Rating Servers

[christmaspwns]

I haven't been updated to the latest formula or whatever is going on based on the rating part. As far as I know there should be a "new" rating system coming up. Once you told me it would be here in a while, then in a month and now it seems to take even longer and longer.

Whatever, I don't really want to start any discussion about what I just said above, I'm just curious about the rating servers. The only server where you HAVE to play to get higher rating is FA #2. Will there be anything done about this? It's kinda sad to see that it has to be like this.

It's nice to see all the "better" players are all on one servers, but it's bullshit. Shouldn't be every (read: "active") server be able to get someone to the top?
I'm just saying, on FA #2 everyone just randomly uses the shit adrenaline and just sucks without it lol.

I don't want to offend anyone with this, I'm just wondering only FA #2 is "THE" server to rate. I just don't like to play there because of the adrenaline "noobs". Ruins the gameplay. But that's just my opinion, hey who am I..

Can someone fill me up with what's going on these days? I'm not really active myself, and I can't be arsed to read every topic on a forum like this.

Thanks, keep up the great job running tb Paulus.

pro*que pasa.

[#SAS#TASIOR]

i dont play there ping sux foke phone aids they move faster then me and its just nob there.. about adre yeh its true its sux, i dont care this game is for fun R.I.P
You play for rate ?? why
Yeh its easy rate there its true

ps: yeh sry for not my best ENGRISH
muahahahhahahahahahahaahhaa

[Scarhand]

I got to the top 10 (7th I think?) on splatterladder before by playing on a random NQ server where there are few good players, and I was still rising until I had to become inactive and haven't found time to be active since. I don't know what my TB rating was at the time because someone stole it. But, I never played on FA, or WOOD, or any of the other high rated servers, and I never actually tried; I goofed off a lot on the server and never changed my name or locked my rating. I'm not sure, but I think it is not much much harder on other servers, because you will be able to do much better. On the other hand, because FA has so many players, it is easy to get a high ppm even with other high rated players on. I think you are correct that it is easier there, but not by a lot.

[christmaspwns]

It's not about if it's easier or not. It's just bullshit that FA#2 is the only server you HAVE to play to get on top. (and I'm not talking about "whoring", but fragging)

[testforecho]

It's not about if it's easier or not. It's just bullshit that FA#2 is the only server you HAVE to play to get on top. (and I'm not talking about "whoring", but fragging)

It's about the way the system works, some flaws are inevitable, like:
- Players are rated by name (a pro with a new name has a low rating, and is regarded as a noob). (I don't know how they deal with it, for example if there is an initial period when the rate moves faster, and cannot influence other player's rating)
- Some players play only in some servers, and there isn't enough 'sharing' of players to adjust their relative scores. A server with only pros in it (who never play elsewhere) will never get them a high rating, since they are 'among equals', and regarded as 'average'. You need 'noobs' there too, to get a high score.
- Servers with many players can assure you that you don't have many of them with a 'wrong' rating (that doesn't match their real skill)

Add to this things like maps, server settings, etc. and eventually everyone will figure out the servers where you have to play to get score, and that will probably shift things even further in that direction.

[Paul]

The system is the same for every server, and we can not insert code that will make sure F|A would rate bad. We finally fixed the latest bug in the new rating method so we're adding more servers to it and trying some different new terms.

[christmaspwns]

The system is the same for every server, and we can not insert code that will make sure F|A would rate bad. We finally fixed the latest bug in the new rating method so we're adding more servers to it and trying some different new terms.

I'm not saying F|A should rate bad compared to other servers. I'm just wondering why FA#2 is the only server where you can get higher rating. Most of the top players don't play vs each other because they're scared to loose their rating, so is it just to own the "noobs" over there? Is it because the server statistics claim to have the better players over there?

Once again, I don't wanna offend anyone, I'm just trying to figure out why.

[testforecho]

Once again, I don't wanna offend anyone, I'm just trying to figure out why.

I am sure the real formula is more complex, and I don't know it , but to make a simple one let's say that a server has:
average rating 10, average ppm 6, then if you wanna go toward 30 rating, you need to make 18ppm (30/10*6) so to make a good rating, you need 3 things:
1. high average rating and low avg. ppm, so you need low ppm
2. the actual ability to make those ppm in that server.

examples taken from 2 random real sessions I found, and calculated with my simplified formula:

server  avg.rate avg.ppm  ppm needed for 30 rating
FA2     11.02    6.3      17.15
BiO     9.05     6.24     20.69

In this case, it's obvious that you need to play in fa2, since not only you need to make only 17 ppm and not 20, but also because making 20ppm in bio is probably much harder than doing 20 in fa

that's why. Even if my formula is simplier than the real tb formula you can get the idea

[Patriot]

afaik ppl usually playing on BiO is also the guys using crossfire.nu, do you think they care for rating?

anway lets get it out Paul you guys keep saying it will be implemented on more servers, what is it? and what is needed to implement it on more servers?
and who chooses which servers is ment for?, and what criterias are the choosing dependant on?

to me atm it looks like its somthing that are going to be implemented on relativ few servers, just correct me if im wrong here
that is yet another way to divide the et world up which i dont like, same with the ideas of "trusted" servers ive seen in another thread.

Ideas like that will totally kill the chances new clans has to get a server running and also in the end kill ppl's motivation to even start a clan, and then ET will be relying solely on newcomers, and they wont come always.

If somthing is going to made, then make sure all have acces to ad it to their servers.

and again Paul if im jumping to conclusions that aint true then please correct me

I might just be to old for these new ideas i dont know, but i do know ive been playing this game nonstop since 2003, had servers since then also, and getting sad by seeing how it all seems to go downwards now, we dont need somthing that will limit opportunities now, we need stuff that will help us keep the et community alive,

and about the rating method you could ad a few simple rules to the rating

somthing like this few suggestions
1. rate the mods individually so lets say etpro servers gets calculated with 1 and jay maybe 0.85, silent 0.92 etc etc
2. rate after serversize 50+ slots server gets a 0.10 reduction in rate a 30+ server gets 0.05 reduction etc etc
3. rate after FF reduce rating if its off
4. rate after xp, but reduce rating with a factor if map is lost

but make it public for all servers.

rant over

[testforecho]

afaik ppl usually playing on BiO is also the guys using crossfire.nu, do you think they care for rating?

I know well that they don't. I just used it as an example of a server where making high ppms is supposedly harder, to support my point #2 (see my post)

1. rate the mods individually so lets say etpro servers gets calculated with 1 and jay maybe 0.85, silent 0.92 etc etc
2. rate after serversize 50+ slots server gets a 0.10 reduction in rate a 30+ server gets 0.05 reduction etc etc
3. rate after FF reduce rating if its off
4. rate after xp, but reduce rating with a factor if map is lost

but make it public for all servers.

(all imho, since the right to answer about this is ofc. Paul's)
1. it is a bit hard to know the right factor for different mods, and having separate ratings would require more resources for tb. Same goes for the new rating. Takes resources.
2. That sounds a bit arbitrary, how can you calculate that factor? Then it would be better to change the rating system in such a way that (without factors) playing in big servers can't give you an advantage.
3. not everyone uses artillery, why should one get less points, say, as medic, if ff is on?
4. I think it cannot be done