ROLadder.net's new clothes

[Zetsumei]

gather function with rating and match making system

It would be great to see something like that. Although I still think its hard to accurately rank individual players in a good way.

As making it depend on wins means that the outcome will likely become too random (you play in a team of 8 so your contribution is basically 1/8th meaning that even if you're the best you can still easily loose ). This requires everybody to play loads upon loads of matches before the result will converge to something useful.

And if you depend it on points then the person covering the back of the cap the entire time gets ****ed. As he cannot gain points by covering a basement . The best result could possible be gained by letting players vote on others for themselves, but then people will be biased towards their clanmates and friends.

Its a difficult one for me at the least . Although logically we could just say screw accuracy, use points and throw some trueskill/glicko over it and then call it a day. Microsoft gets off quite well doing that ^^.

 

[Schreq]

you play in a team of 8

Says who?
I'm actually looking forward to smaller scaled battles. 5on5 countdown for example. Makes gathers a quicker process also. Easier/faster to get 10 players

 

[Frostedfire]

The best result could possible be gained by letting players vote on others for themselves, but then people will be biased towards their clanmates and friends.

and it would help to build reasonable teams out of this, from people that know each other and when they'd be on

 

[Actin]

Says who?
I'm actually looking forward to smaller scaled battles. 5on5 countdown for example. Makes gathers a quicker process also. Easier/faster to get 10 players

Are realism the only units with more players?
The only thing stopping from joining a clan were the low amount of players.
I want the better experience in rohos, but in my eyes that means 15v15 so it is hard to work together. because then you have multiple squads in one battlefield, would have been the most exciting thing about ROHOS.

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

But I think that a "not-too-fast" converging system is good, as you want people to play. And if you get better as you play, the system converges not too fast and more people get into the system, people should more or less rise constantly in rating (although new guys will obviously drop at first if they are not up to the bar of the entry rating). Isn't that what peopel want?

Personally I hope 5on5 will be more than just playable, and it might be better suited for a "serious gather system" as people would not have to connect with as many players to get some real team-play going.

 

[Schreq]

Are realism the only units with more players?
The only thing stopping from joining a clan were the low amount of players.
I want the better experience in rohos, but in my eyes that means 15v15 so it is hard to work together. because then you have multiple squads in one battlefield, would have been the most exciting thing about ROHOS.

Of course that's possible but as you said, its more for the realism units, because it's hard to get that many players on. From my experience clans/units who play bigger scaled matches are arranging them with a huge time in advance. Imo that speaks against a flourishing healthy clanscene and I'd prefer active clans who play several scrims and maybe 1-2 official matches during the period of one week.

Also you make the step into competitive RO-gaming easier with smaller teams. It's harder for new teams to muster that many players and a smaller team size will hence give you more active teams.

Anyways, from what I heard the new roladder will be flexible in terms of reacting to the needs of different ladders/competitions. So I'd say a bigger scaled realism ladder could be possible as well.

 

[Actin]

Of course that's possible but as you said, its more for the realism units, because it's hard to get that many players on. From my experience clans/units who play bigger scaled matches are arranging them with a huge time in advance. Imo that speaks against a flourishing healthy clanscene and I'd prefer active clans who play several scrims and maybe 1-2 official matches during the period of one week.

Also you make the step into competitive RO-gaming easier with smaller teams. It's harder for new teams to muster that many players and a smaller team size will hence give you more active teams.

Anyways, from what I heard the new roladder will be flexible in terms of reacting to the needs of different ladders/competitions. So I'd say a bigger scaled realism ladder could be possible as well.

Makes a lot of sense, thanks for explaining

 

[Zetsumei]

Says who?
I'm actually looking forward to smaller scaled battles. 5on5 countdown for example. Makes gathers a quicker process also. Easier/faster to get 10 players

8 is just an example, whatever player amounts work best can logically not be determined until the game has been played. And with map scaling multiple size options will likely become a possibility. The key is that if you play in a team of say 8 or 5 that it takes quite some matches before you obtain any statistical importance of an individual player. With a gather you often play with various different teams, which makes it possible to separate an individuals importance. But to separate people correctly it requires that most people not just you yourself play loads of matches.

In my personal experience in competitive play what seems to work best regarding map size is a map made for instance 32 players in public play plays best competitively with about half that. So personally based on that I think that the 16 player map sizes work best 4v4 or 5v5 while the 32 player map sizes work best around 8v8. But that is nothing more than a guess on my part.

@Snuffeldjuret
Of course a system that isn't too fast is good. But any system that is too fast or too slow isn't good. I'm not afraid that using pure wins will result in good data, I'm afraid that it will be too slow so that it will basically never converge close enough to be able to separate people well enough in the correct order .

Sure you can always output some info, but statistics are very fragile, and you can easily output nonsense.

 

[Tomcat_ha]

Are realism the only units with more players?
The only thing stopping from joining a clan were the low amount of players.
I want the better experience in rohos, but in my eyes that means 15v15 so it is hard to work together. because then you have multiple squads in one battlefield, would have been the most exciting thing about ROHOS.

8v8 was the sweetspot in RO clan gaming actually. Clans rarely had more than 8 available for a game while below 8 the gameplay deteriorates.
The action in 8v8 games is similar to an 32 player public server.

 

[Zetsumei]

8v8 was the sweetspot in RO clan gaming actually. Clans rarely had more than 8 available for a game while below 8 the gameplay deteriorates.
The action in 8v8 games is similar to an 32 player public server.

Although as RO offers 16, 32, 64 player variants it could be fun to try and see where the competitive sweet spot lies for the 64 version.

If 2 or 3 clans can combine their forces for a 16v16 tournament then it could perhaps offer some great fun. Its always good to leave options open.

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

Indeed Zets, while it works perfectly for HoN for instance it is just not a remotely comparable situation unforteunatly =(.

Although a matchmaking system using inaccurate rating will still be better than a gather function without any matchmaking at all?
I would assume that having some sense of real competition in gather increase the quality of the gather match overall, and that is the real goal. + a decent system should still be better than no at all?

 

[Forssen]

[QUOTE=M

 

[Tomcat_ha]

you should have joined my/our clan then ;p

 

[Actin]

"Freelancers who are not really united"
FWANRU
Great idea

 

[Zetsumei]

Indeed Zets, while it works perfectly for HoN for instance it is just not a remotely comparable situation unforteunatly =(.

Although a matchmaking system using inaccurate rating will still be better than a gather function without any matchmaking at all?
I would assume that having some sense of real competition in gather increase the quality of the gather match overall, and that is the real goal. + a decent system should still be better than no at all?

For matchmaking it could work well, but then its goal should be matchmaking rather than obtaining an individual ranking. With matchmaking you have the averaging ability that makes errors less important.

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

Why can't the goal be both?

 

[yankee]

A first look at ROLadder.net's rankings

A first look at ROLadder.net's rankings

​

There were lots of exciting news about Red Orchestra this week so we don't hold back our latest information. Today we want to reveal the second screenshot of the upcoming RO:Ladder for Heroes of Stalingrad. After the player profile now it is time to show you the new look of the competition page. As a design goal we wanted you to see all the important information about the relating competition at a glance so you do not have to click through several pages to get news and results.


Besides this we would like to introduce our new partner XstreamGaming.net. They will support RO:Ladder with their Gameservers in upcoming competitions and events.
Keep an eye on hos.roladder.net for the latest news.

http://hos.roladder.net/http://hos.roladder.net/

 

[Olivier]

GIEV NAO!

 

[Tomcat_ha]

nice update again.

 

[smokeythebear]

Nice update.

You should make a betting system similar to liquibet on teamliquid.

[url]http://www.teamliquid.net/liquibet2/[/URL]