or 0 on one dot and see what possibilities you can fill in for the rest. very very unlikely for this to draw but if it does no biggie just re. teammates shouldn't be allowed to spec for obvious security reasons.preferably nobody should spec but if both teams agree to let someone spec then let them spec whats the problem? ofc even if 1 player wants spec(s) out for whatever reason be it lag,annoying messages or mere existence of someone watching then specs should be kicked. so who decides which it is? im really hoping your not planning on making each matchup 5 games. maybe let each team pick 1 if your gonna have more than 1 game.both can pick same map then it goes twice.or just have 1 game per matchup id recommend to make things simpler.or even 1 different map per round. if anyone wants to give me a payment for writing this it would give me an incentive to do more stuff like this. bitcoin: bc1qr5kl85x0d6cu30ax7l4h09nlp7zv9dzcceggcu monero: 8AhJ5i8kq9RBoJqvtDbgbibWypw652Adg9bghGgxm4D48JVZaU4zCsvjQ3N7DFn28X84Y3icPCrXCLxBbqPpGGqYEfTMPPY every dollars worth gives me 1 more can of coconut milk .i'm drinking too much of that stuff each one has 250 calories.i drink 2 cans a day average every 4 dollars worth gives me 4 dollars. every 10 dollars gives me 1 600 gram steak cooked either rare or medium rare with some garlic butter maybe def with mashed potatoes or spinach or some side like that and eggs if i'm still hungry after that don"t send more than that because i don't know what to do with it and you'll only stress me out with the extra responsibility.more stress>less new stuff so don't do it if you want me to do more of these.

do do do

mentioning the 2$ | transparency over 9000 respeccability 100 *not a typo so what 0ad has only 800 euros? sad

idk for last 5 mutes i got it was me making a typo and accidentally spelling a nono word. just wondering how long this mute will last. anyone know? usually it was 1 day

i wanted to do one forawhile but if i do it itll be a paid tournament. pay to enroll and top 3 get rewards something like 10,5,3 proportions

i have pms with dakara in saying my avalible scedule and such ect. so im not worried about my specific match.im complaining over the bigger picture. also everything you write is incoherent.ive been trying to scedule a time all this time. and as expected its 27 th and 6 out of 16 matches doesnt have a result yet.

like my post sadbow i did well.btw the format id use for my paid tournaments would be the time bracket one (12 hours) with pre-agreed times between players with 1 hour 20min designated per game just to be safe. if 3 games per match (i like the 3 map option all good maps) then 5 hours total time players must make free btu itll never last that long.if someone has no time then they forfeit unless the other player is so kind as to reschedule.after each game a 15 min optional break(added to total game time as extra).

my post way waay cooler and more informative ->_->. also "might be able to still paly the game? wdym @badosu

to start off all of this applies only if u ppl wanna do things properly and without any issues. @Stockfish maybe next time u host a tournament use time based charts or brackets. a complex version of this would be to require every enrolling player to provide a time chart for the following days of the tournament when they can make time to play. you will set specific limitations maybe such as "at least X amount of time per day" "at least x amount of time total" for the allowance to enroll in the tournament. nobody who only has 2 hours total of free time for the tournament in all 3 days should be allowed to enter . then you put this stats into some program that you either have to find or make. or you can do it manually on a piece of paper.to find overlapping times of all players and figure out based on this who plays who on the first round and then when the first round is over do the same system for the second round. now this will likely work 90% of the time or something. but there will be exceptions to this when players free time brackets just wont add up to produce a clean sequence of games.there are 2 solutions to this. number 1 is: dont @#$%ing host " general tournaments" host "specific timezone(s) ones or specific GMT based ones.lets say 6 hour sized ones.so only ppl who have time in that specific pocket of time to play will enlist. so ppl from japan wont have to play ppl form america.this should likely eliminate nearly every problem but a few will pop up. that being that a few ppl just wont be able to agree still on times because of irl activities. for this the solution would be for players to agree in advance FOR EVERY SINGLE FUTURE POTENTIAL GAME AS WELL on times.so in an example of 4 players me,u,aqua and borg. if im vs borg and u vs aqua. we agree with all of potential opponents in this tournament for example id have to agree with borg you and aqua.this can also drastically reduce the time required for the tournament.especially in addition with the previous points id say there is literally no way for players to mess up and for the tournament to have any issues IN WHICH SOMEONE ISNT RESPONSIBLE. if someones responsible ofc u just put a loss on their match in the tournament,they cry but life goes on for the rest of the players. number 2:pretty sure i forgot number 2 but ill assume it was "dont host 3 day matchups" if you wont even prepare or provide any specific regulations to make it far less likely for the problems to arise.basically host longer tournaments but also the problem of ppl not meeting up should be solved by more time. tournaments wont finish in specific times in this case likely taking 1-2 weeks per matchup more likely a week. in time ppl should be able to agree upon a time. a regulation for this could be to force players to communicate at least once a day to figure out and set a time. but of course if they have activities that they cant postpone + their timezones are perfectly aligned to make it impossible for them to meet up. but usually if an average person sleeps 8 hours there has to be 8 hours of overlapping time.(altho i sleep average of 10-11 hours alto usually less or more so for ppl like me the time bracket in which both me and my opponent are awake is smaller) anyway given enough time surely the players can skip one of the gender studies classes but ofc there will be many times when ppl wont compromise their life over a game tournament that doesnt even give any reward($). ps: i know this is incoherent and the "number 1 and number 2" dont make sense somewhat.altho n2 is just a worse solution that requires less effort i think n1 effort is worth it.highly incoherent post but readable and provides simple information anyone whos iq is over 84 could figure out.just take everything from all the 3 parts and decide whats important to you? faster tournaments with 99.5% success rate? 99.9% success rate tournaments that take a month to finish? ps ps: maybe this will give you a revelation on some things @Stockfish mainly on your moral failings.a thousand concessions that have rotted your convictions and made your way of thinking and behaving corrupt and immoral.i shouldnt be having to write this. its either that or you just didnt care enough to make a proper tournament.SHAME ON YOU @Stockfish SHAME.ON.YOU. next time dont compromise on the right way in favor of gaining temporary advantage and masking your incompetence.its like drugs but i guess when you are old you borrow from the future as there isnt much in the future to look forward to anyway ppl die at 50 after that its just an after image. think of this and sleep on it if you can still sleep after reading this.

am free rn :p

im gonna pretend that i understand anything about what u guys just wrote..for now and trust in myself my capacity and my power in the near not so distant future of tomorrow when i wont be sleep deprived and brainfried.

i "extract file to" d it to replays>0.0023 or something where the list of replays was.cant find it in game.

skill wise or rating wise @Boudica ?

XD youre welcome twardowsky. also since nobody gives a fuc about this im ending this :p.

heres an example of a certificate.i can use other templates too

would be more realistic that same civs dont fight with eachother? whats ur motivation @Feldfeld for wanting these specific rules.what if there was an internal conflict so athen vs athen ect. i geuss yes unpredictability and complexities are more fun so can be more fun if different civs fight but there is as much potential for coutnless possible outcomes in same civ fights as there are otherwise.

example(also my actual nominations): @Twardowsky most improved player @ValihrAnt best team player

nominate players guys for the following categories(btw these apply to last 2 weeks and anything below 1300 is irrelevant) most improved player(any improvement happening below 1300 doesnt count): most underrated player(rating wise): most underrated player(ppl dont know how good they are): most overrated player(rating wise): most overrated player(ppl dont know how much they suc): best team player: worst team player: to nominate do a reply saying "player name" + "title". nothing extra or wont count. after nominations are done which ill give 24 hours atleast ill do polls so ppl can vote. after winners are announced ill give certificates winners can print out and put on their walls.

1521 or something @Stockfish

i want to participate.vinme(1589).

yes yes but i thought of these ideas and more that i didnt write like last year.and my post was b4 urs ...im pretty sure. so i thought of this and then you did.i still think just giving everybody extra metal and stone is a bad way to fix this issue :P. yes the variance in hunt and berries was unnecessary just thought would make the game more random while keeping the balance im not a programer so im assuming that anything that i can simply write down like "generate berries amount = random 100-2000, generate hunt amount=2000-berries amount" can be implemented easily.im sure im wrong about that tho.

@badosu how is that the same? every single mele unit exploits the nearest enemy targeting based on how you put it.thats obviously wrong tho as nearest enemy targeting cant be an exploit as NET is an in game mechanic,a core concept that game is based on.without it the mele units would become largely useless. since my strat doesnt involve anything out of the ordinary for example compared to a standard infantry rush that means that this strat isnt exploiting anything except perhaps the ingame unit stat balance. an actual NET exploit would perhaps be for example when a player identifies the unit or units being targeted by the enemy men and makes them run around while enemy is being attacked by the rest of the men. or any other kind of "luring" but it is easily counterable with some micro so hard to call something thats EASILY COUNTERABLE AND DOESNT RUIN THE INGAME MECHANICS an exploit therefore the NET exploit doesnt even exist.and no dancing isnt a NET exploit and neither is it a NET and PD exploit.it is purely a PD exploit. to make reality somewhat easier to understand for those of you who dont see the bigger picture: nothing is cheating or not cheating in in of itself.its all about the game being balanced.anything that is slightly to moderately unbalanced most people would agree impacts the game negatively.like some civs being more op than others.but anything that is unbalanced or WRONG to a point of it literally breaking the game could be called cheating. generally you could say a group of players agreement on things defines cheating and its commonly accepted standards.there can be many groups and none of their ideas are absolute but at this point im going too far into "is the chair im sitting on even real" territory and we already intuitively understand how definitions and attributes on some concept that we have created work. im sure you understand the :"unbalanced" part which implies literal competitive advantage derived form the said action.WRONG part is different.the wrong part can be many things that ruin the game like imagine if you could press some key and then every time you pressed spacebar youd get 10 random res.thats "wrong" as it ruins the game now 0ad becomes a clicker as now a persons capacity to click becomes an extremely significant factor in them winning. it ruins the game as it changes the game significantly in a a manner that ruins the games core mechanics that we have found enjoyable. of course somebody might say "well i like clickers" so for them the game didnt break because of this and they can go ahead and play like that but in case of dancing the bacic core mechanic of "stronger army wins" gets thrown out of the window along with probably plenty of other mechanics that i cant recall rn. there are literally no similarities between this rush and dancing and while my strat can make the game unbalanced i dont think it will as there are many drawbacks to it that ive mentioned in my original post like ele being extremely slow,difficulty in massing them.well thats about it i guess.altho maybe even the fact that using ele as meatshields causes less unit amount/total hitpoints ratio so harder to use as shields as there are less of them for the same (ranged inf or other high dmg low health unit/meatshield) balance. i think eventually ele should get nerfed tho. yes i know you didnt mean it seriously.but this post altho taking me 10 min to write and make coherent will be useful to quote for me and anyone else for the "unit balance issues" if they ever come up elsewhere want me to write some more? donate below heres my monero: 471oEfj69SvUp19dV7N7vAJu4eaR8yd8267ubduq7dcQYPygQoq2dm5Us5eLbQrsjiWH2RhbsrQKHaQaG1L4QoNGQA7KRw7

ofcourse they arent useful alone... who cares what damage they deal like pikes deal 2 dmg per sec like women.you think it makes much of a difference if you had pikes not dealing damage at all? like 30 pikes in your army and suddenly they deal 0 dps. ok now you just dealing 60 less dmg how tragic thats like 5 javelins.the fact that you find your statement coherent is pathetic in in of itself.idk why im even replying to thoes kinds of comments tbh.wtf is wrong with me is interesting too..ok im gonna start ignoring anything beyode a certain level of stupidity from now on.