Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rated'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Welcome
    • Announcements / News
    • Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
    • Help & Feedback
  • 0 A.D.
    • General Discussion
    • Gameplay Discussion
    • Game Development & Technical Discussion
    • Art Development
    • Game Modification
    • Project Governance
    • Testing

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







First Name

Last Name

Skype ID

Found 2 results

  1. what if metal/stone spawns could not be within a certain distance from the cc of a player.lets say like a bit more than p3 so really far where youd have to either reach for it if your lucky enough to get one nearby. otherwise this would motivate players to build ccs or colonies to fight over these resources that would be quite scarce otherwise.i dont think civilization balance would get messed up because of this altho not sure it might.but the game balance would be rly improved as ppl wouldnt get unfair advantages.also could be as an option would be rly cool also with berries but i have a better idea for berries/hunt.most games are generally unfair in a sense that one side gets an extremely significant advantage which is defenetly fun as makes every game more unique and unexpected but 0ad has enough suprises and complexities as is and for rated games especially the fact that if 2 players of exactly equal skill play bacically the one with significantly better map (which prob happens like 70% of the time ) wins is rly annoying.there are strats to adapt to this randomness mainly scouting early and rushing if you see that enemy has a significantly superior map than you or outposting their berries/hunt(with vision tech to maybe get to it in time when enemy tries to capture)as you rdy your rush but i havent seen anyone using this but me a few times.
  2. Hello, im Stockfish, since some weeks, i've been thinking in the idea of changing the rated points. What i want to do, is not changing the rated system (that in my opinion is ok, ¡but! i would implement some changes . But that's another topic) The idea i have is to change proportionally the points to 2857, finding the multiplierr number to obtain those ratings. If @borg- is now 2371, then to make it be 2857 you must multiplicate his ELO for 1.205 ---- (2371 x 1.205) = 2857 Let's do a top 7 players by ELO and see how it would be : @borg-(2371) x 1.205 = (2857) @ValihrAnt(2164) x 1.205 = (2607) @Feldfeld(2076) x 1.205 = (2501) @Stockfish(2069) x 1.205 = (2493) @chrstgtr(2031) x 1.205 = (2447) @JC (naval supremacist)(2026) x 1.205 = (2441) @liberty (1896) x 1.205 = (2284) That's how it would be, but as there is a lot if difference betwem the first, and the second (and then they're all equal more or less) i would suggest to make the proportion with @ValihrAnt's score, and then, with the number that we obtain, plus it to @borg-. Let's see how it would be! @ValihrAnt's score is (2164), so: 2857/2164 = 1.320. ¡Lets apply it! @borg-(2371) x 1.320 = (3130) @ValihrAnt(2164) x 1.320 = (2856) @Feldfeld(2076) x 1.320 = (2740) @Stockfish(2069) x 1.320 = (2731) @chrstgtr(2031) x 1.320 = (2681) @JC (naval supremacist)(2026) x 1.320 = (2674) @liberty (1896) x 1.320 = (2503) That's how it would be, in my opinion would be better becouse as more points difference, is cleaner. Greeting! What do you think?
  • Create New...