question

[Neon]

Apspirin players on US server and you play on Euro server. Both chooses the server according to there pings.

I didn't say he was abusing anything, I just said he plays on a server where the vast majority of players have very bad pings, while he doesn't.

So if I have good PC and internet, I have unfair advantage?? I don't think it's called advantage. It's more like spending the money for better services.

Well technically yes you do have an unfair advantage. For casual play nobody cares about this, and in professional leagues (not public ladder leagues btw) players compete on the same kit over LAN.

I don't think ping should be considered because if player A is lagging then it's player A fault and not others.

Its not about punishing players for lagging, or having a good connection. Obviously you would have to estimate how much a ping of 300 hurts you, 800 hurts you etc and make a rough guess. In fact, it is not really possible to get this spot on, so a weak adjustment could be made to help a little bit.

Just saying it isn't the rater's fault is not an argument. It isn't the rater's fault that everyone else on the server has a rate of 0 or if they all get a PPM of 26. The point is to adjust for it to help reduce the effect of outside influences to make a more accurate rating system.

Where it will stop if we start considering ping? Then next one would say consider PC specs too. So we penalize player having good PC?

This is probably not even possible

I don't know whole maths of rating but one thing I noticed is:
Neon, you got -ve rating when you had lesser PPM against the player who had less rating then you. Example:

http://et.trackbase.net/index.php?mo...o&idx=21231059
http://et.trackbase.net/index.php?mo...o&idx=21244449

In Aspirin case, his PPM is always higher then the players he plays against with.
Ex: http://et.trackbase.net/index.php?mo...o&idx=21320570
http://et.trackbase.net/index.php?mo...o&idx=21163414

What is your point? This has nothing to do with the discussion. Sometimes I play well, sometimes I don't. I'm not currently as careful as Aspirin is with my rate, which he is; he rates very infrequently and on the same maps, but this isn't a problem. I can do the same if I want, but atm I cba.


---
I don't want this to be taken as me whining that Aspirin is higher than me in TB, infact I actually explained this earlier. I just want the system to be as accurate as possible.

[daredevil]

I didn't say he was abusing anything, I just said he plays on a server where the vast majority of players have very bad pings, while he doesn't.

I simply mentioned he plays on US and you play on Euro i.e. both chooses server where they have low pings.

Well technically yes you do have an unfair advantage. For casual play nobody cares about this, and in professional leagues (not public ladder leagues btw) players compete on the same kit over LAN.

Its not about punishing players for lagging, or having a good connection. Obviously you would have to estimate how much a ping of 300 hurts you, 800 hurts you etc and make a rough guess. In fact, it is not really possible to get this spot on, so a weak adjustment could be made to help a little bit.

Just saying it isn't the rater's fault is not an argument. It isn't the rater's fault that everyone else on the server has a rate of 0 or if they all get a PPM of 26. The point is to adjust for it to help reduce the effect of outside influences to make a more accurate rating system.

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.

What is your point? This has nothing to do with the discussion. Sometimes I play well, sometimes I don't. I'm not currently as careful as Aspirin is with my rate, which he is; he rates very infrequently and on the same maps, but this isn't a problem. I can do the same if I want, but atm I cba.

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.