I simply mentioned he plays on US and you play on Euro i.e. both chooses server where they have low pings.
Let me say this, this is not professional league and this are 'fun' servers. So 'ping' point is moot to begin with. No one ever said it's rater fault.
Weak or strong adjustment, point is adjustment should be valid and useful. System is not accurate and never will be because many factors play role. Everyone here wants to improve it but at the same time we don't want to over bloat it by adding new criteria/functions where there reliability is almost zero or even negative.
If you want to make it fair, put everyone in LAN with same PC and same hardware specs.
My point was simple and very clear. From present stats what I see is Aspirin gets better PPM against any of his opponents, present on that map and hence his rating is higher. It has nothing to with ping. The reason I posted those links is because if anyone sees any coding error or calculation error they can point it out and then Paul can fix it.
To me it doesn't matter who plays good or bad or who rates seriously and who doesn't. It's player option/choice and I don't say anything on that.
-------
More or less players with bad network quality also adds lag on other player or else no admin would kick players with 500+ ping. Sometimes 250 ping doesn't cause much issue on server but a player with fluctuating ping of 50-150 with high packet loss can add more lag on server. So the thing which you see as advantage can also be seen as disadvantage to descent ping players.
My point was very clear like water. Adding ping doesn't solve any single thing and ping is not even accurate and ping even depends on network peering, hops and many other things. There are too much factors within ping and network itself.
Let me put it in laymen terms. You suggested ping should be added as one of the factor in rating and I suggested ping shouldn't be added because the reliability factor of ping is almost none.![]()







