team balance- how often shuffle

[Ctrz]

56 minutes ago, Matu said:

@Eagle_cz shufflexp based on ended map xp would give the closest even teams for the next map.ofc i understand it must be done after map is ended and new one havent started.

Would be great additional option for us in this thing.

Only when map has changed and we have knowledge who will be playing new map. Otherwise people will still leave and teams will be uneven by numbers.

[MiniMuppet]

39 minutes ago, Ctrz said:

Only when map has changed and we have knowledge who will be playing new map. Otherwise people will still leave and teams will be uneven by numbers.

you can't shuffle by xp on the next map as it reset on the next map.

[Ctrz]

3 hours ago, MiniMuppet said:

you can't shuffle by xp on the next map as it reset on the next map.

Surely the XP of previous map is stored in some database somewhere. 

[Jaime]

I like the idea of SR. I thought it will solve the unbalanced teams problem. But it doesn't work as we want. Why? Because SR is not calculated well. Some players, who are not making a big difference when joining a one side, have very high SR. Also, I noticed that these players who really makes a difference have SR between 20-30. 

I think we have to improve SR system. I'm not sure how it is calculated in the back-end.  I think it's time to look at the algorithm and look at the data. Pick common data for  good players. I'm not sure if SR is counting when a player is playing with bots. My opinion is that SR shouldn't increase when there are bots on the server. We can gather all the data about the user (avg. acc, avg. hs acc, win/loss and more) All we have to do is to choose the right weights for the data. 

We have data, so we need to make some UX Research and analysis.

After that, I recommend resetting SR.

We did one iteration of SR system. From my experience, developing a software, it is about repeating these loops: research, prototype, develop, test.

 

I know that probably it's a request for Legacy developers, but I think it's worth to ask them 

 

Talking about ideas you wrote. I'm not a fan of making shuffle at the beginning of each map. It will ruin the game.  

[Ctrz]

3 hours ago, Jaime said:

 Also, I noticed that these players who really makes a difference have SR between 20-30. 

Take that @m00f & @Mister J  

[Dragonkiss]

On 4/28/2021 at 10:41 AM, Mister J said:

 

My advice? Try swapping teams if your team is crushing the other; winning a round from a team that seems much stronger is the best fun you can have. Very often it takes one good medic with one good engi to take the round. Even if the rest of your team is crap. And accept that team-balance in games will always remain very peculiar.

This is what I always try to do. And beeing an crap shooter but one hell of an engy!

 

autoshuffle in any form is an crowdkiller. The only way to balance out teams is for players to switch team. And as most pubbers won’t switch its up to us as TM members to do it. It’s one reason why I joined a clan again just to play balanced (preferably objective based) games. 
 

offcourse if it’s hopeless I choose a fun class aswel and play for fun or when I’m fed up I check ETL2. 
 

but teamballance will always be an hot annoying topic (just like Rambo meds).

Edited May 1, 2021 by Dragonkiss
iPhone autocorrect crap

[Mister J]

On 4/30/2021 at 10:47 PM, Jaime said:

I like the idea of SR. I thought it will solve the unbalanced teams problem. But it doesn't work as we want. Why? Because SR is not calculated well. Some players, who are not making a big difference when joining a one side, have very high SR. Also, I noticed that these players who really makes a difference have SR between 20-30. 

I think we have to improve SR system. I'm not sure how it is calculated in the back-end.  I think it's time to look at the algorithm and look at the data. Pick common data for  good players. I'm not sure if SR is counting when a player is playing with bots. My opinion is that SR shouldn't increase when there are bots on the server. We can gather all the data about the user (avg. acc, avg. hs acc, win/loss and more) All we have to do is to choose the right weights for the data. 

We have data, so we need to make some UX Research and analysis.

After that, I recommend resetting SR.

We did one iteration of SR system. From my experience, developing a software, it is about repeating these loops: research, prototype, develop, test.

 

I know that probably it's a request for Legacy developers, but I think it's worth to ask them 

 

Talking about ideas you wrote. I'm not a fan of making shuffle at the beginning of each map. It will ruin the game.  

The one problem that remains is something I see the most: high skilled players with no history on the server will have an SR of 0. And there are many of them. It is something such a system just can not account for. 

[Bomba]

Completely agree with J, you need to play a lot to get high sr even as a high skilled player

the system whith k/d ratings would be better like we used to have on etpub. from the moment players join our server their skill is constantly represented in the k/d rating and that makes for easy and fair shuffles imo

[m00f]

On 4/30/2021 at 10:47 PM, Jaime said:

I like the idea of SR. I thought it will solve the unbalanced teams problem. But it doesn't work as we want. Why? Because SR is not calculated well. Some players, who are not making a big difference when joining a one side, have very high SR. Also, I noticed that these players who really makes a difference have SR between 20-30. 

I think we have to improve SR system. I'm not sure how it is calculated in the back-end.  I think it's time to look at the algorithm and look at the data. Pick common data for  good players. I'm not sure if SR is counting when a player is playing with bots. My opinion is that SR shouldn't increase when there are bots on the server. We can gather all the data about the user (avg. acc, avg. hs acc, win/loss and more) All we have to do is to choose the right weights for the data. 

We have data, so we need to make some UX Research and analysis.

After that, I recommend resetting SR.

We did one iteration of SR system. From my experience, developing a software, it is about repeating these loops: research, prototype, develop, test.

 

I know that probably it's a request for Legacy developers, but I think it's worth to ask them 

 

Talking about ideas you wrote. I'm not a fan of making shuffle at the beginning of each map. It will ruin the game.  

Imo more useful than SR would be a k/d ratio or average xp/min rating for players to determine team balance

[Ctrz]

9 hours ago, m00f said:

Imo more useful than SR would be a k/d ratio or average xp/min rating for players to determine team balance

I remember in another server, that played for SL rating which is based on XP/min, player who collect his XP as covert while taking every enemy uniform possible - even when he had one, he did some unsilenced shots and was able to grab new one. Had high XP but not much use. 😕  Also another one who in goldrush the entire allied side just fixed tank (even when it was its final position in front of axis spawn) and truck. Have not seen that in TM too much but xp/min can also lead to that disgrace.  K/D ratio shows that player is able to frag because maps are hard to fight without even somewhat competitive aimpower by the whole team. Team can have the best engis and covies but if they are killed all the time then they get nowhere but just frustrated.

[Jaime]

What I meant is to collect proper data, including K/D and XP/min. 
Looking into the data we can see the pattern. Let's say that K/D should be counted 1/2 of SR and rest are avg acc, avg hs acc, avg xp/min. I think we have to define the algorithm of SR. Pick ingredients and weights to them. 
The equation we look for should play for players that can frag and for obj oriented guys (like engies).

My proposition. Look at the top of the frag players (I mean players who are good shooters, not playing for frags) and look at the top of the obj oriented players (engies, fdops, players that are not having 40-50 acc but they push obj).

Lets propose the equation and then see if it needs more adjustments. 

[Ctrz]

2 hours ago, Jaime said:

What I meant is to collect proper data, including K/D and XP/min. 
Looking into the data we can see the pattern. Let's say that K/D should be counted 1/2 of SR and rest are avg acc, avg hs acc, avg xp/min. I think we have to define the algorithm of SR. Pick ingredients and weights to them. 
The equation we look for should play for players that can frag and for obj oriented guys (like engies).

My proposition. Look at the top of the frag players (I mean players who are good shooters, not playing for frags) and look at the top of the obj oriented players (engies, fdops, players that are not having 40-50 acc but they push obj).

Lets propose the equation and then see if it needs more adjustments. 

Do you think good players should get negative SR when losing map? Thats also currently in calculation.

[Jaime]

Well, SR should be based on avg, so it will always decrease/increase. Like K/D. No one performs stable skill level

[Ctrz]

2 hours ago, Jaime said:

Well, SR should be based on avg, so it will always decrease/increase. Like K/D. No one performs stable skill level

Well currently you can do the game of your life with 100 kills and get obj almost done and all you get is 0 or still -0.02 or something SR. And someone in other team who does almost nothing all map long but wins with team gets +0.10 SR and its already out of balance. 😕 The map win/lose rate shouldnt be in calculation in my opinion. At least not that much like now.

[DiNg]

 

1 hour ago, Ctrz said:

Well currently you can do the game of your life with 100 kills and get obj almost done and all you get is 0 or still -0.02 or something SR. And someone in other team who does almost nothing all map long but wins with team gets +0.10 SR and its already out of balance. 😕 The map win/lose rate shouldnt be in calculation in my opinion. At least not that much like now.

My two cents: I really appreciate that SR based on map winning/losing because since then people have actually been going for the objective, even the good old braindead wannabe mAus rambo camping medics.

Still you got a point there, stack allies when server is almost full and it's free points all night long

[Jaime]

Amm without looking into a data I can't propose any equation. I don't even know if it is possible to change to SR calculations @Eagle_cz @MrMuppet?

[Ctrz]

1 hour ago, DiNg said:

 

My two cents: I really appreciate that SR based on map winning/losing because since then people have actually been going for the objective, even the good old braindead wannabe mAus rambo camping medics.

Still you got a point there, stack allies when server is almost full and it's free points all night long

Maybe we shouldnt show or give out openly how the SR is been calculated so people are not focusing on trying to raise it artificially (if that can be the case...). 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Jaime said:

Amm without looking into a data I can't propose any equation. I don't even know if it is possible to change to SR calculations @Eagle_cz @MrMuppet?

I think thats a suggestion to legacy devs too? Surely they should happy to improve if we give them enough logic.